Exhibition at P.S.1 Contemporary Art Center: Not For Sale

I have not seen the show yet, but I thought this is another interesting look at relationship between art and economy. what’s intereting thing about this exhibition is that participating artists had to sign some sort of agreement that they are not going to sell works of art in the show.

Not For Sale
February 11 – April 22, 2007
(Long Island City, NY – February 9, 2007)

“Not about a specific scene, movement, or ideology, Not For Sale is about the relationship between artists and their work in the context of the economy in which they function. When material works are transferable for cash, artists have the choice of whether to sell the work or keep it from market participation. In today’s robust art market, these decisions become even more pointed, even painful.

Reasons for retaining work are many: The work is not “finished” or otherwise does not seem satisfactory to the artist; the work is completely satisfactory and too good to pass out of the artist’s hands; the work was made for a loved one who has remained, or for a loved one who has exited; the work is regarded as a turning point in the artist’s production, such as models or drafts that inspired later works. Some artists hold on to a portion of their production as investments in themselves.

I have tried to avoid work with issues of installation which might render the work unsaleable. Museums and collectors were not asked to lend works; this is a show of work that the creators won’t part with. Not everyone I called is in the show. Some artists simply could not find works that they would not sell.

This show is a personal one: I called artists whom I know well and who happened to be at home. It also represents some kind of manifestation of my unfortunate allergy to the commercial aspects of art.”

– Alanna Heiss, Not For Sale curator and Director of P.S.1 Contemporary
Art Center

The artists in the exhibition are: Janine Antoni, John Baldessari, Jennifer Bartlett, Lynda Benglis, Cecily Brown, Chris Burden, Janet Cardiff, Christo, Chuck Close, Eric Fischl, Luis Gispert, Peter Halley, Tim Hawkinson, Jasper Johns, Alex Katz, Byron Kim, Christopher Knowles, Jeff Koons, Louise Lawler, Glenn Ligon, Maya Lin, Shirin Neshat, Richard Nonas, Dennis Oppenheim, Ellen Phelan, Richard Prince, Robert Rauschenberg, David Reed, Matthew Ritchie, Ed Ruscha, David Salle, Julian Schnabel, Dana Schutz, Joel Shapiro, Judith Shea, Stephen Shore, James Siena, Shahzia Sikander, Mark di Suvero, Sarah Sze, Richard Tuttle, Lawrence Weiner, John Wesley, Fred Wilson, Robert Wilson, and Jackie Winsor.

Not For Sale is on view from February 11 through April 22, 2007 in the Second Floor Main Gallery.

Feminist Art Exhibitions

In a few weeks we’re going to be discussing the Global Feminisms exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum. This article, in the NY Times, on a new exhibition of feminist art in Los Angeles,
Wack! , might provide some food for thought.

Jean Baudrillard (1929–2007)

03.07.07 – The French critic and provocateur Jean Baudrillard, whose theories about consumer culture and the manufactured nature of reality were intensely discussed both in rarefied philosophical circles and in blockbuster movies like The Matrix, died yesterday in Paris, reports Patricia Cohen for the New York Times. He was seventy-seven. Michel Delorme, director of Galilee, Baudrillard’s publisher, announced his death, which he said followed a long illness. Baudrillard, the first in his family to attend a university, became a member of a small caste of celebrated and influential French intellectuals who achieved international fame despite the density and difficulty of their work. The author of more than fifty books and an accomplished photographer, Baudrillard ranged across different subjects, from race and gender to literature and art to 9/11.

text taken from artForum News

options for final project

I’m hoping that we might be able to spend some time in class on March 8th discussing the final project for the course.

The final project will take different forms for different students. However, in all cases it will involve conceiving of and fleshing out an exhibition (I recommend that artists include at least one piece of their own work, although this is not a hard and fast requirement) of any variety that you choose. It may be an exhibition of art, design, history, or any other subject.

Two possible options for the form of the final project are:

1. A grant proposal. I suggest that you follow the guidelines for a grant proposal established by the New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA) These guidelines are quite typical of the requirements for grant proposals. Please note that you will not be responsible for the budget section of this proposal. Or, if there is a grant that you know you would like to apply for, then please use those guidelines to make this exercise as relevant as possible.

2. An exhibition proposal, of the sort that would be written to a museum. I suggest following the Smithsonian Institution’s guidelines. But again, if there is a venue to which you would like to apply, please use their guidelines.

I would be happy to consider other options for the form of the final project, as long as it involves conceiving and planning an exhibition and its accompanying programming (if applicable).

All final projects are due on the last day of class (May 10th).

When we return from spring break, on March 29th, I will ask everyone to please hand me a brief statement of your thoughts regarding your exhibition. On that day students will also sign up for presentation dates. Options are: April 19, April 26, May 3. The 15-20 minute presentation is an opportunity for you to workshop your ideas for your proposed exhibition.

Finally, if you would like to work collaboratively with another student or students in the class for your final project and presentation, you are welcome to do so.

The Target Collection of American Photography: A Century in Pictures Celebrates 30th Anniversary of Target Corporation’s First Gift

I know that I’m late getting this posting in, and had all but given up on doing it this week until I came across this entry in the Aperture external blog. For those of you who don’t know about it, Aperture Foundation has a magazine, gallery and book publishing business all about photography. This link got my attention and couldn’t resist posting a link to it here. This is an excerpt regarding Target and their support of the arts.

http://thef-stop.blogspot.com/2007/01/century-in-pictures.html

A few fun facts about American business and the organization that made this experience a possibility. George D. Dayton founder of the Dayton Company established the practice of giving 5% of pre-tax profits to good causes in 1946. The Dayton Company opened its first Target store in 1962 and today operates about 1,500 stores. In 2000, the company was renamed the Target Corporation. The Target Corporation gives back $2 million each week to education, art, and social services. Target has partnerships with designers such as Michael Graves and Isaac Mizrahi to ensure aesthetically pleasing quality products. It’s no surprise that a company that puts so much importance on good design would also support the art community. Target sponsors events such as Target Free Friday Nights at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City. Their support isn’t confined to New York…through Target Store Grants funding is provided for programs across the United States that make art accessible to the public creating a cultural experience. The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston is one such recipient of the Target Store Grants, which helped establish the photography department in 1976. Since then, Target has provided funding for eight previous exhibitions. A Century in Pictures Exhibition is the ninth MFAH exhibition to show works from the Target Collection and will travel to the Austin Museum of Art and the Art Museum of South Texas in Corpus Christi. The Target collection at MFAH includes about 420 photographs.

The Department Museum

After reading the article about the creation of the Newark Museum and Dana’s desire to have it emulate a deptartment store. I stated to think about the stores that emulate museums. The stores that immediately came to mind that have embraced this ideal is the new Barney’s that was built in Boston last year and Louis Boston. In both stores the clothing is displayed as if each piece is a highly prized artifact. You actually forget that you are in a clothing store. In the Barney’s store clothes are even displayed in glass containers just as if they were at the Met in the Costume Institute. Many feel that these stores are pretentious and on a few different comment sites more than once the word museum came up. I found that pretty interesting. Though they most likely are commenting on price and the sales staff, would people have the same attitude if the Gap displayed their clothing this way??

On a side note I just have to remark on the fact that when I was at the Jewish Musuem and in the gift shop they had The Idiots Guide to the Conflict in the Middle East?????

The Triennial at the Cooper-Hewitt

We had an interesting discussion last evening in the Topics in Prints and Drawings class about the Design Life Now exhibition currently on view at the Cooper-Hewitt. Beyond issues of installation, many in the class felt that the exhibition wasn’t entirely appropriate for the Cooper-Hewitt. It is more about doing something cool to bring in a younger crowd to the museum rather than basing an exhibition on the collection that was viewed as more historic. It should be more about the history of decorative arts, and therefore be a would be a more honest exhibition, and more about what we study as MA students in the program. It was also suggested that Design Life Now would have more appropriate as an exhibition at Parsons. How do those of you who are in the Cooper-Hewitt MA program feel about the content of the Triennial exhibition and how it connects to the museum and its collection? Do you feel it is about branding, establishing a new image for the Cooper-Hewitt ? Those of you who are not in the MA program there, what are your feelings about what the Cooper-Hewitt is, and what are your expectations for exhibitions there?

Branded Nation

In the reading, I was thinking how Twitchell was exaggerating the circumstances. Saratoga Springs does not have cutting edge architecture for its museums, the World of Coca-Cola is has a higher number of visitors because it’s at the Atlanta Underground and Atlanta has terrible public transportation to bring people to the High, etc. Then I was struck by how many things have moved in this highly commercial direction–the Met did in fact end up holding an exhibition of Coco Chanel’s work sponsored by Chanel and the catalogue included an essay by Karl Lagerfeld, whose contemporary works were included in the exhibition. Adding to the commercial mechanism, additional funding was provided by Conde Nast, whose Vogue is a major supporter of Chanel through the friendship between Anna Wintour and Karl Lagerfeld. The Guggenheim has continued what is effectively a franchise business, also planning a museum in Abu Dhabi. While this expands everyone’s global brands, is it also putting greater emphasis on the original. Is it really the same to go to the Guggenheim or Louvre in Abu Dhabi? Is it more or less valuable to have gone to the original? I think it’s an interesting twist on the art world idea of originals and copies, and both are to the museum’s advantage.

Value by association

When I saw the Bic disposable lighter at MoMA behind the glass, with it’s own lovely little label and spotlit in glowing white light, I thought, ‘Hey, my Bic lighter must be cooler than I realized. And to think I only paid $.69 for it (granted, it’s the 2003 model).’ Upon closer inspection, this Bic is called the Flaminaire. I have to say I never thought much of my Bic lighter until I saw it in the case at MoMA. Now my Bic is privileged — I may even start calling it my flaminaire just because it sounds cooler. And no way is my flaminaire one of those dime-store lighters, it now shows that I’m a standard-bearer of good taste. Who knew a lighter could be so awesome? Thanks, MoMA.

I have to say I was a bit disappointed I couldn’t purchase another flaminaire at the MoMA store, though. I would have paid like 3 bucks for it just because it was inside that case at the museum. Oh well, I’ll just have to hold on tighter to the one I have — my little disposable product has now been specially imbued with the value of high culture. Amazing.

Flaminaire. J1 Bic Disposable Lighter, 1972.
Image from MoMA’s online collection.

Louvre Abu Dhabi

In an timely news story, The New York Times reports that the licensing of the Louvre name to Abu Dhabi will be cost $520 million, plus $747 million in art exchanges, loans, and management advice.