Jennifer McMackon has posted a considered, critical (in two senses of the word) review of Quantal Strife at Simpleposie. Her review and my response are here. I have also posted a brief response to Peter Goddard's Toronto Star review here (scroll down).
Well, I read and struggled mightily with Jennifer's response to Sally's curating. Who are you all talking to? What % of the population of the globe do you think is able to follow all this? I beleive that art is fundamental to human existence, but dear god, you have to operate where a few of us outsiders can follow
Reviews like this are the reason people steer clear of art exhibitions.
Having not seen the exhibit, I can understand if she simply found the art visually unappealing, but her quibbles are almost entirely taken up with your catalogue and the sources you cite. Rather than harping on the philosophical underpinnings of the curator's interpretation, the reviewer might be better off wondering whether the art is interesting enough for interpretations that don't involve the "Thousand Plateaus."
I think Jennifer is an excellent writer and I have enormous respect for her knowledge and smarts. She's a good art critic who raises the bar and I hope she continues to write insightful, challenging reviews such as the one under discussion.
True enough. I didn't mean to sound so dismissive as I did find her review interesting to read. The "steer clear" comment I made was less about the writing and more specifically about the academic chill that comes from criticism of an art's text being "emphatically user-friendly."
Well, the jig is up! That super sleuth at Simpleposie, just by seeing the show and reading the catalogue (not sure in which order) has uncovered Quantal Strife's secret plan to fail: Operation Less Than Awesome. Plan goes like this: The curator painstakingly handpicks three artists in whose work she has a "pedagogical lack of confidence" and curates them into a show. The artists then go about making work that "prefers not to look awesome". They achieve this only by "stopping just shy of making something awesome" (not an easy task). The curator then attempts to camouflage this plot by writing a catalogue essay that uses no big words. How devious! At least no one found out about the invite being a gigantic acid blotter.
Am I the only one who sees the Sun King's face in this photo?
L.M. You slay me! Oh, no wait. The Church already did. My bad.
|
Jennifer McMackon has posted a considered, critical (in two senses of the word) review of Quantal Strife at Simpleposie. Her review and my response are here. I have also posted a brief response to Peter Goddard's Toronto Star review here (scroll down).
- sally mckay 3-17-2006 6:55 am
Well, I read and struggled mightily with Jennifer's response to Sally's curating. Who are you all talking to? What % of the population of the globe do you think is able to follow all this? I beleive that art is fundamental to human existence, but dear god, you have to operate where a few of us outsiders can follow
- galenagalaxian 3-17-2006 8:07 am
Reviews like this are the reason people steer clear of art exhibitions.
Having not seen the exhibit, I can understand if she simply found the art visually unappealing, but her quibbles are almost entirely taken up with your catalogue and the sources you cite. Rather than harping on the philosophical underpinnings of the curator's interpretation, the reviewer might be better off wondering whether the art is interesting enough for interpretations that don't involve the "Thousand Plateaus."
- Mike W (guest) 3-17-2006 12:48 pm
I think Jennifer is an excellent writer and I have enormous respect for her knowledge and smarts. She's a good art critic who raises the bar and I hope she continues to write insightful, challenging reviews such as the one under discussion.
- sally mckay 3-17-2006 3:11 pm
True enough. I didn't mean to sound so dismissive as I did find her review interesting to read. The "steer clear" comment I made was less about the writing and more specifically about the academic chill that comes from criticism of an art's text being "emphatically user-friendly."
- Mike w (guest) 3-17-2006 9:08 pm
Well, the jig is up! That super sleuth at Simpleposie, just by seeing the show and reading the catalogue (not sure in which order) has uncovered Quantal Strife's secret plan to fail: Operation Less Than Awesome. Plan goes like this: The curator painstakingly handpicks three artists in whose work she has a "pedagogical lack of confidence" and curates them into a show. The artists then go about making work that "prefers not to look awesome". They achieve this only by "stopping just shy of making something awesome" (not an easy task). The curator then attempts to camouflage this plot by writing a catalogue essay that uses no big words. How devious! At least no one found out about the invite being a gigantic acid blotter.
- S.C. (guest) 3-18-2006 3:30 am
Am I the only one who sees the Sun King's face in this photo?
- L.M. 3-19-2006 3:36 am
L.M. You slay me! Oh, no wait. The Church already did. My bad.
- tino (guest) 3-20-2006 5:53 am