Since you simply exclaim your reaction to Desiderio's new work without any 
investigation of it then what you say is merely an unfounded opinion it's 
unjustified to say a work by him is the greates of 2008. 

No doubt that Desiderio's work is worthy of experiencing and serious study.  
And It is difficult to understand the general marginalization of much so-called 
"traditional" painting, even in this era of a broad rebirth of figuration.  But 
is is unquestioned that so much was wrought from the traditional methods and 
subjects that little seems left to do, even with the new perspectives of our 
time. 

Less mentioned is the tendency of very conservative (right wing)people being 
the collectors of traditional art.  They are betting against art history  and 
betting for a triumphal return of something from the past. It has never 
happened yet. Today's art world is decidedly liberal (since at least 1850).  
Nevertheless, all questions should be examined, all ways of artmaking should be 
valid because all things human are always human. There's no value at all in 
simply bemoaning this or that state of criticism.  The field is open, not so 
much for redundant naggers, but for contributing new insights and advocacy. 
Desiderio is one artist who is  doing that.

Pluralism is the idea that all ways of making art have validity and that no 
idea or style or concept ever really dies out but is at time more or less 
visible and crucial to symbolizing the sense of an era.  Because we live in an 
era of magnifying complexity and competing world views, and increasingly 
insistent individualization, we should expect artwork to reflect that through 
extraordinary diversity.  And that's exactly what's going on.

The so-called museum of contemporarty art is an contradiciton because to be 
contemporary is to be ongoing, to be moving along with time and change whereas 
museums are depositories of past times, the frozen moments of history.  That's 
why some contemporary art venues are named "Institute" of "Center" or some such 
and why many of them don't collect.  But then we need to accept the reality of 
commerce.  Big collectors support these intstitutions and indirectly pay the 
salaries of directors and curators.  They, the collectors, want their works in 
their museums, and want the tax advantages that come with them.  They also like 
the increased marketability of their collected pieces.  So contemporary museums 
are born.  They try to balance the political reralities of their patronage and 
the measure of the artworld, often also shaped by the patronage (as always).  
Miller doesn't get it that realist traditional painting, although usually 
priced higher than the more
 experimental work, stands little chance of rocket style rise in value vis a 
vis the experimental and impossibly bad looking anti-art stuff.  All of this 
should stand aside from genuine criticality, the trying to discover the good or 
bad, the importance, of an artwork.  Easy to say, hard to do.

Miller should stop being shocked by the reality of the artworld and begin to 
examine the art he likes more seriously, for what it is.  He should develop a 
critical discourse, historically informed, philosophically informed, 
sensitively informed and give up screaming about the unfairness of the world.  
Yes, Miller, we all know we're in the swamp, late at night, and surrounded by 
alligators.  Now tell us how to get out of the place. It doesn't help that he 
grabs some swamp-crazed lunatic (that Shaw guy writer from Boston) as a leader.
WC


  






--- On Sat, 11/22/08, Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> From: Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Painting of the  Year: 2008
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Saturday, November 22, 2008, 1:51 PM
> http://www.marlboroughgallery.com/artists/desiderio2008/artwork.html
> 
> 
> Just stumbled onto this piece in an art magazine -- and was
> stunned.
> 
> It feels so serious and dramatic -- and such an inspiring
> update on Titian.
> 
> I've seen Desiderio's work before -- even in person
> -- but none of it compares
> -- since, until now, he's been compelled to present
> narratives that were
> either meaningless - or -- full of despair/depression. 
> I.e. -- he wanted to
> fit into the contemporary artworld.
> 
> 
> I can't think of any contemporary figure painting that
> comes close -- though I
> never have -- and never will  -- actually see it (unless I
> fly to NY before
> it's sold.
> 
> The chances of a painting this traditional ever going into
> my two local art
> museums are zero -- at least in the foreseeable future.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW -- his  bio makes no mention of any mentors --and he is
> not connected to
> the American neo-academic tradition that's centered in
> Minneapolis -- though
> he did study somewhere in Florence for a year.
> 
> He's not a full-time  Professor of Art anywhere -- but
> he does make himself
> available as something called a "Senior Critic"
> -- whatever that is.  Could
> that possibly have something to do with taste ?
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> Free information on vast array of home improvement
> projects.  Click here.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc1zNX3l6VdIWSc0No2KmP5JY1
> 2WNQvsDJvK08T8IyrVWxw0U/

Reply via email to