Global Feminisms

The Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art (Brooklyn Museum) exhibition opens its doors on March 23, 2007. Curated by Maura Reilly, it is merely dedicated to feminist art that has had a great impact since the 1960s through its initiative to revitalize social issues in art. Rising a counter-discourse to aesthetic formalism, feminist art has been a pioneer in contemporary art scene wth its dedication to challenge the status quo, to produce new publics, and to invite the audience to critique and deconstruct dominant ideas. I must underline that Judy Chicago's "The Dinner Party" (1974-79) finally found a spot in a permanent collection of an art space - in the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art.

The Brooklyn Museum will be hosting a symposium titled "Feminisms Without Borders" on March 31, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. in Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Auditorium. The symposium that accompanies the exhibition "Global Feminisms" will offer two panels:
Resisting Histories of Art, and Local/Global Feminisms.

AI interview with Damien Hirst

Following are some quotations from the AI interview with the Britpack artist Damien Hirst. Artist's new works including a series named after Philip Larkin's (1922-1985) poems as well as after Christian icons, are on display in Gagosian Gallery in Los Angeles.

" [...] I did a load of medicine cabinets a long time ago and I named them after Sex Pistols songs. I suppose I must be getting old if I’m naming work after Philip Larkin poems. I don’t know. They’re quite religious-looking, and I think I was just trying to find a way to avoid the religiousness by saying they’re named after poems rather than naming them after churches or anything like that. I’m still coming to terms with my own religion. . .

[...] rather than be frightened by notoriety, I’ve embraced it. When I was growing up I had a lot of friends, older artists, and each of them was just sitting in his studio, painting away, waiting to be discovered. I always thought that was a lonely, sad, depressing pursuit and I was more frightened of that than anything else. I wanted to make art that had an audience, and I didn’t want to wait for that audience to find me. I wanted to go out and get it.

[...] As an artist you’re looking for universal triggers. You want it both ways. You want it to have an immediate impact, and you want it to have deep meanings as well. I’m striving for both. But I hate it when people write things that sound like they’ve swallowed a fucking dictionary. When I make the artwork, anything I say, I try to deny it as well at the same time, so you make viewers responsible for interpretation. I think that’s good. I want to make artwork that makes people question their own lives, rather than give them any answers. Because answers always turn out to be wrong further down the line, but questions are exciting forever."

Does money debase the art?

"Irrational exuberance of the contemporary art market is about the breeding of money, not the fertility of art," SUNY Professor Donald Kuspit opines, "and that commercially precious works of art have become the organ grinder’s monkeys of money." In his article "Art Values or Money Values" in Artnet, Kuspit underlines that the hierarchy of values has been shaken, and it has determined money atop of the spiritual value of the work of art. In art scene where critics have become the mere "intellectual losers" in Kuspit's words, money has arisen as the only determining factor for value. Hence, he argues, money that has become the only raison d'etre of art, leaves no room for the independent evaluation of art. Rather than making an overgeneralized and simple statement that money creates art, Kuspit emphasizes that art's value has been guaranteed by how much it is worth. Thus, validation of art, in Kuspit's view, now depends on money that defeated the intrinsic value of the work of art as well as the critics' criteria; and this is leading and will continue to lead to the rise of "defective artists."

On the other hand, Toby Lichtig criticizes Kuspit's remarks that embody a "comical pomposity." According to his essay "Has Money Contaminated the Art World?", speculation in art should be considered as regrettable, but normal. His argument implies the 'musts' for critics in a realist way. Although it does not seem facile, critics should raise their voices, and "speak louder than money with their expertise." Moreover, public interest often focuses on art that is valuable in monetary terms. However, this does not mean that the audience is inevitably going to accept the "schlock of the new" which risks overvaluing itself. At this point, we need to trust to curators, Lichtig says.

This discussion paves the way for the role of shock value in contemporary art scene. After the divorce of art and aesthetics, art has included works with the beauty to be appreciated with 'taste' in Hume's perspective as well as disturbing or totally new works that reflect the shock value. Contemporary art focused on new ideas and their patenting sometimes may produce 'bad' works with good publicity and high value in price. At this point, I quote Lichtig: "We can lose count of the amount of times certain conceptual artists might try to surprise us; and it is only once they have done so the first time - once they are a safe bet - that money is interested. Damien Hirst can now stuff a porcupine, skewer it on a stick, call it "The Ugliness of Transcendence" and earn a million. There's nothing we can do about Charles Saatchi putting a price on this. But that doesn't mean we necessarily have to take it seriously."

Fraser defines 'artists':

"Artists, like other arts professionals, are often highly entrepreneurial. I would go even further and say that we are the very model for labour in the new economy, a fact that's not an odd irony or quirk of fate, but deeply rooted in our 'habitus' - as Pierre Bourdieu calls the habits, dispositions and preferences generated within a given field. We're highly educated, highly motivated 'self-starters' who believe that learning is a continuous process. We're always ready for change and adapt it quickly. We prefer freedom and flexibility to security. We don't want to punch a clock and tend to resist quantifying the value of our labour time. We don't know the meaning of 'overtime'. We're conceived that we work for ourselves and our own satisfaction even when we work for others. We tend to value non-material over material rewards, which we are willing to defer, even to posterity. While we may identify with social causes, we tend to come from backgrounds which discourage us from seeing ourselves as 'labour'. Finally, we're fiercely individualistic, which makes us difficult to organise and easy to exploit."*

*Andrea Fraser, "A museum is not a business. It is run in a businesslike fashion," in Art and Its Institutions: Current Conflicts, Critique and Collaborations, ed. Nina Montmann (London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006), p. 94.

Art Commerce: Oxymoron, or not?

Between 8-11 March, Dubai hosted the DIFC Gulf Art Fair - the first major international contemporary art show in the Middle East. Dubai has been lately considered as a skyrocketing center of attraction for artistic practice and art market - a possible future-rival to New York and London.

Christie's foresaw the regions's potential in 2005 by establishing an office in Dubai and by initiating auctions. It was followed by Sotheby's that has also positioned itself in the market: "When there is a critical mass in an economy, inevitably it grows by-products and the art market is one of them," Roxane Zand - Sotheby's Middle East and Gulf director opines, "Art is a form of investment. With so much property going up here, people want to put art in the property."

The ongoing debate on the region's growing contribution to the art market paves the way for the tricky question: does the art in the Middle East really begin to blossom?

Here is the official website of the Gulf Art Fair.

Please read Peter Conrad's article published in Guardian:

Rhinoplasty in Iran through Nelson's lenses

Rhinoplasty is one of the themes of London-based photographer Zed Nelson's projects. Nelson's biting eye catches the irresistible desire of young Iranian women to 'change' their appearance of their faces - their visible image in public. The strict rules in Iran that require women to cover their bodies and hair pave the way for different social trends. Despite the ban on make-up in public spaces, Iranian women seek for alternative ways to 'improve' their looks with the emphasis on their face. Hence, nose jobs have been popularized for the last ten years the reports state. Thus, the rate of rhinoplasty has been the highest in Iran in this time period. It is argued that the introduction of satellite television into people's daily life has triggered women's longing to imitate Hollywood-standards of beauty.

Nelson also examines the gun obsession in the Unites States, members of the NAAFA (National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance), dedicated soldiers of the French Foreign Legion, 'Porn Safari', and 'Disappearing Britain' including Yorkshire Miners, Cornish fishermen and World War II Veterans.

Check the photographer's website.

"The List" within the Fortress Europe

"March 14 through March 28, 2007

The List is a project by artist Banu Cennetoglu and curator Huib Haye van der Werf, produced by Stedelijk Museum Bureau Amsterdam, in collaboration with the Art in Public Space Foundation (SKOR), SMCS on 11, United, Maison Descartes - Institut Francais des Pays-Bas and Idea Books. The List is made possible in part by the American Center Foundation.

Description
The List is a document which contains the names of more than 7000 (known) refugees who died within, or on, the borders of Europe. It is being compiled by UNITED for Intercultural Action - a non-profit organisation composed of a network of more than 560 organisations from 49 different countries (www.unitedagainstracism.org).
For this project the List will be displayed as a poster campaign in 110 MUPI’s - outdoor advertising signs- throughout the city of Amsterdam for the duration of two weeks, March 14 - March 28, 2007. The poster campaign will not be commercially designed or contain any advertising, but only contain the List itself.
The project will commence with a seminar held at SMCS on 11, in which an international group of artists, filmmakers, photographers and academics will present work in the context of the list.
Throughout the week an information center will be made available to the public at SKOR’s INkijk, in the center of Amsterdam. Here supplementary information about the ‘Death List’ and the many other international initiatives dealing with the issues of Europe being a fortress and the fate of refugees will be made available to the public.

The purpose of this project is to confront a general audience with this crucial document by making it visible within the public sphere. The urgency to do so lies in the consistent portrayal of Europe having an ‘inside’ and an ‘outside’. The representation of Europe as a fortress - through political discourse and therefore news agencies - leads to singular notions of ‘us’ and ‘them’. However, we are at a moment where the borders of Europe are in a process of redefinition and where what is external (of) today can be internal (of) tomorrow. Rather than portray Europe as an enclosed and limited entity, one could consider embracing the uncertainty of its boundaries as something positive and unlimited.
The List as it is proposed here, however, is not merely meant as a socio-political project, but also as an experiment in exploring the borders and the scope of artistic practise. From this, it seeks out the limits of critical potential of the ‘cultural institute’ as well. What role can art play in the discussion on - and depiction of - Fortress Europe and migration? From what position can it do so?"

For further information please check the link.

Curating is . . .

In his article titled "The Bias of the World: Curating After Szeemann & Hopps," David Levi Strauss discusses the definition of "curator," and puts the emphasis on how Herald Szeeman and Walter Hopps - the two sui generis architects of the curatorial practices of today - contributed to the redefining of the word, and how they challenged the structure and questioning of the curatorial works in contemporary art scene. New curators should take risks in curatorial work, Strauss argues. “The nice thing about utopias is precisely that they fail," Szeeman opines, "For me failure is a poetic dimension of art."

Read the article.
(Thanks to Alpin for the link.)