The news out of Art Basel Miami would seem to be all economic and not controversial if you were to only depend on art sites like Artnet or Hyperallergic. But the most significant story ignored by these sites was covered by The Guardian at this link – https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/05/miami-panmela-castro-mural-rio-de-janeiro-removed. The report covers censorship of a mural for the fair by Brazilian artist Panmela Castro depicting an instance of police brutality in Rio de Janeiro. Local Miami police only “complained” about the mural’s content before, according to the report, managers of the ‘Aria 21’ parking section of Art Basel immediately ordered it be painted over, allegedly in order to not “jeopardize good relations with police”. In our times of political tyranny, police militarization, and the Black Lives Matter movement it is imperative that such complicit oppression and suppression of art by police groups instead be denounced and amplified in attention to the public. Especially when the art in question is only being critical of illegal practices and policies involving police in order to correct them. It is not right that an original police crime of brutalization in another country be compounded by local police censorship. It stands to reason that Miami police sympathize and imitate the brutal tactics depicted and so do not want them idolized and immortalized in a local public mural. Shame on Aria 21 and Miami Art Basel for not supporting political art and surrendering to pressure from police. This is not what an Art Fair should stand for, but it is past time to recognize Miami Art Basel for the base commercial venture it really is and not the cultural icon it aspires to be. Real Art is increasing the already great distance from such events when Art Fairs sanction censorship such as this.
Protests directed at Whitney Museum co-chair Warren Kanders finally led to his resignation and that of his wife who was also involved in some museum committees. It was about time. There is no room for artists to surrender their principles to profiteering warmongers, arms manufacturers, or criminals who capitalize on abusing people or nature. Shame on the few artists who resisted the call to boycott this version of the Whitney Biennial in a year of protests. In particular I was shocked by the cowardice shown by Puerto Rican artist Nibia Pastrana Santiago who was apparently herself gassed by Kanders’ chemicals during legitimate non violent protests aimed at governor Ricardo Rosello on the island. According to Hyperallergic, Nibia said “My work is not something that can be uninstalled, the work in itself is my body in action…”. What nonsense and pathetic rationalization! Just say you’re opposed and won’t show sister! Find some valentia and quit making excuses to not join your principled exhibitors and remain in a tainted exhibit. Maybe you will find a way to just remove your ‘body’ from these soiled spectacles if you ever find some real art identity. And shame on all the other artists who for one reason or another preferred the prestige and exposure of the show to taking a moral stand against the corruption of museum philanthropists. It is past time that artists take a stand against those who seek the prestige and affirmation of the art world through museum boards while they exploit and abuse human rights and decent standards. Hopefully this is just the beginning of a trend, now more frequently visible through organizations like ‘Decolonize This Place’, who deserve credit for leading the protest against the Whitney’s complicity with “…death, disaster, and destruction” and raised consciousness among the artists selected. Maybe next time such efforts will be joined by present art-cowards like Santiago who missed their chance to stand against hidden artworld creeps.
I have never been a fan of formal teaching of studio art in art schools although I went through at least seven years of it. Mentoring has a place in the course a trajectory in art but learning old master techniques or aesthetics seems like a futile exercise in imitation and nostalgia. That is why it does not surprise me that Art Schools in this country are generally suffering from lack of students and teaching focus. It seems the smaller institutions are closing or merging in large numbers. We saw this in the DC area with the unfortunate 2015 merging of the Corcoran School of Art into George Washington University. Here is a link to a recent article about this in artnet.com… https://news.artnet.com/art-world/heres-why-art-schools-are-under-such-extreme-pressure-1460836. Even though I find instruction of art futile, I believe the environment of art school is invaluable experience given the proximity to other artists, ideas, history and techniques. According to the article, it seems like about a fifth of the art schools in the Association of Independent Colleges of Art and Design (AICAD) have faced an operating crisis in the last few years even though the top schools have seen a moderate (2.4%) increase in enrollment. This statistic however excludes schools that have closed or merged. One of the comments in the article promotes the idea of art schools training artists in tangent disciplines as ‘creatives’. It seems to me like this completely defeats the purpose of an art school – may as well teach artists to fish. Most if not all students of art are well aware of the sacrifice necessary and of the lack of options available in the real job market after graduation with an art degree. Most do not see only a future of gallery representation or teaching. Yet I believe most students would agree the experience is worthwhile as long as the focus is exclusive to art and not some lame version of a ‘normal’ education. Intense immersion in an art environment is the real value of art school and art teachers should stop worrying about their students finding gainful employment post graduation… both the anxiety and the prospects do not compare favorably to the realities.
The buffoons in government who continue indefinite detentions without charge at the lawless US gulag in Guantanamo, Cuba have now added an additional layer of humiliation and subjugation – the confiscation of artwork made by inmates there with threats to destroy it. According to an article in The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/08/guantanamo-bay-art-new-york-exhibition, authorities have begun to confiscate artwork by detainees after the success of an ongoing exhibition ‘Ode to the Sea’ at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York which runs through January 26, 2018. The authorities now claim all artwork produced by detainees belongs to them and are confiscating and preventing their transfer outside the prison. Originally they announced plans to ‘incinerate’ the artwork but the Miami Herald reported http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article186891663.html that it may just be ‘archived’ in unknown fashion, leading to charges of censorship, further dehumanization, and violation of human rights. Detainee attorney Wells Dixon declared “Let’s see who can destroy works of art and culture faster, ISIS or @DeptofDefense”, while the National Coalition Against Censorship stated “This baseless policy change uses art as a political football in an effort to prevent these works — and a deeper understanding of those who created them — from informing public discussion of the policies the U.S. government makes in its citizens’ names”. The art program was the prison’s most popular and until this exhibition presented no significant controversy over process or content. All the artwork on exhibit was inspected and put through a rigorous vetting and approval procedure. It is a sad comment on the drift of our democracy that Guantanamo still exists, much less that artwork produced there is now being confiscated with threats of destruction by the fascists in charge.
I was intrigued by a recent Artnet article that analyzed artist by auction sales: https://news.artnet.com/market/25-artists-account-nearly-50-percent-postwar-contemporary-auction-sales-1077026. The conclusion the pair of reporters came to was that only twenty five artists account for nearly fifty percent of all postwar and contemporary art auction sales. Of these artists more than half are American, two are women (Agnes Martin & Yayoi Kusama), one is black (Basquiat), and only nine are living. Other conclusions drawn by the article is that the auction art market is ‘winner takes all’, practically unchanged in its makeup over the last decade, and subject to supply and demand – or how prolific an artist is and how often their work comes up for auction. Although an interesting read, I don’t believe it is a good measure of artistic success to look only at auction sales where profits are driven exclusively by collectors and capitalism. I am hoping they conduct another analysis of Contemporary art that only includes living artists and takes into account gallery and direct studio sales if possible. That would provide a more accurate picture of the actual market for living artists selling art and provide encouragement to a lot more people struggling with creativity in the present.
While skimming through the Hyperallergic site I found this gem of a link… https://hyperallergic.com/382547/study-claims-80-5-of-artists-represented-by-nycs-top-45-galleries-are-white/ It seems CUNY Guttman College professor James Case-Leal conducted a study with his class to determine racial and gender representation in the top 45 New York galleries and found 80.5% are white and 70% are male. Guerilla Girls have been bringing attention to such gross disparity since 1985 with apparently not much changing in the art scene in 30 plus years. The same study found that when including only American artists, white dominance climbs to 88.1%, while only 1.2% of Latinos are represented – even though Latinos as a national minority group number about 16% and surpassed African Americans years ago as the largest minority in the US. Just so you get an idea of the gulf in disparity, Latinos represent more than 27% of NYC’s population. BTW African-Americans were at 8.8% representation in these top galleries. I suppose Trump sympathizers will immediately scream about faults in methodology, micro statistics, and political correctness but the study is nevertheless troubling in how it demonstrates the insistence of white male privilege within the art world and among collectors. Museums rarely hold shows on women artists or contemporary minority artists. Are there really that many more talented white male artists in America or does this only expose the blatant bias of curators and museum directors? Maybe we need a companion study on the racial makeup of these groups plus gallery owners and their corresponding preference for certain artists.
Due to the ineptitude and ignorance of our current president who is ready to cut practically all federal arts funding in favor of MORE military, former buffoon-in-chief George W Bush is getting a mandate-makeover and publishing a best-selling book of his artwork. Next, pigs will fly. This is the man who established the USA as a leader in: extraordinary rendition (otherwise known as kidnapping), ‘preemptive’ war (otherwise known as invasion), indefinite detention without charges, torture and dark sites, extrajudicial drone assassinations, mass surveillance and other high crimes. Art and political criticism have sunk to a new low in our times when such “artists” merit books and media recognition instead of jail time. I am convinced we have Dubya’s rogue administration to thank for the existence of our present orange buffoon and the public’s general acceptance of his many illegal and inhumane policy proposals. But why are legitimate media and art sites now sympathetic to our former monster of a politician? Here is a link to a Guardian article calling George W Bush a “…talented painter with an affecting vision…”: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/mar/06/george-w-bush-art-painting-portraits-in-courage . Paddy Johnson of ArtFCity writes “…at least the one image from the series is really compelling.” These are dangerous times indeed for art and politics when praise and success are so misguided that Donald Trump is elected to destroy American culture and Dubya Bush is hailed as a serious artist.
According to Hyperallergic http://hyperallergic.com/324466/appropriated-images-of-black-people-spark-boycott-of-st-louis-museum/ there are protests at the St. Louis Museum from an exhibit of a white southern-born artist appropriating images of African-Americans and then defacing them with toothpaste and chocolate – which he then labels as ‘fine contemporary art’ and the museum honors with a solo show. Museum director Lisa Melandri is SHOCKED, JUST SHOCKED the black community would find Kelley Walker’s art offensive – probably because she is brain dead. What could possibly be wrong with a white southern appropriation artist defacing racially charged black imagery to sell tickets to rich white museum goers? It could only be worse if Walker had decided to use images of lynchings. Didn’t anybody on the museum staff even consider how this show might convey a message of white privilege and arrogance? Worse, at an ‘Artist Talk’ at the museum, the artist apparently could not, or would not, explain his use of black images and of racial injustice, preferring to concentrate on ‘technical aspects’ of his work. COWARD! If you’re going to steal images from others, at least know WHY YOU CHOOSE THEM! Many local artists are offended by the show and the artist’s ‘rude and defensive manner’ and are calling for a boycott of the museum. It is obvious this show is insensitive to blacks and the local community but it is also insensitive to the original artists who produced the appropriated magazine covers and photographs. How long has this artist labored in the isolation of the New York Art World to become blind to people and to stealing images? There really is no justification for such callousness. It is not only just but necessary to boycott ANY appropriation artist at any museum or gallery show, especially if the theft offends the disadvantaged to benefit the powerful. Call this appropriation a ‘visual gentrification’ – and I hope a protest in the Midwest is just the start of opposition to this social opportunism.
Besides appropriation art, there is no topic that enrages me more than modern art factories. Isn’t it disgusting what capitalist artists will do for profit? I guess it’s to be expected that American Corporate art CEOs will protect their bottom line. I worked for a CEO who pretended to admire Cesar Chavez while busting any attempts to unionize – the same hypocrisy that apparently drives Jeff Koons in this post from ArtFcity… http://artfcity.com/2016/07/18/jeff-koons-lays-off-workers-amidst-reports-of-impropriety/ . Long past seem to be the days of Picasso Communism and famous artists championing social justice. In my view, authentic artists just want solitude to concentrate and produce personal pieces but capitalist artists count on
slave low wage labor to create and produce theirs. I hope the demise of art factories (and capitalist artist’s dependence on them) is as certain as gentrification following artist colonies. BTW let’s put to rest the myth that these factories have always existed in the art world. Artist “workshops” were originally used to train and educate artists by copying or completing their master’s works, have been discredited since Rubens and Rembrandt, and have only served to obscure and confuse the talent and reputation of the artists who utilize them in order to serve the art market. The latest entry in art factories, thanks to desperate artists in China, is ‘My DaVinci’ check out this link: http://www.mydavinci.com/artistlist.html. It feels like you may as well use an app to create art for all the creativity that comes from captivity… or exploitation. At least such sites are obvious in their commercialism, unlike ‘factories’ like Koons’ who use the same techniques to con the art world and its gullible collectors. Are such things as ‘My DaVinci’ a natural product of globalization? Western CEO’s exploiting Asian artists to produce and market classic kitch? Is this the new economic colonization? It’s all rather depressing to consider.
I disabled my Facebook account years ago when the site was still popular but it still irks me that they remain so stupidly prudish and out of synch with modern society in spite of being a ‘social’ media. Exactly what society they are reflecting? Last month it was not reproducing Courbet’s ‘The Origin of the World’ from 1866, last week it was censoring Denmark’s iconic ‘The Little Mermaid’ sculpture – a national symbol and major tourist attraction since 1913 , today it’s blocking gallery accounts because they advertise an artist performance barely showing breasts in a promo (pun intended). MEMO TO FACEBOOK… go to most European beaches in summer and see how many visible mammary glands you can count before you go mad trying. Or tune in to just about any cable channel to catch some exposed bosoms. Facebook resembles the morals of Iran more than the West – in another ‘revealing’ event this week Italy felt it had to cover their nude, classic, Roman statues during the Iranian president’s recent visit. What stringent morality is overwhelming the planet and exactly what can’t Facebook understand about nudity and Western art? Is their awkwardness with nudity simply an extension of Zuckerberg’s nerdiness? Or are all Western social media going to succumb to the moral code of ISIS? Soon, I hope, Facebook will only attract prudes and seniors before suffering the same demise as MySpace because their 21st century version of American Puritanism is just laughable for modern social media.