...more recent posts
From David Nolan Gallery:
Steve DiBenedetto, Who Wants to Know?, closes Saturday, January 8th. Don't miss it!
VILLAGE VOICE, Dec. 22nd -
Ever watch an amusement park at night with your eyes dilated by good dope? That's how it feels to stand in front of Steve DiBenedetto's recent paintings and drawings. Much less representational than earlier efforts, the new works present complex, vaguely mechanical systems of spirals, blobs, angular constructions, and tangled tubing—all connected and glowing like neon.
When DiBenedetto's favorite subjects (octopus, helicopter, building) do occasionally make an appearance, as in Spiral, they're pretty much overwhelmed by the dream-state kaleidoscope. Yet for all the chaos of line, form, and loose brushwork, he keeps things under control with the careful placement of pinks, oranges, yellows, and greens, expertly balancing their vibrancy like a latter-day Fauvist. - Robert Shuster
Darn! Too bad I just saw this and it is in 45 minutes:
MoMA The Museum of Modern Art
At noon today! Patti Smith will perform a 15-minute acoustic set in honor of Jean Genet's 100th birthday. http://j.mp/hhNF8
What?HC NYT / TM.US (via support hide/seek face book)
“Katz: Well, we edited in terms of length, not to remove content. We felt the imperative to represent David Wojnarowicz’s work as he designed it. We included every scene that’s in the video, we just truncated the length.”
Why is this acceptable? What gives you the right to determine that a short version of the film–what, one bit of every shot, in order?–is an accurate representation of how it was “designed?” Yes, I know the estate OK’d it, but that doesn’t make it right. Aside from the controversy about its removal, the placement and use of video in this exhibition was abysmal. The touch-screen kiosk holding the Wojnarowicz and Bidgood pieces looked like an information center, not a means of displaying art. Both video monitors were easy to miss and looked tacked-on, to put it mildly. I was not at all surprised to learn of their “inadvertent” omission from the catalog. That the curators did not accord video respect equivalent to the photographs and paintings is evident by the way in which it was displayed. Ironic that these curators are being lionized for something pertaining to the one part of this excellent show that failed completely.