I agree with Chris' comment below. I have the tape, too, but haven't looked at it yet. The book stays on the sober side of the screed line.
Trouble is, only a certain kind of contemporary art is highly favored and gets the museum attention. It gets its spot in art history and thus drives the narrative. See today'sNYT for obit of Karl Benjamin. Note how his work was excluded from NY concept of art. See his work on www.geoform.net Damn, I wish I could fix this text problem. Michael? WC ----- Original Message ---- From: caldwell-brobeck <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, August 4, 2012 5:25:39 AM Subject: Re: Academic postmodern kitsch I had not heard of Munson, so I looked her up - this video from CSPAN seems to cover a good deal of her material (it's of a talk and Q&A given by her and Hilton Kramer at the Washington Press Club): http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/159740-1 Now personally I will say there's lots of art I don't like, don't understand, find personally repellant, etc. (especially as I am somewhat politically conservative), but I do get awfully tired of those nominally on my side using scary buzzwords - :Marxism! Postmodernism! Deconstruction! Moral Relativism! Loss of Skills! - to try and establish that we are always teetering on the brink of destruction, and Somebody Should Do Something Right Now! As far as I can see they just want power in their court rather than someone else's. Over the long run the art market seems pretty darwinian - most of what they object to in art will be forgotten, just as most Salon art has been, and I'm content with that. Cheers; Chris On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 12:40 AM, William Conger <[email protected]>wrote: > I thank Michael and others for helpful advice on not writing free verse. > I am a > technological Luddite and can't focus > on the computer tasks that might help me write simple lines of text. It's > just > painting, reading, writing and thinking that > keeps me distracted from everyday stuff. Today I had lunch with James > Valerio > (see Forum Gallery), a friend of > 45 years. We have very different political views. I'm way too liberal > for him. > Yet we are not so far apart on > issues about art as we are on politics. We both lament the brutish > character of > so much 'postmodern' art thinking > and how it has all but taken over the academy and the art world itself. I > suppose that's because we're both > painters and, as everyone knows by now, painting is dead and gone in the > world > of serious, fashionable art: the art > of contemporary museums, major art fairs, hot critics, dealers, and > collectors. > James gave me a book to read. > Now, I'm usually plenty up to date on books about the art world but this > is one > I missed. It's titled Exhibitionism. > Authored by Lynne Munson, published 2000. I recommend it but it has > flaws. it > does have fascinating, and damming > information about the NEA. Many of your suspicions about current art will > be > confirmed. The near impossibility > of carrying on a good discussion of aesthetics in a postmodern context > where all > meanings have been cut loose is conformed. > > I wonder how this post will look when you read it. On my screen, it's a > perfect > rectangle of text. > wc
