jamesrohrbach
- jamesrohrbach joined Artlog 3 months ago
- Works as: www.gullivergo.com
- Last updated on 18 Oct. '08
- → More information
Recently by jamesrohrbach
- jamesrohrbach, commenting on “Place (Village)” (2006-8), by Rachel Whiteread.
2 months ago
Roberta Smith on 08 Frieze Art Fair
by jamesrohrbach / 2 months ago / Source: www.nytimes.com
jamesrohrbach is following dianagreenwold 03 Oct 2008
How about being a medium fish in a medium pond? New York can be overwhelming for many artists, but a place like Milwaukee or Austin is severely limiting in terms of the national and international exposure that your work is likely to get. If ou consider the “big ponds” of the art world London, New York, Berlin, LA, maybe even Beijing, then I think I’d go for a “medium pond” such as Paris, Rome, Madrid, Amsterdam, maybe even San Francisco.
- jamesrohrbach, posting in Big Fish or Little Fish?
03 Oct 2008
at.large: Roberta Smith on Looking at Art
by jamesrohrbach / 02 Oct 2008
A few great lines from this Q&A from yesterday:
http://www.artfagcity.com/2008/10/01/roberta-smith-on-looking-at-art/
“I always loved Frank Stella’s observation that when you start out as a painter, you make other painters’ paintings, then you gradually begin to make your own paintings.”
“I am always on the lookout for a spark of necessity — a feeling that this particular artist had no choice but to make this particular artwork this particular way.”
You raise a great point, and I do think that’s a weak spot in my argument. However, the blockbuster exhibitions are driven in part by a frenzied market in which you are trying to get huge attendance numbers to support ever-expanding institutions. What we could be seeing soon, potentially, is a significant reduction in the scope of museums – no more global things like the guggenheim – and as such more modest attendance goals.
I also think that museums are going to start trying to attract people more by using technology in innovative ways, rather than with “pop” shows that come with a lot of political baggage and stigmatization.
- jamesrohrbach, commenting on at.large The meaning of the new Met & Guggenheim directors
01 Oct 2008
I’ve been meaning to write for a while regarding my initial thoughts on the selections of Thomas Campbell and Richard Armstrong as the new Directors of the Met and Guggenheim, respectively. Armstrong’s selection in particular has received relatively little coverage from the media – presumably because he seems to people like a bit of a ho-hum, unknown guy (as does Campbell, but because it’s the Met and he’s replacing de Montebello of course that story got a lot of attention). Frankly, I find the lack of discussion around these choices disappointing and a bit bewildering; to my mind, they represent the first signs of a sea change that seems likely to descend aggressively upon the art world over the next 18-36 months.
Let’s step back and review some of the current major trends:
- The world economy is heading for a period of difficulty the length and severity of which are absolutely unknown.
- Massive disposable wealth is increasingly concentrated in the East: Russia, China, the Middle East, and, to a certain extent, India. More significantly, these populations are also very much concerned with the status symbols so important to one’s climb out of the middle class. For Russia, India, and China, it’s individuals (Oligarchs, Bureaucrats) who are making this rapid ascension; in the Middle East, it’s entire nations who are asserting their sovereign-funded status as global leaders for the first time.
- After a decade in which museums in the US and around the globe engaged in a frantic competition to build the next “star” building, these institutions are now increasingly stuck in debt – with buildings that cost enormous sums to maintain, and with declining ticket sales after the initial boost of architecturally-driven enthusiasm subsides.
- Demand for contemporary art is rapidly outstripping supply of works of quality, leading to price inflation and the creation of collections of dubious artistic value.
As you can see, I’m on the “glass half empty” side of the great “State of the Art World” debate.
These trends seem to shout in unison one single message: the art world in the West is heading for a period of conservatism. Collectors will spend less money, and place significantly greater emphasis on “blue chip” works/artists. Architects will respond to the now-stigmatized “Great Museum Building,” as well as the explosion of terribly gaudy edifices in Dubai and elsewhere, with a return to modesty and function – all wrapped in the “Green” aesthetic and value set. And museums will turn away from “pop” exhibitions and dreams of globalization and engage leaders who embody the principles of curation, connoisseurship, and serving the community.
Thomas Campbell and Richard Armstrong represent the vanguard of this trend.
Usually I am skeptical of “hyper-green” buildings – the gimmick factor can be high. In this case, however, Piano has created something sublime, a perfect balance of form (beautifully integrated into the plaza, a perfect compliment to the de Young) and function (achieving its duals missions of being a museum space and as well as a leader in environmental stewardship). After a decade in which museums have sacrificed function at the alter of form and the “Star Architect” (see: Denver Art Museum), this is so refreshing. I am proud of my city.
Why I love Schjeldahl
by jamesrohrbach / 26 Sep 2008
From this week’s New Yorker: “The delirious “Starry Night” and the hellish “Night Cafe” attain serenity in their realization, cruising at an attitude of talent beyond imagining.”
jamesrohrbach is following abigailhawkins 21 Sep 2008
jamesrohrbach is following lacey 21 Sep 2008
jamesrohrbach is following hallwaybathroom 21 Sep 2008
jamesrohrbach is following dylan 21 Sep 2008
jamesrohrbach is following Nish 21 Sep 2008
sf.art: Code Switchers at The Lab
by jamesrohrbach / 21 Sep 2008
On Friday night I attended the opening of “Code Switchers” at The Lab. Summary from them:
“This juried exhibition investigates a variety of approaches to cultural and material bilingualisms, (mis)translations, appropriations, and the purposeful misuse of “proper” communication codes.”
There were two separate ideas here that, to my mind, in their confluence inhibited the force of the exhibition. First, that of the intersection between language and visual arts; second, that of the cross-cultural effects of our mid-period globalization. Both interesting themes, albeit daunting given the pre-existing body of masterworks and master artists who have plumbed the depths of these subjects (on language/art, Lawrence Weiner for example; on the effects of globalization, check out Mohini Chandra sometime). There’s still a lot of life left in the visual exploration of these ideas, yes; but suffice to say the artists selected for Code Switchers had a lot to live up to.
Nevertheless, a number of artists admirably tackled the task at hand. Julie Cloutier and Claire Nereim put together, “Stymie,” a beautiful screenprinted alphabet book that uses As to make Zs, Bs to make Ys, and so on. The idea certainly literalizes both “stymie” and “code switchers,” but the work derives its real strength from its beauty and production value. It’s the contemporization of calligraphy in process (screenprinting), values (craft/salvage), and aesthetic (in the book, the aesthetic is anti-standardized – each letter seems to come from an entirely different type family; in the companion “Stymie Miniscule,” it’s digital, all of the letters being made exclusively of slab-serifs).
Facundo Arganaraz and Nicole Anne Crescenzi also teamed up for the exhibition, and decided to address both of its themes. Their collaboration “Esso/Esta” demonstrates the political and linguistic ironies generated by globalization. In noting that ExxonMobil’s international name Esso bears striking resemblance to Argentinian slang for, essentially, “Fuck off,” they’ve achieved the relatively rare success of making a political statement (and one about oil at that) while neither sermonizing nor trivializing. It works because the simple altered logo painting and companion crotch-shot photograph are funny, tongue in cheek, and unpretentious. We could use more such commentary without the dressing of heavy-handedness with which it usually comes.
Also worth a brief mention were the large-format photographs of Jennifer Little. What they have to do with ‘code switching’ I don’t know, but they are stunning images that use carefully-crafted, perfectly-executed reflections to create complex images of comingled interiors and exteriors. Perhaps it’s that comingling that the curators were associating with globalization – I find that a stretch, but loved the works.
The Lab was ambitious in developing this project. Despite my full support for their mission of cultivating local and contemporary artists, I would have preferred an exhibition that juxtaposed the best of Code Switchers with older works that address head-on language, globalization, and art. Let’s put some Oulipo books next to “Stymie,” and the Werner Herzog film “Lessons of Darkness” (recently at the New Museum) next to Arganaraz and Crescenzi. This isn’t within The Lab’s mission or abilities so I certainly don’t hold it against them, but the intellectual material here is so rich that I left the show hungering for more, and, with a few exceptions, better.
http://www.thelab.org. Code Switchers through 10.11.08
I’m interested to go see that – I’ve earlier stated that I found the work obvious and uninteresting (http://jhr.tumblr.com/post/42164145/there-are-certain-sets-of-responses-to-art) but would like to see in person