Quantcast
Channel: The Great God Pan Is Dead
Viewing all 665 articles
Browse latest View live

The Pan Review of Books: The Blazing World

$
0
0
Robert Boyd



The Blazing Worldby Siri Hustvedt is a rich, complex novel disguised as an anthology about the work and life of Harriet Burden, a recently deceased artist. The conceit of the book is that it was edited by I.V. Hess from Burden's notebooks with additional sections from contemporaneous publications (reviews, articles, etc.) and testimony by people who knew Burden.

Burden was the widow of a successful contemporary art dealer, Felix Lord. While married to him, her own art career was at best moderately successful. After he died, that modest success dwindled. She came to believe that it was her status as a woman that held her back in the sexist art world. So she developed an elaborate plan to put on art exhibits of her work using three men as fronts or "masks." The first, Anton Tish, was a callow youth who gained a tiny measure of fame after "his" show. The second, Phineas Q. Eldridge, a black, gay performance artist, was highly sympathetic to her eccentric project. The third mask was Rune Larsen, who simply went by the name Rune, an already successful young artist. The book is primarily about these three shows and what happened after.

Obviously feminism is a major theme here. But the book is quite tricky--it leads you down one thematic path and sneakily changes course, several times. When I started reading it, I thought of Fernando Pessoa, who wrote under many pseudonyms (or masks) that were quite distinct personalities. (Pessoa is acknowledged early on, as if to get him out of the way.) Also I thought of The Golden Notebook by Doris Lessing,  a novel where the protagonist writes in several differently themed notebooks, as Harriet Burden does in The Blazing World. And like Burden, The Golden Notebook's protagonist, Anna Wulf, suffers a mental breakdown.

As I read it, I was really taken with the voices Hustveldt created for the "contributors." So instead of writing an essay about the book, I thought I'd quote some of them and add my own annotations. 
I don’t think anybody really knows when she first started thinking about pseudonyms. She published one dense art review under the name Roger Raison in a magazine in the eighties, dumping on the Baudrillard craze, demolishing his simulacra argument, but few people paid attention. I remember when I was fifteen, our family was in Lisbon, and she went over and kissed the statue of Pessoa. My mother told me to read him, and, of course, he was famous for what he called his heteronyms. (Maisie Lord)
Maisie Lord is Burden's level-headed daughter. She is a documentary filmmaker who has spent considerable time documenting her mother's odd, chaotic life, including a full-length documentary about a schizophrenic denizen of Burden's Red Hook compound.
Over time, however, I learned that the boy [Anton Tish] had attended the School of Visual Arts, did not know who Giorgione was but considered Warhol the most important artist of all time, which must have explained his silk-screen obsession. Rather than celebrities, Tisch did silk screens of his friends, presumably because their proverbial fifteen minutes had or would come. He explained that his art referred directly to Warhol while also pointing to the phenomenon of reality TV, although it was difficult to glean this information from the banal images he showed me. He liked the term conceptual and used it a lot, not unlike the way Edgar used man. Anton was not a bad kid. He was just stupendously, heartbreakingly ignorant. (Harriet Burden, notebook C)
This harsh portrait of Burden's first "mask," Anton Tisch (whose name she changes to "Tish" for the exhibit), is funny but rings true. We've met that guy before under different names. Burden is that she is better educated than everybody else in the book. She has read everything. Whatever else it is, The Blazing World is a novel about Burden's mind; her interpretations of history, philosophy and science. She has to teach Tish her own highly idiosyncratic history of art to get him up to speed to be a convincing front.
Mostly, the art business has been about men. And when it has been about women, it has often been about correcting past oversights. It is interesting that not all, but many women were celebrated only when their days as desirable sexual objects had passed. (Rosemary Lerner, art critic)
The book's feminist themes will be pretty familiar to anyone who is familiar with Linda Nochlin, the Guerrilla Girls, and so forth. Lerner is an art writer working on a biography of Burden who has, since her death, risen in the estimation of the art world--correcting an old oversight, as it were.
After her parents and then Felix [her husband] died, this monolith of adversarial forces seemed to grow rather than diminish. An enemy with a masculine, not a feminine face, it swatted the likes of Harry away like a mosquito. She had fantasized about her revenge for years, and now it had come—sort of. (Rachel Briefman, childhood friend)
But the abstract feminist motivations for the "mask" exhibits aren't the only motivations. They are wound together with a sense of resentment Burden feels over how her work has been ignored. Because by the time this anthology is being written her work has become highly esteemed, her resentment seems justified in retrospect. But for her friends and contemporaries, it must have seemed self-indulgent, if not a little crazy.
Yes, my husband and I have been collecting for years now,” a woman in a Chanel suit told me. “We just bought a Kara Walker.” (The idea here: Tell black artist about another black artist.) “Her work is soooo powerful, don’t you think?
[...]

When The Suffocation Rooms were shown, they were read through me—P. Q. Eldridge was exploring his identity in his art. White boys, the Anton Tishes of the world, have no need to explore their identities, of course. What is there to explore? They are the neutral universal entity, the unhyphenated humans. I was pretty much all hyphen. (Phineas Q. Eldridge)
Phineas Q. Eldridge is one of the most likable characters in the book. He becomes a good friend of Burden's in the course of their project together, and by virtue of his own status as an outsider, he is sensitive to the small but significant racial/sexual distinctions between how people view "white boys" and how they view people like him or Burden. This makes him a good conspirator for Burden.
She had drunk too much, and I could feel the self-pity mounting as she rolled off the names of women artists suppressed, dismissed, or forgotten. She jumped up from the sofa and stomped back and forth across the room. Artemisia Gentileschi, treated with contempt by posterity, her best work attributed to her father. Judith Leyster, admired in her day, then erased. Her work handed over to Frans Hals. Camille Claudel’s reputation swallowed whole by Rodin’s. Dora Maar’s big mistake: She screwed Picasso, a fact that had obliterated her brilliant Surrealist photographs. Fathers, teachers, and lovers suffocate women’s reputations. These are three I remember. Harry had an endless supply. “With women,” Harry said, “it’s always personal, love and muck, whom they fuck.” And a favorite theme of Harry’s, women treated like children by paternal critics, who refer to them by their first names: Artemisia, Judith, Camille, Dora. (Phineas Q. Eldridge)
This book is crammed with information. Because it's a novel about a particular person, you have to take some of the information with a grain of salt. Burden isn't a completely reliable narrator. But for me, there is a lot of "further reading" suggested by its contents. It's not enough that Burden feels that she (and women artists in general) have been shortchanged; names must be named.
I worry over Bruno’s refusal to come with us. Maybe it is Phinny’s hand that makes me think of Bruno, my mauling lover. I am back to life under his hands, his rumbling voice, his jokes, but he said, I hate that art world shit. It’s worse than the poetry world, and that’s pretty bad, but there’s no money in poems. Just egos. (Harriet Burden, notebook B)
"Bruno" is Bruno Kleinfeld, Burden's boyfriend--a not very successful poet, but a hell of a nice guy. Both he and Burden are oldish--they have grown children. Kleinfeld loves her art but doesn't quite understand it. Burden doesn't like Kleinfeld's poetry so much, but loves his prose memoir and encourages him to continue it. Kleinfeld really doesn't get her need for revenge--to him, the whole game of the art world is a sick joke to be avoided if at all possible.
[T]he Goldberg study, 1968. Women students evaluated an identical essay more poorly when a female name was attached to it than when a male name was attached. The same results were found when they were presented with a work of visual art. Goldberg study revisited, 1983. Men and women students rated the essay with a female name attached more poorly than with a male name attached. And so it goes, but there is a twist as the research progresses in the 1990s. When expert credentials are attached to a woman’s name, the bias disappears. For artists, expertise is fame. Sex and color don’t disappear; they no longer matter. (Harriet Burden, notebook B)
For all the academic references, this is a key passage. Burden is not just fighting sexism or getting revenge, she is conducting a personal version of the Goldberg studies. She believes that the reception of her art will be colored by the supposed identity of the artist--and furthermore, its meaning will change. By the way, these are real studies. Burden's theory that fame can replace expert credentials rings very true.
The subterfuge was right up Rune’s alley, a ploy that wowed him because, if it all went as planned, he could become the biggest art world kidder of them all. He would expose the critics (some of whom he hoped to draw and quarter) as clowns. This was the man’s vulnerability, Harry claimed. There were those who called him a con artist, a panderer. Plus the market scared him. Up one day, down the next. He didn’t want to go the way of Sandro Chia, dumped on the market by Saatchi, never to recover. Rune lived like a pasha, indulged himself; he needed upkeep. (Bruno Kleinfeld)
Rune was the third "mask," but unlike Eldridge and Tish, Rune was already a successful artist--and within the context of the novel, a good artist. But unlike Tish, who was just a dope, and Eldridge, who went along because he liked Burden but otherwise had no particular stake in the world of art galleries, Rune was deeply involved in the art world and was a very clever, savvy player. Bruno is parroting Burden's assessment of Rune in the passage above, an assessment that turns out to be quite naive.
[...] she got that wrinkled, knowing look on her face, which always let me know a big explanation was coming, and she launched into a story about James Tiptree, the science fiction writer. According to Mother, for at least ten years no one actually saw Tiptree in the flesh, not even his editor. His secret identity caused a lot of speculation, and there were some people who thought that hiding behind the pseudonym there might be a woman, not a man. Robert Silverberg, another science fiction writer, wrote an introduction for a book of stories by Tiptree. He weighed in on the sex question and argued that just as no man could have written the novels of Jane Austen, no woman could have produced the stories of Ernest Hemingway or James Tiptree. Mother loved this part of the Tiptree drama because Silverberg’s faith in the writer’s unimpeachable masculinity turned out to be misplaced. When the actual person stepped out from behind the pen name, the macho Tiptree turned out to be Alice Bradley Sheldon.
But Mother stressed that nothing was simple. After she had invented Tiptree and before she unveiled herself as Alice Sheldon, the writer took on another persona, a female one she named Raccoona Sheldon, whose work was rejected by a number of publishers and deemed inferior to Tiptree’s. The writer, who had been praised as a man who could write feminist science fiction, now had a female mask, too. My mother said the bizarre name Raccoona had surely been inspired, at least on a subliminal level, by the masks raccoons don’t wear but simply have—the ones given them by nature. That’s the title of my third film, the one I’m working on now about my mother: The Natural Mask. The revelation that James Tiptree and Raccoona Sheldon were two sides of the same person didn’t make life simpler for Alice Sheldon. Although the women who had been friends with Tiptree by letter, including Ursula Le Guin, Mother said, had understood something deep. “When you take on a male persona, something happens.”
When I asked her what that was, she sat back in her chair, waved her arm, and smiled. “You get to be the father.”
As her daughter, I didn’t like hearing my mother talk about being the father. I felt a visceral jolt under my ribs, but I started giggling and said something like “Oh, Mother, come on, you don’t really mean that.” But Mother did mean it. She told me that in 1987 Tiptree shot her husband and then killed herself. Mother said Sheldon couldn’t live without her man—not her husband, obviously, but the man inside her—and she believed that’s why she exploded into violence.
What interested her was not simply substituting a man’s name for a woman’s. That was boring. No, she pointed out that Le Guin had suspected all along that Raccoona and Tiptree were two authors that came from the same source, but in a letter to Alice she wrote that she preferred Tiptree to Raccoona: “Raccoona, I think, has less control, thus less wit and power. [Maisie Lord]
Even though this novel is set in the art world (and some if the best parts are the descriptions of Burden's artworks--they are good enough that they make you want to see the "real" art), the story of science fiction writer James Tiptree, Jr. seems like a possible source for the book. If so, it's pretty odd that Sheldon/Tiptree's true story would be recalled in the course of the novel.That a feminist science fiction novelist like Le Guin--a woman of incredible sensitivity--would nonetheless express a preference for Tiptree over Racoona Sheldon seems to confirm the Goldberg study and Burden's own contention that the meaning of the work is changed if we know it's by a woman or a man. But Sheldon's story also brings the theme of mental illness or breakdown back into the story. The violence committed by Burden in the story is far less serious than what happened with Sheldon, but it is still quite shocking when it happens. (There is an excellent biography of Sheldon:James Tiptree, Jr.: The Double Life of Alice B. Sheldon by Julie Phillips.)

With your name on my work, I said, it will be different. Art lives in its perception only. You are the last of three, and you are the pinnacle. I could hear the cracking passion in my voice. I altered my tone to one of calm deliberation.
He liked the idea of pulling a fast one, but my ideas felt outdated, a little lame to him. We live in a postfeminist age of gender freedom, transsexuality. Who cares which is which? There are lots of women in art now. Where is the battle?
No, I said to him, it’s more than sex. It’s an experiment, a whole story I am making. Two down, one to go. After that, I retire from the game. We will find a project, I said. Hadn’t his work The Banality of Glamour focused mostly on women’s faces and bodies? Surely he knew that women face pressures men don’t. I had suffered from the cruelty of the beauty culture. I knew what I was talking about.
He smiled a gentle smile, and he said, Harry, you have your own style, your own elegance, your own femininity. He wanted to be kind, but I boiled—fists clenched, fury rising. He had offered me condescension, compensation. Don’t worry, Harry, you count, too, he was saying, even if you are funny-looking. I bristled at him and growled, But that’s not the point. The point is the trap, the suffocation. I turned away.
No pique from him: You want to wear me for one exhibition. It was a good phrase, “wear me.”
I told him yes, that was it exactly, except that by “wearing” him I might find something else in myself. This is what I was trying to explain. [Harriet Burden, Notebook O, the Fifth Circle]
Here Burden specifically identifies the "mask" project as an "experiment"--she is replicating the Goldberg experiment in her own way. Rune seems to be eager enough to play along, but Rune has his own agenda.

To go much further would be to risk "spoilers." And there is a mystery threading through the work that readers will want unspooled gradually. Despite its odd form and intellectual subject matter, Hustvedt want you to feel the need to keep reading. There is a plot here that the reader wants to see through. (In this way, The Blazing World resembles the novels of Hustvedt's husband, Paul Auster. Apparently they have even shared characters in their novels.)

I'm always interested in novels that are about artists or otherwise set in the art world. But The Blazing World transcends that interest. It is unusually fine.

Lonestar Explosion 2014 - The Artist Is Pleasant by David B. Collins

$
0
0
Dean Liscum

I've been confronted with many things when viewing performance art by David B. Collins: shrink-wrapped suicide hotline conversations, naked strolling down Westheimer with a clothed entourage, a naked body covered in green paint. Now I can add to that list a peanut butter sandwich sans nudity.

 
The Artist is Pleasant by David B. Collins

Collins piece was a one-on-one interaction in which audience members were invited to sit across the table from him. The two of them would exchange pleasantries, and at some point Collins would offer to make his audience a peanut butter sandwich. From what I witnessed of the performance, it was a plethora of pleasantness or at least superficially so.

I say superficially because it wasn't pleasant for me. The title is a pun on the phrase "the artist is present" and the concept of being fully present, of being in the moment. The piece made me wonder if the artist is pleasant, meaning he's conforming to societal norms so as not to offend or insult anyone, can he also be present as an artist? Isn't the artist, specifically the performance artist, supposed to challenge us in some way, to move us out of pleasant-ville if only for a day trip? When I go to see performance art, I expect and want to be challenged to embrace, to avert, to intervene, to abandon what I'm confronted with. I don't expect or want a cup of pleasantness and a side of peanut butter with my performance art.

I boycotted the sandwich. I grew up on peanut butter and pleasantness. I've had enough of that shit. I want my performance artists present. I want them intellectually, aesthetically, and emotionally engaged. If that means naked and smeared with peanut butter, so be it. If that means I'm shocked, disgusted, or emotionally scarred for life, so be it. The pleasantries, I can do without. They leave their own marks.

The audience, however, played along. No one challenged Collins or his menu. No one got belligerent or confrontational or naked. No one asked him to do anything inappropriate in "pleasant" company. And he didn't. Collins was a perfect gentleman, which was pleasant but not very satisfying. Unless, frustrating audience members with pleasantness was the objective of Collin's pleasant-present dichotomy.

If so, bravo. If not, I prefer him naked and green all over.


No Seriously, What’s the Matter With Rice?

$
0
0
Betsy Huete

 
The building formerly known as Art Barn ready to be disassembled

Rice University’s recent decision to raze the Art Barn has caused quite the stir. (Well, possible razing—the Brown Foundation at present is discussing the possibility of moving the building to the Fourth Ward—because deconstructing, moving, finding land, and rebuilding is apparently a much more financially viable option than simply maintaining it onsite.) Although it has done little for the arts beyond sitting next to the Media Center for decades, proponents claim that it has symbolic and rich art historical and architectural value for not only Rice but Houston at large. While these claims may absolutely be true and the Art Barn’s demolishing very sad, as arts writer Devon Britt-Darby, Matchbox co-curator Jessica Fuquay, and Glasstire commenter Lisa Hardaway among others have made abundantly clear, this is just one incident, one symptom of the systemic failure of Rice University to take its arts program seriously.

And it’s easy for us to point finger, isn’t it? Yes, where the powers that be choose to direct—or not direct—their funding is certainly one culprit, and we’ll get to that in a bit. But the truth is Rice’s blatant lack of respect disguised as nonchalance towards the visual arts has far reaching tendrils that are deeply entrenched within the arts department as well as the greater student culture.

 
Edward and Nancy Kienholz, The Art Show, 1984 at the Art Barn (from Finders/Keepers catalog, 1997)

I’d like to start by saying that I didn’t even know what the Art Barn was until I got to grad school, nor was I aware of its dense, luxurious history and connection to the Menils. I thought it was just the corrugated metal building for Continuing Studies that happened to look an awful lot like the Media Center. Now sure, we can chalk that up to my own ignorance and lack of curiosity, but it begs the question: why is the school across town discussing, educating, and celebrating Rice’s art historical significance when Rice isn’t? Why did it take nearly a decade out of school to understand how amazing it was to be able to take a class with Thomas McEvilley? And why were there only three people in it? Why did Rice Gallery, one of the most exciting spaces in Houston, turn their backs on its students and deny them a senior show?

To be clear, Visual and Dramatic Arts department (VADA) has a lot of great things going on. When I was there, the faculty was excellent, and as people like George Smith, Bas Poulos, and Darra Keeton have retired, it seems they have found excellent replacements in Chris Sperandio and Natasha Bowdoin, and I’m sure they will find someone great to fill the sculpture faculty position. Rice’s decision to team up with the MFAH and have a constant influx of Core Fellows as adjuncts was stellar, and I can say first hand how formative that was for my undergraduate experience. But there have also been missteps within the department, like alienating probably the best lecturer I’ve ever had—David Brauer—because students complained that he graded too harshly. What the hell? Has anyone heard of Rice students filing a petition against their chemistry professor because, gee, he’s just too tough?

And this brings me to the student culture. Rice’s student body consists of the most creative, innovative, quirky, nerdy, funny, open-minded people I have ever met. This is why I found their indignant attitude towards the arts as a discipline, towards its power as an instigator of critical thought so confounding. I remember the sideways glances, the thinly veiled looks of contempt upon telling anyone at school I was an art major. I mean, how impractical is that? What kind of job would I get? And I think a lot of that doubt and even shame pervaded students within the department. It is common for students at Rice to double, even triple major, but it says something when every student in the department is a double major. In fact, I distinctly remember being the only student in my class who only majored in art. Why is that? There’s no way to be totally sure, but it certainly speaks for a lack of confidence in art’s purpose as a discipline and rigor within the department.

To be completely fair, I’m pretty old; I graduated nearly a decade ago (Martel ’05). It’s quite possible many things have changed since my time there. I hope they have, and there are obvious indicators to suggest times are indeed changing within the department. The development of grass-roots student run and alternative spaces like Matchbox and the Emergency Room have become exciting mainstays not only for the campus but for the Houston arts community in general. The Cargo Space is an innovative mobile residency, one of the very few mobile artist residencies in the country, at least that I’m aware of. Unfortunately, these endeavors were done in spite of Rice’s support, not because of it.

And that brings me back to the powers that be: what propels Rice’s blasé attitude towards the visual arts? Just ask Rice’s PR rep, B.J. Almond, and he’ll retort, citing the university’s public art program and its plans for the Moody Center of the Arts. The argument against plop art is too easy: as pretty as it is, it doesn’t tangibly affect the students and their education. The Moody Center of the Arts is a little more difficult; it’s harder to criticize an institution that doesn’t even exist yet. As exciting as it seems though, the evidence suggests that the Moody Center is more interested in garnering public attention and collecting donations than fostering an excellent visual arts program. The vice provost for interdisciplinary initiatives, Caroline Leveander, was quoted in Rice News as saying that “there’s a trend in elite higher education to build art centers on campus and raise awareness of the arts” and that “the new center should help recruit highly talented faculty and students in the visual and performing arts.” Call me crazy, but I think a good way to recruit exceptional talent would probably be to establish an MFA program for them to be able to attend. OR A BFA PROGRAM FOR THAT MATTER.

While the “Harvard of the South” continuously turns up its nose at its own artists, it is interesting to note that actual Ivy League schools like Columbia and Yale not only support their art students and faculty, they are among the best in the country. It seems that those universities are dedicated to the utmost excellence in all disciplines, not just the ones that the people running the show deem most important. So I think the real question isn’t why Rice doesn’t support the visual arts, but rather why isn’t Rice embarrassed that it doesn’t support the visual arts?

I hate to say it, but perhaps the demolishing of the Art Barn is a good thing. It seems to be shining a light on issues subsumed within yet simmering at Rice University for a very long time. Maybe this is what VADA needed: maybe this will somehow inhibit people from settling for the university’s PR placations and instead ask it to nurture its students and faculty that are trying so hard to make their program better.

Dallas on a Friday in March

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

There is something about Dallas that makes me want to make grand pronouncements about it, to sum it up in one pithy catch-phrase. Hence the vastthree-partpost I did in 2012, and a subsequent post that is sort of the antithesis to the first three posts' thesis. I wish I had a similar overarching thing to say about Dallas for this post. I'll outsource that to Paul Middendorf, who recently wrote an excellent two-partoverview of the Dallas scene for Glasstire recently. He looked at what was happening in many of the small experimental/grass roots art spaces and tried to draw conclusions from what he saw. I know many of us in Houston look enviously on this scene. Middendorf seems to think that the artists residency CentralTrak and its director, Heyd Fontenot, were really the underlying engine behind a lot of this activity. Without being able to trace CentralTrak's specific influences, this nonetheless rings true to me. So, Middendorf has Dallas pegged, right?

Not so fast. Also in Glasstire recently was a scathing article about the Dallas art scene, "Whites Only: Diversity and the Contemporary Art Dealers of Dallas" by Darryl Ratcliff. It uses data about galleries that are members of CADD, the Contemporary Art Dealers of Dallas, to show just how lily-white their exhibits are. Looking only at solo shows in 13 CADD galleries over the past 15 months, Ratliff determined that only 16 percent of them featured non-white artists, and only two percent of them were black. He also determined that only 38% of the shows were by women. (The total number of shows was 189.) The general gist here is, Dallas, what the fuck?! (This kind of analysis would be useful to run for Houston as well. My gut feeling is that we'd do better, but how much better?)

So two very diverging views of the Dallas art scene were fresh in my mind as I swept into town.

My first stop Friday was Ware: Wolf: Haus, an alternative space in the shadow of the big Santiago Calatrava bridge over the Trinity River. I guess it's things like Ware: Wolf: Haus that are supposed to help convince Dallasites that this isn't actually a bridge to nowhere. They had a show featuring Matt Koons, Allison Ginsberg and Randy Guthmiller up. But apparently no one from Ware: Wolf: Haus was around, and the other people in the building didn't want to let me go in. "Now is not a good time," I was told. I would subsequently learn that Friday is in general not a good day to try to check out alternative spaces in Dallas.


Apophenia Underground (Jeff Gibbons and Justin Ginsberg), Lock All the Doors, television, video

I crossed the Calatrava and headed into the Design District. At Red Arrow Contemporary, there was a show of work by Apophenia Underground, a collective consisting of Jeff Gibbons and Justin Ginsberg. I was told it would be better to see at night--one of the pieces was a projection onto semitransparent material covering the front windows. It would be visible from outside and inside. That sounded cool and I made a mental note to return later that evening (the galleries in the neighborhood were apparently open late that night). But Friday night, I decided to go see The Grand Budapest Hotel instead.

Apophenia Underground's work at Red Arrow wasn't brilliant. All conceptual work is dependent on the quality of the idea, and this seemed like the kind of conceptual work that Donald Barthelme complained about--too easy. But some of it was visually striking, which for me can turn a weak conceptual artwork into something exciting. There was something mysterious and cool about seeing the video in Lock All the Doors only as a blue shimmery reflection on the floor, for example.


Apophenia Underground (Jeff Gibbons and Justin Ginsberg), Post Cards and Leaf, mailed postcards, leaf, television

Post Cards and Leaf consisted of a sheaf of postcards (not pictured) and a big leaf on top of an old portable television.


Apophenia Underground (Jeff Gibbons and Justin Ginsberg), Post Cards and Leaf, mailed postcards, leaf, television

The TV glowing through the leaf is intriguing, and I liked how the TV image was obscured as it had been in Lock All the Doors. When you crouch down to read the type on the leaf, you will laugh. It's not exactly a work that can be collected (the leaf will curl up and disintegrate eventually, right?). That Red Arrow is showing work like this makes me ask, is Red Arrow in fact a commercial gallery? I think so, but this is unusually adventurous work for a commercial gallery. And that's exciting. I like seeing a gallery that isn't 100% about selling very expensive merchandise.


Geoff Hippenstiel, no title (Mount Saint Victoire), 2014, oil on canvas, 76 x 117 inches

Not that there is anything wrong with selling art. Especially art as pretty as the Geoff Hipenstiel paintings at Holly Johnson Gallery. This was the first of several gallery shows I saw in Dallas featuring the work of Houston artists. I think that it's great that the two cities should share its artists. What I wonder is that for artists selling their work through commercial galleries, does showing in Dallas help--does more work get sold? Does their base of collectors expand? The answer has to be yes, or else Houston artists wouldn't have shows up at Holly Johnson Gallery, Talley Dunn, and Barry Whistler.

But beyond those purely mercantile concerns (probably more interesting to me than to the readers of this blog), the Hippenstiel show is gorgeous. Up to now, I've been dealing with his work in terms of technique and formal matters, but what I realized when I saw this group of paintings was that Hippenstiel is devoted to making paintings that are beautiful, whatever other qualities they may contain. He has long painted images of rounded hills, but with no title (Mount Saint Victoire), he makes for the first time a reference to the greatest hill painter of all, Cezanne. Cezanne was another painter concerned with formal qualities of paint who nonetheless ravished the viewer with the beauty of his paintings. No title (Mount Saint Victoire) is an apt homage.


Geof, Hippenstiel, (left to right) no title (Kobe Zip), no title (Murder Ballad Zip), no title (Teal Zip), 2014, oil on canvas, 20 x 16 inches (each)

While most of the show is work that feels in line with work Hippenstiel has done before (hills, a large skull), these homages feel like he is staking a claim to the tradition of paintings that are so beautiful that they border on the sublime. Hence his tributes to Barnett Newman. But while Newman was deliberately going for the overwhelming experience of the sublime, Hippenstiel dials it down. His painterly versions of Newman's zips are a bit more polite and domesticated. They're pretty in a way that you would never say of Newman's paintings. That may have been Hippenstiel's intent.


Joshua Goode, Adolescent Unicorn T-Rex Skull with 'No Fear' Bedazzlement, 2013, plaster, steel, paint and beaded bracelet, 40 x 48 x 24 inches

At Ro2 Gallery downtown, there was an exhibit of fake fossils and artifacts putatively from an archeological dig in Europe, including the Adolescent Unicorn T-Rex Skull with 'No Fear' Bedazzlement. Ever since the Museum of Jurassic Technology, "fake natural history" has become its own genre of conceptual art. I can appreciate the elements of institutional critique that originally informed this genre, but this kind of work feels tired and old-hat now. This show, that posited a discovery by artist Joshua Goode of an ancient "Texas" culture in Europe was especially feeble. The show is one big joke which is not redeemed by being particularly funny.


Joseph Havel, installation view of Stacks at Talley Dunn Gallery

I traveled north to Talley Dunn Gallery to see the Joseph Havel show, Stacks. Some of the work on display I had seen at Hiram Butler Gallery back in 2012, but the main work, the sculptures of stacks of books, was new to me. Talley Dunn Gallery reminds me a lot of Hiram Butler Gallery; both feature very tasteful art, some of it blue chip, and both are geographically isolated--they aren't near any other galleries. Someone told me while I was up there that they found it hard to attend openings at Talley Dunn because of this.

I loved Havel's books. Made mostly of poured resin, they were really aimed at people like me--people drowning in books, always reading, never catching up. I had a nightmare last night that someone had stolen my books. But book culture is becoming extinct. I rarely encounter people for whom reading books is an important activity. Not anymore, at least. (Let me shout out to Kaboom Books here in Houston--I walk in that place and I can expect to spend the next thirty minutes discussing books with the owner, who has read everything.)


Joseph Havel, installation view of Stacks at Talley Dunn Gallery

To me, Havel is memorializing that culture here. Except for their vertiginous height, the piles of books he portrays could be taken from my bedroom. By casting them in translucent resin, he effectively turns them into ghosts--ghosts of a period when owlish intellectuals had their own vast personal libraries, hoarded higgledy piggledy in cramped apartments. A silly article in Vice recently brought the demise of this culture home with one line, "He owns more hoodies than books."


Joseph Havel, installation view of Stacks at Talley Dunn Gallery

They looked especially handsome in the cavernous gallery in the back of Talley Dunn. They would look less beautiful in my house. In fact, they'd probably have real books stacked on them. (If Houston readers want to see a Havel book stack in person, there is one in the fountain at CAMH.)


Vernon Fisher, Jocko at Dover

Talley Dunn had an odd selection of other work hung as well, including this great Vernon Fisher painting of World War II military movements in Belgium, but not excluding Nancy, Sluggo, a clown and pixelated battle scenes. I asked the gallery attendant about it, and she launched into an explanation and asked if I had ever read the comics strip Nancy. Boy had I! I used the opportunity to paraphrase Wally Wood--"Sure! After all, it takes more energy not to read Nancy than to read it!"

Next stop was the Meadows Museum at Southern Methodist University. The campus was beautiful, and the museum stately. The main show up was work by Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida, and it was nice enough. The beach scenes he painted were fun. But when you see an artist like Sorolla, you understand why Modernism so desperately needed to be invented when it was. I wasn't allowed to take photos of the Sorolla show, but if you click through above, you can see some examples of his art.


Antonio Saura, Portrait of Mari, 2958, oil on canvas

But there was Spanish art there that I really liked, like this energetic Antonio Saura.


Jaume Plensa, Sho, 2007, painted stainless steel

But then here's some Spanish art I hate. Jaume Plensa is one of those artists when you first see their work, you might think it looks pretty cool. But over time, the novelty has worn off and all that's left is its banality. That might be acceptable except for the fact that it has pretends to be intellectual and full of meaning. This transparent, empty head is ironically a good symbol for Plensa's work as a whole. Nobody home.


Santiago Calatrava, Wave, 2001

That the novelty of a piece of art might evolve into banality is a risk with Santiago Calatrava's fountain in front of the Meadows, but for now I like it. Much of Calatrava's work seems to be based on some complex application of physics to engineering (he certainly doesn't seem to very concerned with the human element of architecture), so this is an apt sculpture for him.


Santiago Calatrava, Wave, 2001

The metal parts move, creating a continually propagating wave-form. One reason I like this is that we had a desk-top version of this in my High School physics class back in the 70s. It's a work that fills me with nostalgia.

It was mid-afternoon by now, and I still wanted to see some more stuff. I left the Republican wealth of University Park and headed down to the still somewhat grungy (but gentrifying) neighborhood of Exposition Park, right next to the Texas State Fairgrounds.  My intent was to check out some of the tiny alternative spaces in the neighborhood. First I went to the Power Station (which actually isn't tiny at all).


The Power Station

This once was a facility for Dallas Power & Light, this beautiful building somehow managed to avoid being razed or turned into condos. The day I went, I went through the front door and found a darkened empty space. It was a little freaky. No one was present. The darkness was an intentional feature of the installation. One fluorescent light flickered on and off at regular intervals. Only after a while did I realize that there was some stuff on the floor.


Michael E. Smith, [foreground] Jawbreaker, basketball, bird parts, plastic, rubber, epoxy putty, [background] untitled, bucket hats, plastic, 2014

This was an exhibit by Michael E. Smith. Jawbreaker looked kind of cool. I thought about stealing it, since there was no one around. But fortunately I have some sense of morality left. The pile of hats near Jawbreaker, on the other hand, just made me shrug my shoulders. They wouldn't even be worth the effort of stealing.


Michael E. Smith, untitled, milk jug, parrot feathers, plastic, actuator magnet, 2014

This upside down milk jug was hanging above the side door. There was a little garden on the side of the building, as well as stairs leading up. I climbed them to a mezzanine level, where there was another similar milk jug hanging over the door. Inside were several more objects in the dark, including this disturbing piece.


Michael E. Smith, untitled, wood, child's pajamas, plates, 2014

Weirdly enough, I totally missed two pieces that afternoon. The reason was that even though it was pretty dark in the Power Station (the windows had all been blacked out), there was plenty of sunshine pouring in from the side doors. It was, in fact, a beautiful day in Dallas. It wasn't until I came back the following night that I saw two of the most visually striking pieces.


Michael E. Smith, untitled, altered video, 2014

This video was set in the ceiling two floors up. It's footage of a rescue at sea taken from a helicopter. So the camera is pointing down, and there is something kind of vertiginous about looking up at it. (The chains are leftover bits of hardware from when this was part of DL&P.)


Michael E. Smith, untitled, glass globe, light, plastic coral, 2014

And if you will recall, there were two lights flanking the entrance of the Power Plant. With the simple act of adding plastic coral inside them, Smith turned them into a totally creepy installation. These glowing fleshy protuberances, like perfectly spherical testicles or some alien life form, were the best part of the show.

But over all, the exhibit felt like a waste of that great space. There just wasn't enough there there. The plastic encrusted basket ball, the veiny lights--by themselves, these were intriguing objects. But all together, it didn't add up in any meaningful way. However, I was interested in and impressed by the amount of work Smith put into using the Power Plant itself as a key element of the exhibit--the blacked out windows (obviously a huge amount of work), the single blinking fluorescent tube. And strangely enough, even though I was there for a while, I never saw another living soul. That was perhaps the most memorable thing about the show.

Next I wanted to see 500X, the Reading Room and the Oliver Francis Gallery. 500X was closed and I couldn't find the Reading Room (my phone couldn't map the address, and when I tried to call them, no one answered). Not to worry--I saw both of the spaces Saturday. Francis Oliver Gallery was about a half mile away, and it was such a beautiful day that I decided to walk over.


seen on Main St.

It was worth the walk--this transitional neighborhood had a lot of interesting things to see. If the galleries were going to be closed, I would take in what visual stimulation I could find.


seen on Main St.


seen on East Side Ave.


seen on East Side Ave.


seen on East Side Ave.

I loved that there was a narrow pointed building on this skinny little block.


seen on Commerce St.



Oliver Francis Gallery

But alas, Oliver Francis Gallery was also closed. It would end up being the only alternative space that I wanted to see this weekend that I didn't. At this point, I was all arted out. The quest for art would continue Saturday.

Any big conclusions about Dallas? Not really, but I notice that almost none of the art I saw that Friday was by women. There was a nice piece by Robin O'Neill at Talley Dunn and a not-very-memorable show by Anna Bogatin at Holly Johnson. But that was it. So that kind of validated some of Darryl Ratcliff's findings.


CounterCurrent Coming Up

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

So this thing is happening next week:


CounterCurrent14 from Mitchell Center for the Arts on Vimeo.

And you can see their schedule and featured performers on their website. It's weird that there would be two large scale performances festivals in Houston in a given year, much less within a month and a half of one another. But the Houston International Performance Biennale wrapped up in February (and was so packed with performances that this blog is still processing it--you can read about some of the performances here, here, here and here, and there are more posts to come).

The difference seems that HIPB was much more of a grassroots thing. While it had performers from out of town, a lot of it was all about the local performance art community. Also, there wasn't much in the way of social practice-oriented pieces at the HIPB.

CounterCurrent, on the other hand, is being run by the Cynthia Woods Mitchell Center for the Arts at the University of Houston. It appears to be much more professional and seems at first glance to be split more-or-less evenly between out-of-town artists and local artists, with a strong emphasis on artists associated with UH.

Which festival is the better festival? I guess it doesn't matter--having two festivals like these just gives us all more choices. (That said, part of me wants to see a performance art cage match between them.)


Dallas on a Saturday in March (might be a little NSFW)

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

(Continued from Dallas on a Friday in March)



Where Friday had been sunny and beautiful, Saturday was rainy and cold. But that didn't keep the custom/classic car people from filling the lot of Four Corners Brewing. This was an unscheduled stop--I was driving east on Singleton and saw them. Pulled a u-turn and checked out some of the best art I saw all day.



Note the "swamp cooler" on the side of this car. A lot of the vehicles here had these primitive air-conditioners mounted on their passenger doors .



The cars seemed about equally split between muscle cars made into low-riders and classic 40s and 50s cars. I was especially pleased to see all the vintage pick-ups. And there were several young women present like the one at the top of the post dressed like 50s bad girls. I guess this is the custom car version of cosplay? If so, I approve.



I also liked how the car clubs had their own matching mechanics shirts. I think contemporary artists should consider forming into similar clubs (with similar matching shirts).



Some people wouldn't really call this art. Maybe a kind of craft. Let's face it--no custom car show is ever going to be listed in Glasstire's calendar section. But it is art. There is a great section in Seeing Is Forgetting the Name of the Thing One Sees (1982), the biography of Robert Irwin by Lawrence Weschler, that deals with this:
"Of course, what's going on is such situations is precisely an artistic activity. A lot of art critics, especially New York Artforum types, have a lot of trouble seeing the validity of such a contention. I once had a run-in with one of them about this--this was years later, in the middle of the Ferus period. [...] We got going and ended up arguing about folk art. He was one of those Marxist critics who like to think that they're real involved with the people, making grand gestures and so dorth, but they're hardly in the world at all.

"Anyway, he was talking about pot-making and weaving and everything, and my feeling was that this was all historical art but not folk art. As far as I'm concerned, a folk art is when you take a utilitarian object, something you use every day, and you give it overlays of your own personality, what it is you feel and so forth. And a folk art in the current period of time would more appropriately be in the area of something like a motorcycle. I mean a motorcycle can be a lot more than a machine that runs along; it can be a whole description of a personality and an aesthetic. 

"Anyway, so I looked in the paper and found this ad of a guy who was selling a hot rod and a motorcycle. And I took the critic out to this place. It was real fortunate because it was exactly what I wanted. We arrived at this place in the Valley, in the middle of nowhere, and  here's this kid: he's selling a hot rod and he's got another he's working on. He's selling a '32 coupe, and he's got a '29 roadster in the garage. The '32 he was getting rid of was an absolute cherry. But what was more interesting, and which I was able to show the critic, was that here was the '29, absolutely dismantled, I mean, completely apart, and the kid was making decisions about the frame, whether or not he was going to cad plate certain bolts or whether he was going to buff grind them, or whether he was just going to leave them raw as they were. He was insulating and soundproofing the doors, all kinds of things that no one would ever know or see unless they were truly a sophsticate in the area. But, I mean, real aesthetic decisions, truly aesthetic decisions. Here was a 15-year-old kid who couldn't know art from schmart, but you couldn't talk about a more aesthetic activity than what he was doing, how he was carefully weighing: what is the attitude of this whole thing? What exactly? How should it look? What was the relationship in terms of its machinery, its social bearing, everything? I mean, all these things were being weighed in terms of the aesthetics of how the thing should look. It was a perfect example.


"The critic simply denied it. Simply denied it: not important, unreal, untrue, doesn't happen, doesn't exist. See, he comes from the world of New York where the automobile... I mean, automobiles are 'What? Automobile? Nothing.' Right? I mean, no awareness, no sensitivity, no involvement. So he simply denied it: 'It doesn't exist.' Like that: 'Not an issue.' Which we argued  about a little on the way back over the Sepulveda pass. 
"I said, 'How can you deny it? You may not be interested, but how can you deny it? I mean, there it is, full-blown, right in front of you, and it's obviously a folk art!'
"Anyway, he, 'No, no.'
"So I finally just stopped the car and made him get out. I just flat left him there by the road, man, and just drove off. Said, 'See you later, Max.'"
Robert Irwin FTW!


500X

OK, now I was going to see some alternative art spaces, even if it killed me. I knew 500X was open because their sign had given Saturday hours. That was my first stop. The metal exterior made it look like a typical storefront gallery in terms of size, but it seems they have the whole building to use as they please. There were several galleries, some quite large. There were multiple shows happening all at once. For that reason, it reminded me a bit of Lawndale Art Center in Houston.


Elaine Pawlowicz, Pet Warranty, 2014, oil on canvas, 36 x 36 inches

The big show on the ground floor was a group pf paintings by Elaine Pawlowicz. She states her influences are outsider art, Chicago Imagists, surrealism and several others. I think those influences show in Pet Warranty with its weird forced perspective and colors.


Elaine Pawlowicz, Cactus Ball, 2014, oil on canvas,48 x 48 inches

Less so in Cactus Ball, which appears to be aiming more for prettiness. But the problem I have with both paintings is that Pawlowicz's painterly ambitions surpass her technical skills. Both of these paintings would have more oomph if they were convincing images, but her painting of three dimensional things in space is awkward. None of those parrots is quite right, and the figure standing behind them is especially awkward. The position of that hand and the way it's painted doesn't look like a real hand. Now we've come a long way from requiring verisimilitude from painters--that was rarely a concern of the Chicago Imagists, after all. But when Roger Brown needed to paint a hand, it looked pretty much like a hand. Indeed surrealism works best when its dreamlike images seem real.

Cactus Ball is a perfect example of this. Imagine a sphere of flowering cactus plants floating in front of you, about ten feet wide. If you saw such a thing, in a dream perhaps, you'd probably agree that it is a surreal image. But Pawlowicz doesn't paint a convincing sphere. The cacti on the edge of the sphere should be facing out and not toward the viewer. There should be a sense of the center projecting towards us and the edges receding. Cactus Ball just doesn't look like a ball.

The was some humor in some of her paintings of animals, and her intense coloring has appeal, but as a whole, these paintings didn't work for me.


Elizabeth Hurtado, Foci II, 2014, white recycled garment bags, arm knit,  five stitch rows

Upstairs was an installation by Elizabeth Hurtado called Portal that consisted of two large discs, one white and one dark brown. The one above is Foci II.


Elizabeth Hurtado, Foci I, 2014,  recycled garbage bags, arm knit,  five stitch rows


Elizabeth Hurtado, Portal, 2014

The two discs are rugs knitted from material associated with garbage. So I think we're meant to think about the material and the process. But for me, the two large discs, one black and one white, laid on the parallel wooden floorboards, has a mysterious presence. The elemental shapes, the opposing colors; it recalls Malevich and Richard Long. I liked being in the room with them, walking around them. I liked that they were vortices. The work has the appeal of some minimalist works in that the two discs are defined as art in part by their relationship to the architectural space where they are. And the material suggests post-minimalism. And finally, these plastic-bag knit rugs are similar to actual circular knit rugs--which remind me of the kind of home-made rugs my grandparents had, but which these days you are more likely to find on Etsy. It was their qualities as particular objects installed in a particular place that I found exciting.

Before I left, I asked the attendant if he knew wherethe Reading Room was. It was just around the corner. I don't know why my GPS couldn't find the address on Friday. Unfortunately, it was not open. Strike two.

There were several exhibits opening that night. The first was over at the McKinney Avenue Contemporary. The exhibit was Inversion of the Sacred by Masami Teraoka. This Japanese-American artist combines western and Japanese art in the pieces in this exhibit, which take the form of large altarpieces (similar to the Ghent Altarpiece by Jan and Hubert Van Eyck). But writing this does not prepare one in the least for the utter insanity of these pieces. Take a look.


Masami Teraoka, Eve and the Pope's Walking Stick from The Cloisters Last Supper series, 2009-2014, oil on panel with gold leaf frame, 120 x 120 x 3 inches

We see that Teraoka is not just creating a pastiche of the Renaissance altarpiece (down to the gold leaf) but also the erotic Japanese silkscreen print, or shunga. Above and beyond the collision of those two classic forms, he paints many of the women in the pieces as modern porn figures--by having them clothed in sexy lingerie or fetish wear, for example. It's a gloriously insane mash-up of disparate elements.


Masami Teraoka, Inversion of the Sacred from The Last Supper series, 2009-2014, oil on panel with gold leaf frame, 120 x 120 x 3 inches

The obvious point is to suggest that the church is hypocritical about sex. If Teraoka were a French surrealist in the 30s, I would say he was being deliberately blasphemous as a provocation. But I don't think that's exactly what is going on here. He states, "My Cloisters Last Supper – Triptych Series addresses Catholic clerical sex abuse. Underlying this theme, I see an authoritative institution trying to dictate individuals’ sexual relationships, gender and morality. To bring out such compelling cultural issues and put them on the Last Supper table may be an appropriate place to start a dialogue – to investigate the anatomy of these abuses." OK sure, but these paintings don't seem to me to be about anger or condemnation. They are too titillating for that, too erotic. I don't think the viewer is meant to be outraged; on the contrary, I think the viewer is meant to look at them with a big grin while exclaiming, "Outrageous!"


Masami Teraoka, Madonna and Geisha Pieta from The Cloisters Last Supper series, 2009-2014, oil on panel with gold leaf frame, 120 x 120 x 3 inches

That said, if the MAC invited Bishop Farrell of the Catholic Diocese of Dallas for a private viewing, or better yet, showed the work to William Donohue of the Catholic League, real outrage could be generated. But for me, a secular and somewhat jaded art viewer, the work seemed delightfully naughty, like The Virgin Spanking the Christ Child before Three Witnesses: Andre Breton, Paul Eluard, and the Painter by Max Ernst but combined with an eroticism that recalls de Sade. And this connection makes me want to label the work surrealism. It's hard to do surrealism in the 21st century without it seeming a bit trite. But Teraoka overwhelms us with the size of these pieces and the sheer quantity of perverse images. The work makes an impact. In that way, I'd relate it to the work of Paul McCarthy of Jake and Dinos Chapman. And that art is not for everyone, obviously. But there is a part of me that likes to be shocked--that likes to exclaim, "Outrageous!"


Terrell James, Reason, 2013, oil on canvas, 66 x 66 inches

Next I went to see another of the Houston artists showing in Dallas. Terrell James was having an opening at Barry Whistler Gallery. The show was full of brightly colored abstractions like Reason. I don't know where she started out as an artist; she is much younger than the generations that pioneered abstract expressionism and color field painting, which her work reminds me of, but she continues that tradition of abstraction. I see echoes of Helen Frankenthaler, Clyfford Still, Hans Hoffman and Dorothy Hood in her work, particularly in her use of broad flat areas of color, vigorously applied.


Terrell James, (left) Divided Sight 7, 2013, Chinese watercolor on paper, 30 x 22 inches and (right) Divided Sight 6, 2013, Chinese watercolor on paper, 30 x 22 inches

This flatness was especially emphasized with James' Chinese watercolor paintings. I asked James what "Chinese watercolor" was, and she told me that they were literally watercolor paints she bought in China. They have a gouache-like quality. What struck me about these paintings, which invariably would consist of areas of more-or-less flat color underneath a layer of thin black drawn lines, is how much they seemed like silkscreen prints. They had that bold, poster-like quality, and the intensity of the colors reinforced this.

If you like abstract painting like I do, this is a good show to see. The Houston artists I saw in Dallas--James, Joseph Havel and Geoff Hippenstiel--represented our fair city well.


Francis Giampietro, Before and After installation view, 2014

The next stop was Beefhaus, which is the exhibition space for the art collective Art Beef. (Why is it that two of the alternative art spaces in Dallas are called "haus"?) Beefhaus a small storefront that hasn't been seriously remodeled from whatever it was before (it even has a large, walk-in safe), and based on Francis Giampietro's show Before and After, artists can use the space as they will. That's a useful freedom to have. On their page, Art Beef has this statement:
ART BEEF is a collective of artists based in Dallas, Texas interested in challenging notions of authorship and market structure, while questioning the forms of programming most often associated with other artist-run spaces, galleries, organizations, and institutions. While individual artists ourselves, Art Beef is not intended to serve a platform for our own respective practices. This collaborative project is, therefore, a problematizing exploration of artists as curator without the constraints of either a commercial or not-for-profit art space, examining the status and function of art, particularly within the city of Dallas.
They get International Art English extra points for the use of the word "problematizing."  And kudos for combining a humorous name, Art Beef, with a humorless statement. Anyway, Giampietro's show was not humorless, but it was obscure.


Francis Giampietro, Before and After installation view, 2014

Like these three jars of liquid on this easel. What were they? I was a little worried that they may be filled with urine, but I went ahead and smelled them anyway. It was beer. (Whew!) And then there was the hole in the wall off to the left. People would peer into it but not cross the threshold for some reason. That little bit of floorboard along the bottom seemed to act as a kind of psychic barrier. They could see a shelf in the other room with a jar on it. The jar was filled with something dark.


Francis Giampietro, Before and After, 2014

If one went ahead and walked into the room (which I did, of course), this is what you saw. The label reads, "ONE WINTER'S BEARD."  It was funny to me that people were reluctant to step across that border, and even funnier was what actually was in the room.

But that didn't mask the basic opacity of the show. What were these stamped patterns on the wall? Why was there a stretched piece of pig-skin on the wall? What did the badly framed photos of Renaissance frescos signify?


Francis Giampietro, Before and After, 2014

I thought the pigskin might have something to do with football, which Giampietro had touched on in earlier work when he was a student in Houston. But he explained that the whole show was about Pope Francis and the man from whom the Pope chose his name, Saint Francis of Assissi. The green shapes on the wall are Pope Francis' crest. The reproductions of the fresco were from a cycle on the life of Francis, taken from Flickr images.

I have to admit I didn't find this explanation very illuminating, but more important, I would never have guessed it if Giampietro hadn't told me. I don't mind the exhibit being a headscratcher--it's an understatement to say that Giampietro's work rarely lends itself to easy interpretation. But I don't think it quite had the oomph of his earlier work. It felt coy and tentative in comparison.

Giampietro told me the Reading Room was having an opening that night, which explains why they had been closed earlier. Third time was a charm--I finally got to see it.


The Reading Room

This is what the Reading Room looks like from the outside. You can see that it is quite small. Inside, they were displaying a work by Nicolas G. Miller. I can't find much about Miller online, but he seems to be an artist from Marfa, where he has had several shows. This show was pretty spare (but given the tiny space it was in, not excessively so). It consisted of a sculpture (which was actually a big white subwoofer playing sounds), an LP record, and a print.


Nicolas G. Miller, Common Sense, 2014, Audio Engine S8 powered subwoofer, plinth, cables, aromatic cedar, low frequency effects tracks from Spielberg filsm, 60 exhibition copies of the Common sense vinyl record

The room was crowded with talking people which made the sounds from the subwoofer inaudible. Occasionally there was a low rumble, but I think that was thunder coming from outside. Let's face it--opening night is never a good night to experience sound art.


Nicolas G. Miller, Five Rows of Four/Ferns, 2014, screen print, 22 x 30 inches

The record itself was a 33 rpm record in a limited edition of 190. You could buy a copy for a mere $20, which I did. So now I have a copy of barely audible lo-frequency sound effects from Steven Spielberg movies. It's an object not really to be listened to (even though I did because I have that responsibility as a critic). It's more about the idea of what sounds are on the record than the actual sounds.

At this opening, I met up with Jim Nolan who had come to town to help hang Giampietro's show, and he invited me to join him a few Dallas-area artists (including Justin Ginsberg--half of Apophenia Underground, whose show I saw the day before--and Sally Glass, publisher of Semigloss magazine) at a nearby bar. They wanted to go check out a closing night party at Ware:Wolf:Haus, which appealed to me since that was another space I had tried but failed to visit on Friday.



We crossed the bridge over to the west and made our way to the gallery. The closing party was pretty much over, but they kept the doors open for us (we had called and said we were coming by). The show that was ending was Things and Place by Randy Guthmiller, Allison Ginsberg, Matt Koons and Alex Revier.


Randy Guthmiller, three shape pieces

Randy Guthmiller makes a zine called Shapes, which is pretty much just what it says--page after page of various shapes. He says he was influenced by that great shape-maker, Elsworth Kelly. He had a bunch of shape pieces up at Ware:Wolf:Haus. They seem to be shapes drawn on a computer and then printed large. Sometimes the colors are solid, but often they have some repeating texture.


Two pieces by Matthew Koons

Matthew Koons is also intrigued by shapes and also (apparently) uses computer software to create his work, but his images are more complex that Guthmiller's. They often employ photographic source material and are designed to have a quasi-three-dimensional look of pyramids, diamonds and cubes. There is kind of a 60s science fiction/psychedelia feel to them--they could be cover images for a Michael Moorcock-era issue of New Worlds or an early J.G. Ballard novel. Guthmiller chose the artists for the show, and one can see why he relates to Koons' work.

I only got to see it briefly, but Things and Place was quite nice. And this flexible art space, Ware:Wolf:Haus, was full of possibility.  Jim Nolan had been particularly impressed with the grassroots art spaces in Dallas when he had been a resident at CentralTrak. He asked me why Houston didn't have more artist-initiated spaces like this. Part of the answer is that Houston does have such spaces: Scott Charmin Gallery, El Rincon Social, Alabama Song and Skydive (which admittedly has been somewhat dormant lately). But the Dallas scene seems in some ways more simultaneously more sophisticated and more energetic. But maybe that impression is a product of me sweeping in over a weekend and seeing a whole bunch of stuff all at once. But it nonetheless suggests that Dallas is doing important things. Houston has long assumed a sense of artistic superiority in Texas that at this point can't be justified. What Dallas has going on is different from Houston, but in no way inferior.

That was the end of my Dallas art tour, but I was to make one more eventful art stop on Sunday in Waxahachie.


The Pan Review of Books: Painting the Town Orange by Pete Gershon

$
0
0
Robert Boyd



In the 1970s, mailman Jeff McKissack took a modest property in Southeast Houston and transformed it into a monument to the orange. He finished it in 1979. I recall as an undergraduate at Rice University during the 80s going over there to see rock shows--McKissack had build a small stage and bleachers. The seats were old tractor seats.


Jeff McKissack and the Orange Show (photo by Geoff Winningham)

His working class neighborhood had no deed restrictions and Houston famously has no zoning, so there was nothing to stop McKissack from building his dream. While the Orange Show is the best-known example of "visionary architecture" in town, Houston, it turns out, is full of this kind of build environment, this sort of outsider architecture. (I realize that "outsider" is a problematic term, but I can't think of a better way to describe people like McKissack.) It's high time someone wrote a book about them, which is what Pete Gershon has done with Painting the Town Orange: The Stories behind Houston's Visionary Art Environments. The Orange Show, the Beer Can House, the Flower Man's House and even Notsuoh are described, as well as many that weren't saved and exist only in photographs and memories.

But if Painting the Town Orange were merely a guide book, it would be of only modest interest. (Likewise, if it were a book of criticism about these places, I'd be intrigued but I'd still likely find it less useful than Gershon's book.) What Gershon has done is thoroughly researched each artist's life, particularly McKissack, John Milcovisch, the creator of the Beer Can House, and Cleveland Turner, who was the Flower Man. Now why people create structures like this is to some extent unknowable, but Gershon shows how their biographies at least lead them to a certain point where doing something like this--something both very public and highly eccentric--seems like an option.

And beyond that, Gershon thoroughly reports how the structures were saved--how each one was discovered by people who considered it worth the considerable effort required to acquire the works (usually after the death of the artist), restore them if necessary, and preserve them. These stories end up being more complicated than one would expect. For the people who did this, there was no particular roadmap, no handbook on how to save outsider architecture. Personalities like sporting goods heiress Marilyn Oshman, who was instrumental in saving the Orange Show and artist/activist Rick Lowe, who did the same for Cleveland Turner's house, are a big part of the story that Gershon tells.


Cleveland Turner and his house, circa 1990 (photo by Larry Harris)

(This kind of story--about how the work of outsider artists is recognized and, if necessary, preserved-is always fascinating to me. Henry Darger's work was saved because his landlord, Nathan Lerner, happened to be a photographer with a very open mind and an artist's eye. Vivian Maier's photos were purchased by John Maloof in a storage locker sale, and it was just luck that he was the kind of person who realized the gold he unearthed. Charles Dellschau's art was abandoned as trash, ended up in a second hand store, and purchased by the right people.)

As if to emphasize the sometimes miraculous circumstances that lead to a place like the Orange Show being preserved, Gerson includes a chapter entitled "The Lost Environments." He writes about Pigdom, the "shrine to swine", and Bob Harper's Third World. What often happens with this kind of place is when the artist dies, the heirs don't have the resources to preserve the structures and aren't connected to a local art community that could help. The places become dilapidated and dangerous, and often the city red tags them. The bare minimum of what a visionary environment requires to survive is to be widely recognized within the local art community as art. And even that may not be enough.

Gershon moves away from "outsider" environments to discuss Notsuoh,  which is a functioning bar/performance space run by Jim Pirtle, and Zocalo/TemplO, an environment that was built by Nestor Topchy. Dan Phillips and the Phoenix Commotion, a company that builds highly eccentric art houses out of materials headed for landfills, are also discussed. Pirtle and Topchy both come out of the Houston art world and Phillips was a dance instructor at Sam Houston State University--none of them are really "outsiders"--but Gershon identifies the impulse to build an expressive environment as a common feature between them and McKissack and Turner.

There are environments such as this all over the world. Houston's are neither the biggest nor, in my opinion, the most beautiful. (I'd probably vote for the Watts Towers.) But they are tightly woven into the fabric of Houston, and the stories of how they came to be made and how they ended up saved are fascinating.

Waxahachie Postscript

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

After Friday and Saturday in Dallas looking at art, you would think I'd be satiated. Wrong. I found out that a gallery I had heard good things about was open on Sunday. This was the Webb Gallery in Waxahachie, which is between DFW and Houston. So I programmed my car's navigation and headed there.


Ellis County courthouse

Waxahachie is the country seat of Ellis County and has a beautiful courthouse. (I kind of goosed up the "haunted house" look by adding an Instagram filter.) The town is pretty rural and has a population of a little over 21,000. The downtown is quite beautiful, but unfortunately it seems like most of the commerce takes place on highways in big box stores. Still, there were plenty of small businesses downtown. I ate at a nice Mexican family restaurant there. And then there's the Webb Gallery.


The Webb Gallery

Many small towns have antique stores and junk shops, and from the outside that's what Webb Gallery looks like. But it is something altogether different on the inside. The objects they have inside include outsider art, folk art, super-weird items picked up in flea markets, unclassifiable art by contemporary artists, lowbrow art, carnival art, etc. It is similar in some ways to Yard Dog in Austin, but much bigger (real estate in Waxahachie must be cheaper than on S. Congress Street). And the size of the gallery permits it to show some amazing large pieces.


The Webb Gallery interior

As befitting its merchandise, the Webb Gallery eschews the standard "white cube" model. It goes for clutter, and clutter encourages browsing and discovery. The gallery is owned by Bruce and Julie Webb, but unfortunately they were in Fort Worth for the day. Manning the store was Brian K. Scott, and artist from Dallas who worked part time here. He showed me some linoleum blocks (for printing) he had done that look incredible! I can't wait to see them printed.


Brian K. Scott and his linoleum blocks

Obviously Webb Gallery doesn't depend solely on the good people of Waxahachie for income. It needs collectors from Dallas and Fort Worth (and the occasional Houstonian like me) to make the trip. I assume that's why they are open on Sunday so they can catch these weekend day-trippers.


Webb Gallery interior

The current exhibit is called Big Hair and Sparkly Pants, a Texas-oriented group show. The contents ranged from Stanley Mouse rock posters for the 13th Floor Elevators to somewhat conceptual sculptures by great Texas songwriter/musician Joe Ely.


Joe Ely, The Songwriter

I also liked Ike E. Morgan's paintings of Sam Houston, which were displayed underneath his huge portraits of George Washington.


Ike E. Morgan, Sam Houston and George Washington

What made them work was not just the crude, Dubuffet-like paint handling (which is what caught my eye first) but the repetition. Morgan seems to fit the classical definition of "outsider" artist--self-taught and socially isolated (because of his mental illness). In this way, he resembles Adolf Wölfli or Martin Ramirez. I think there are a lot of problems with this definition of "outsider," and it's hard not to feel a whiff of exploitation with such artists. On the other hand, these paintings are great and Morgan appears to love doing them. The repetition of images may suggest some kind of OCD, but to me they seem completely congruent with how we actually view presidents and leaders like Washington and Sam Houston. Their images, by being repeated, turn them from people into icons. Andy Warhol certainly recognized this fact--why shouldn't Ike Morgan? (Intuitive Eye has a really good account of how performance artist Jim Pirtle first encountered Morgan and his art while working at the Austin State Hospital.)

Another artist included in the exhibit was Campbell Bosworth. Webb Gallery had several pieces by the Marfa woodcarver. I had a small piece by Bosworth already--a stack of drug money carved in soft wood and painted. But I had just gotten a bonus from my company and saw a Bosworth sculpture that was making me thirsty:


Campbell Bosworth, Thunderbird, the American Classic, 2012, carved wood

So I bought it. But I wasn't through browsing--as I said above, the cluttered nature of the gallery encourages searching through its nooks and crannies. I had noticed the large Charlie Stagg sculpture (see below).


Charlie Stagg sculpture

The price tag was a little rich for my blood, alas. And even if I could afford it, where would I display it? It's significantly taller than my ceiling. But as I continued to nose around the shelves, I came across this piece:


Charlie Stagg, small blue sculpture

This tiny desk-top sculpture used Stagg's standard triangular helix construction and then added an extra twist in on itself. Stagg (1940-2012) unlike Morgan could not be considered an outsider artist. He had a MFA from an elite art school (the Tyler School of Art at Temple University), taught art, was represented by East Coast galleries, etc. But in 1981, he moved back to his hometown of Vidor, Texas and started producing works like these as well as building his visionary art environment on a large wooded property his family owned. I had seen some of Stagg's work at AMSET, but was astonished to find it for sale in Waxahachie. The price couldn't be beat, either. So I ended up buying it, too.

After I bought these two pieces, Brian Scott pulled out the celebratory beers and we spent an hour or so chatting about Charlie Stagg and the art scene in Dallas while playing with the gallery's two dogs, who craved attention.


One of the Webb Gallery's guard dogs

That, I have to say, was the perfect gallery experience. If you're driving to Dallas or Fort Worth, swing by the Webb Gallery on the way. It's well worth the small detour.


Artstroller

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

I was reading a review of the CORE Fellows show on Glasstire, and I was impressed by the reviewer's comment, "They offer no entry point: something beautiful or relatable or humorous to help us see the world as they do." I liked that because I often feel the same way. The reviewer was Casey Gregory.


photo from Artstroller feturing painitngs by Casey Gregory

Casey Gregory is also responsible for a Houston art blog, Artstroller. Partly responsible. Also contributing is eighteen-month-old daughter Clemintine. Hence the title of the blog. The subtitle states, " Clementine and Casey Gregory take on the Texas art scene, one stroller-outing at a time." Sometimes the posts are all photos, sometimes there is quite a bit of text. I liked her review of Sarah Sudhoff's performance at Nicole Longnecker Gallery because she could relate it to her own experience as a somewhat new mother. Her discussion of Anton Ginzburg's work up at the Blaffer was excellent as well.

And I love the title, Artstroller. It reminds me of Sig Byrd's classic column for the old Houston Press, "The Stroller." It suggests that these trips to the museums and galleries are not about blog posts but are instead about passing the time. And if a post happens to be the result, so be it. (I don't know if this is how Gregory views it--it may be that each outing is done with the intent of writing a blog post. )

The blog has been running since April of last year, but I only became aware of it relatively recently. Now that Gregory is writing more frequently for Glasstire, I worry she won't have time for her own blog. I hope not, though. I like these casual stroller outings a lot.

ReTemplO

$
0
0
Robert Boyd


The Crescent, seen from inside

In 2001, Nestor Topchy dismantled TemplO/Zocalo, his compound devoted to art and performance. Located on rented property in Rice Military, the land there had simply become too valuable for the rent that was being received.

The idea of a built locus for diverse art practices has never left Topchy's mind. In the past few years, he has been promoting a concept called HIVE, a huge art village made of surplus shipping containers. HIVE doesn't exist yet, but what does exist is Topchy's home just south of the North Loop. A long time work-in-progress that still looks like a construction site, Topchy has completed some buildings that amply demonstrate his ability to build impressive structures. HIVE has a lot of challenges, not least acquiring 10 acres of land inside Houston--preferably along Buffalo Bayou east of downtown. But after seeing what Topchy has done with just a couple of helpers on his own large property, I have no doubts about his ability to build the HIVE once all the other considerable hurdles have been surmounted.


The Crescent

But what's important about these buildings is not that they are proof of Topchy's ability to get the job done, but that they are arresting art environments. They exist to display art and to create art, but are also works of art in and of themselves. They are beautiful structures not quite like anything I've ever seen anywhere else.


The Crescent

The Crescent is the biggest of them (although another is being built that may be larger). Built with a curved, glassed-in space and a tin roof with overhanging eaves, it looks like a combination of vernacular southern architecture and a Victorian English greenhouse. It is quite simply beautiful. A large pond curves around it and Topchy describes the light at certain times of the day as reflecting off the pond lighting up the interior of the Crescent. I suspect that it's quite beautiful.


The Crescent

Inside the Crescent, the curved glass wall is meant to mimic the field of vision of one's eye. Indeed, if you stand against the back wall and look out, you can't encompass the whole curve all at once. (The photo at the top of this post is actually 11 photos stitched together.)


The Crescent

Modern architects love huge panes of glass, often custom made. But with its grid and small panes, the Crescent recalls an earlier architecture. It made me think of the Crystal Palace, built in London in 1851. The decorative door wouldn't look out of place in a fancy greenhouse built 140 years ago.


Chapel Sculpturetecture

Adjacent to the Crescent is the Chapel Sculpturetecture. The exterior walls are tin (including some decorative stamped tin).


Chapel Sculpturetecture

This tiny chapel seems to be a place of meditation and private worship. Inside there is a wood stove and a sink, and lining the walls are dozens of small portraits, painted in the style of Russian Orthodox icons. The figures are surrounded in gold leaf,  the paint is egg temper, and they are sealed with linseed oil.




Chapel Sculpturetecture interior views

Of course, Russian icons had certain generic subject matters, almost always painted the same way. Topchy's thing is a little different--his icons depict real people, some living and some dead. About them all, Topchy writes, "The entire strand , because they are presented all together as a growing corpus, is like a social/cultural DNA, a portrait of community determined by transmission , i.e. I meet or am introduced to the sitters personally." Well, not all of them are folks Topchy has met. He even included an image of that old 20th century iconoclastic painter of icons, Kazimir Malevich.


Nestor Topchy, Bert Long

It was touching to see this image of Bert Long, so recently dead.


Nestor Topchy, Bas Poulos

And I liked seeing this one of emeritus Rice painting professor and my occasional breakfast compadre Bas Poulos. Recognizing faces was a big part of the fun of being in there.






But what I loved about Chapel Sculpturetecture was the peaceful setting for contemplation. It really is a holy place. In the cool quiet of the afternoon, communing with this shining silent community of saints, I could feel it--at least until my reverie was interrupted by other guests entering.


The Archetapas Shrine

The property is strewn with odd pieces of architectural sculpture, some of it mobile like the Archetapas Shrine (which looks like a piece of Jim Woodring architecture).


The Ohm Home

Or this little trailer/office called the OHM Home. It dates back from the TemplO days and was constructed out of packing crates. Topchy called it a gypsy wagon, which is apt, but I saw hints of Russian vernacular architecture in it, especially in the eaves.

Part of the reason we were there was to see a work in progress, the Multivarious Utilitarian Composition (MUC), and multi-container construction that will incorporate some of the principles of HIVE but on a much smaller scale.


plans for the Multivarious Utilitarian Composition

Right now it's just a couple of containers with a dogtrot, but they are functional. One even has plumbing and tenant. He plans to build a couple of MUCs on his property and rent them as studios to other artists (similar to Independence Art Studios up in Independence Heights).



In addition to the architecture, the property is decorated with art objects like this sphere painted International Klein Blue (the color created by French artist Yves Klein, an artist whose work greatly influenced Topchy). And after all this, it may surprise one to know that Topchy and his wife Mariana Lemesoff (owner of Avant Garden on Westheimer) live in an ordinary house on the property. Despite the multitude of structures there, it doesn't seem cramped--in fact, there seems like plenty of room to grow--more water features, more buildings, more art. (Topchy's property is more than an acre.)

 
Topchy holding forth

I have expressed skepticism about HIVE in the past. My concerns remain--there is something too inward-looking about the HIVE. Topchy spoke of how the basic plan of the HIVE was related to many human structures throughout history, and I instantly thought of the medieval walled town, whose walls were there to keep barbarians away. But here there is no barbarian horde at the gate--just fellow Houstonians. To me HIVE may serve to isolate artists from the ebb and flow of the city in which they live. It may end up more like a isolated (if not gated) suburban community, a Woodlands of art, rather than a vital artistic center.


 A rendering of HIVE

But  these objections have been purely academic up to now because I didn't expect HIVE to actually be built. Despite the significant obstacles that still remain, though, I now feel confident that it can be built. What Topchy has done with two assistants on his own property demonstrates to me that with he could, with sufficient help, build HIVE. And if HIVE is to be built, the issues I bring up are no longer theoretical. They are problems to be addressed. And this is the point when they become solvable.

There is a HIVE timeline, but what I'm looking for is a press release that states that the land for HIVE has been acquired.  That will be a key moment in its development from idea to reality.

Grace Bashara Greene

$
0
0
Pete Gershon

[When Pete Gershon wrote Painting the Town Orange: The Stories Behind Houston's Visionary Art Environments (which we reviewed last week), one chapter dealing with four Houston artists had to be excised for space reasons. Gershon has graciously given us permission to publish the chapter as four separate blog posts on The Great God Pan Is Dead. This is the first.]

Collections of things: not of baseball cards or coins or Faberge eggs, but of the cast-off, used-up detritus of society. It’s a recurring theme in the environments in this book, whether they be the architectural leftovers used to build the Orange Show, John Milkovisch’s beer cans, the junk given new life by Cleveland Turner and Bob Harper, or the ladies’ shoes that fill Notsuoh. The obsessive gathering and presentation of stuff can be a valid artistic statement in and of itself.

I’d spent a couple of hours with architect Cameron Armstrong discussing Houston’s site-specific works over burgers and beers. The morning after, he sent me an e-mail. “Since last night, the idea of discarded objects, ‘thrown-away’ but then recovered and repurposed as (part of) art work has kept coming to mind,” he wrote. “Until our conversation, I had not yet thought how thoroughly our attitude towards culturally obsolescent objects reflects disdain and even revulsion at the past, the out-of-date, the non-presentday. As a form of pollution perhaps, or beyond that even a moral defilement of the present moment (merely by their persistence). It's as if Houston's forward-lookingness experiences the past (especially its objects) as an ideological kind of dirt and an existential threat.”

“In that light,” he continues, “selectively collecting castoffs as material of/for art -- which is what all of the artists in question have been doing -- would seem quite literally a recuperation of (potentially deep) meaning. Here's a thought: working as a junk artist in Minneapolis perhaps means only just using junk; in Houston it might instead have monumental implications.”


Grace Bashara Greene's house

Perhaps nobody accumulated more objects than Grace Bashara Greene. For more than forty years she lived in a handsome, historic brick home in Houston’s Montrose neighborhood. On the outside, it looked like any other of the well-tended, early-century houses constructed up and down Avondale Street when oil money began to flow into the city. Behind the drawn drapes, however, it was another matter entirely. Clogging the dark, smoky interior was a dizzying conglomeration of stuff: narrow paths led through mountains of handkerchiefs, model cars, hats, feathers, Buddhist figurines, vintage advertising signs, books, records, toys, bits of barbed wire and stained glass and broken mirrors gathered in boxes, a subway clock, the horn from a Victrola, a barber’s pole, and the piece de resistance: The Button Lady, a dressmaker’s mannequin Grace covered with thousands of spools, brooches, sparkling appliqués, and buttons of every shape, color and size. Where the head would be was a blinking light bulb.

When the Orange Show’s Eye Opener Tour came to call in the mid-‘90s, Grace’s home was described in the brochure as “a memory box, filled to the brink with her creations. Carefully cut and pasted fabrics, trays and spiraling shelves -- this is the fabric of her life. Grace's work is a tribute to the enduring memories and experiences of her life as a woman who is both a mother and an artist."

“Honey, I had a fifteen room house filled with antiques,” she told writer Randall Patterson, who interviewed her for the Houston Press in 1997. “It’s not a matter of clinging to the past, it’s a matter of not throwing anything away.” Indeed, she seemed to be congenitally unable to let go: not of the objects that came into her life, and most of all, not of anything that reminded her of her only daughter, Elizabeth. She kept not only Lizzy’s baby shoes and the invitation and bouquet from her wedding, but also all of her baby clothes, her schoolwork, pins and certificates from the clubs she joined as a girl, the pompons from her cheerleading days and her corsages from dances otherwise long forgotten.

At the time that Patterson took up Grace’s story, Lizzy was living in the posh River Oaks subdivision with her husband, an investment banker named Tom Hargrove. They had just liquidated her mother’s vast and cluttered estate and moved her into their sunny backyard guesthouse, where she whiled away her days smoking cigarettes in an antique bed with her decrepit poodle beside her. “Kind of reminds me of me,” she told Patterson as she gazed at her dog, “old and broken down.” Soon after, Grace was keeping the poodle alive on a respirator. Grace died in August 2004, and now, in 2012, Lizzy lives just around the corner from my house, in a converted corner grocery store decorated with Tibetan prayer flags, wind chimes, deer antlers, garden statuary and a profusion of flowering plants. The sidewalk is strewn with birdseed; geese honk at passersby from inside the fence.


Grace Bashara Greene


Howard, Grace and Lizzy

Grace was born on January 28, 1928 to Sam and Rose Bashara, Lebanese immigrants who never learned to speak English. Sam was a successful, self-made oilman and Grace had everything she needed but the approval of her parents, who favored her sister. Throughout her childhood, she was teased for her darker complexion by her schoolmates, but did well as she went on to Lamar High School and the University of Houston. She married Howard Greene, the son of poor Arkansas farmers, and Lizzy arrived soon after in 1945. Grace’s parents thought she chose poorly, and the hard-drinking Howard proved them right when he walked out on his wife and daughter. When Lizzy was three, she relates obliquely in an e-mail, “my mother had a nervous breakdown. They gave her the truth serum. That was the going drug then. She faced and admitted her fears … I came in the room and didn’t know her.” For several years, Grace and Lizzy lived with Grace’s parents in a bigger house her father had built in River Oaks at the corner of Inwood and Kirby. But when Grace’s mother threw away her prized Mickey Mouse watch, she snapped, and moved with Lizzy to her childhood home at 414 Avondale, which her father still owned. “It was like Mrs. Greene had been sprung from prison,” says Molly Oldfield, Lizzy’s best friend growing up (and the surrogate Lizzy designated when I first approached her for an interview). “It was also the time when she became financially on her own. I don’t know how she made it.”

Grace worked for herself, setting up a business selling insurance to truckers during school hours, and establishing her role as an outsized presence in her daughter’s life. She was the den mother for Lizzy’s Brownie troop and the room mother for her class from kindergarten through twelfth grade. She signed Lizzie up for swimming lessons, dance lessons, piano lessons, modeling lessons, did her homework and her art projects for her, and opened their home to Lizzy’s friends. “Mrs. Greene gave us the opportunity to express our creative badness because she was the same way,” remembers Oldfield. “We weren't really bad, just ‘bad,’ and it's a wonder we didn't get arrested for our pranks. All we knew was that none of us had mothers like Mrs. Greene and we couldn't get out of our houses fast enough to be set free.”

Grace might wake up Lizzy and her friends during a slumber party to take them out to see some go-go dancers, or smuggle them into a drive-in movie in the trunk of her car. “Mrs. Greene got a new car every year because within 12 months her car would be beat up, dented and tired,” says Oldfield. “One time we were in the parking lot of the old River Oaks drug store across from Lamar High School. She had a light blue Oldsmobile convertible, brand new, top of the line. She backed into a big steel post, hard, and it was just an ‘oh, well.’ She never gave it another thought!”

At the same time, Grace started experimenting with her own creative tendencies, using a card table in her bedroom as a workspace. “She made montages of people and things she cut out of magazines and glued on top of each other with paper doilies, glitter and other stuff,” says Oldfield. “At the time, I couldn't see the art of it. I'd never seen anything like it. She didn't get it from her family. She didn't get it from our parents who loaned us to her. She didn't get it from us. She didn't get it from anyone or see it anywhere. I don't know where it came from. She was extraordinary.”

Having invested everything she had in her daughter, Grace fell into depression after Lizzy left home in 1967 to attend college at North Texas State University in Denton. Lizzy married, graduated, and continued to model, but having tasted freedom, she kept a distance from her mother even after she returned to Houston. Alone in the house on Avondale, Grace filled the gap carting trinkets home from antique stores and yard sales until they reached the ceiling, and she busied herself making elaborate collages out of the items her daughter had left behind. She showered her daughter with gifts that carried both emotional and physical weight. She crafted a shawl for Lizzie that an art critic would later describe as “pristine and ethereal in its delicacy, belying the weight of hundreds of pieces of antique lace and tiny trinkets hand-sewn together.” It was so heavy Lizzy couldn’t wear it. She made a scrapbook that chronicled her daughter’s modeling career in minute detail, but it was so thick Lizzy couldn’t lift it.


the shawl by Grace Bashara Greene

In turn, Lizzy gave her mother a parakeet in an attempt to bring some life to her dark, congested space. Grace stuffed the bird’s cage with toys and food until there was no room for it to fly. It thrashed around in a panic and died; she cremated the remains in the yard and kept the ashes by her bed in a metal tin. Lizzy routinely had meals delivered to her mother’s house. Grace stockpiled them in the freezer.


detail of the shawl

But what Lizzy found suffocating, others found fascinating. In 1993, Houston’s Art League presented the cumbersome shawl and the button-encrusted dress form alongside sculptures local artist Carter Ernst wrought from old tires. When Ernst’s friend Susanne Theis arrived at the opening, she was surprised to find Lizzy there. They’d known each other for years, yet Lizzy had never mentioned her mother’s work to Susanne. For the next few years, Grace’s house would be a regular stop on the Orange Show’s Eyeopener tours.


inside Grace Bashara Greene's house

Filmmaker Laurie MacDonald visited in 1996 while compiling her documentary film about key Eyeopener tour participants. Amidst the chaotic home décor, Grace futzed with handfuls of largely indistinguishable bric-a-brac in shadow boxes and showed off the Button Lady. “I think all my pieces are masterpieces,” she remarked with a twinkle in her eye, laboring to breathe as she inspected the mannequin, a cigarette dangling from her lips. “When you’re good, you’re good, kiddo.”

When Grace fell and broke her hip later that year, she spent time in the hospital, where doctors felt they detected the early signs of Alzheimer’s. By then her family money and savings had long since run out; she was living on social security checks and food stamps. Realizing her mother would no longer be able to care for herself, Lizzy reluctantly moved her into her backyard apartment. She made it clear to Grace that an invitation was required to enter the main house, and despite his dutiful efforts to support and care for his difficult mother-in-law, Lizzy’s husband Tom bore the brunt of the tension between the two women. “Oh, you son of a bitch,” she snarled when he reduced her poodle’s food supply to two cans a day from twelve, as the Press reporter Randall Patterson looked on in discomfort. Grace brought a few things with her to River Oaks, but Tom and Lizzy had the rest of the contents of 414 Avondale sold off (the auctioneer resorted to a shovel to make his way though it all in what was surely the largest estate sale ever held in the Montrose neighborhood). The house itself was sold, too. It’s still there, subdivided now as a rental property, the Bashara name still set into the sidewalk in blue and white tile.

“I know my work’s good,” Grace said, staring down the lens of Laurie McDonald’s camera with a smirk, as if to challenge all skeptics in perpetuity. “I’m not apologizing if that sounds conceited. If no one wants to recognize me, that’s fine, I don’t care.”


Grace Bashara Greene, The Button Lady and interior views of her house

That recognition finally came, however. In 2002, Lizzy’s unwieldy shawl and even the Button Lady found their way to the American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore, where they are now displayed alongside the work of outsider artists Ted and Zona Gordon and Judith Ann Scott in an exhibit entitled “OCD: Obsessive-Compulsive Delight.” Introductory wall text by the museum’s director, Rebecca Hoffberger reads: “In its more benign manifestations, OCD can serve as a key ingredient in the process of generating prolific, intensely focused, and often meticulously detailed creative production of all sort. Hyper-conscious teachers, researchers, theorists, chefs, medical staff, writers, performers, sports stars, and visionary artists frequently display elements of OCD behavior that actually aid in bringing about extraordinary, beneficial results and performances.”

It’s a salient point. “I want my surgeon to be washing his hands, checking the chart all the time,” Hoffberger tells me. “You know the ballplayers who have to scratch their balls, rub their nose every time they step up to the plate? It’s those rituals that we more often forgive in sports figures, but there’s ritualized behavior to some degree in most of us, whether it’s a certain pair of shoes, or a certain perfume. Most people who aren’t visionary artists have a bit of that.” Grace traveled to Baltimore with Lizzy and Tom for the pieces’ installation. “I was glad she was able to be celebrated,” Lizzy told me when we eventually spoke, fondly recalling the scramble of photographers and even makeup artists from the Body Shop. “I was just glad her work would be protected. If a pin dropped, they all ran to pick it up. Surreal, really. Only a museum can protect the fragility of broken-hearted art.”

“There’s a term, horror vacui,” says Hoffberger. “The fear of the void. I think that applies here.” She cites the famous hoarders Homer and Langley Collyer—who stuffed their New York City apartment with 14 pianos, the chassis of an old Model T, and even human organs pickled in jars—as examples of such obsession taken to the unhealthiest extreme, but then points to the Australian Bowerbird, whose colorfully decorated mating dens, she says, “would make Andy Goldsworthy jealous. That kind of behavior, to be surrounded by things, and all the better if it’s one’s own creation, there’s something in that. I think Grace was not just compulsive in her collecting. She had a very rich visual vocabulary of beauty. She was very driven to express herself, and how lucky we are for that.”

Lizzy brought breakfast out to the guesthouse one morning in August of 2004. “I laid the breakfast tray down and knew she was dead,” she writes in a late-night e-mail. She called the Bradshaw Carter funeral home, which arrived with chocolates and expensive candles. “In two days they created an art slide show with photographs, champagne and a piano player. They dressed her in geisha silks for the wake; I rubbed oil on her hands and feet. Tommy was horrified, but it felt right, like the pieces of your life you try and assemble. I never realized until now all she sacrificed for me, a horror, really. She was tough. She was who she was. I miss her daily.”

David David Smalley's Miniature Museum

$
0
0
Pete Gershon

[When Pete Gershon wrote Painting the Town Orange: The Stories Behind Houston's Visionary Art Environments (which we reviewed last week), one chapter dealing with four Houston artists had to be excised for space reasons. Gershon has graciously given us permission to publish the chapter as four separate blog posts on The Great God Pan Is Dead. This is the second post. You can read the first post here.]

Dateline Houston, January 1941. Cornelius Pickett, former executive vice president of the Lumberman’s Association of Texas is inaugurated as mayor. The 36th Infantry Division of the Texas Army National Guard is activated and leaves Houston to train in Fort Benning, GA for battle overseas. And in the attic of his Craftsman bungalow in the charming Hyde Park area west of downtown, a man named David David Smalley opens what he calls his “Miniature Museum” to entertain the neighborhood kids.


David David Smalley's bungalow with the Miniature Museum in the attic

Smalley worked as a mapmaker for the Southern Pacific Railroad, married and raised two children, and taught Sunday school. In his free time, he collected things. Little things, mostly. Really, he collected just about anything you could name. In his miniature museum, which filled every inch of his dusty attic space, the visitor stepped into a wonderland of doodads, thingamajigs and whatchamacallits, more than 1500 in all. There were mastodon teeth, World War I bullets, jars filled with the monogrammed stubs of Smalley’s map-drafting pencils, and souvenir pennies from the 1934 World’s Fair in Chicago. There was a cucumber seed found on the Capitol grounds, an early X-ray tube, a Mexican chocolate mixer, and an old corset stay (“probably traveled many a mile,” read its display card; each object was assiduously labeled with one). The museum didn’t just contain the things he collected; it also displayed things he made. He carved delicate flower designs into Lucite blocks cut from the windshield of a World War II bomber, made model train engines from toilet paper tubes, and whittled dozens of model airplanes from balsa wood, which he painted army gray and hung from the ceiling. There was a train set, an eight-foot-tall telescope (its 12-inch glass lens ground by Smalley’s own hand), and a metal robot that would wink, wiggle its ears, and dance to the delight of Smalley’s pint-sized patrons. He built that, too.


Lucite blocks cut from a WWII bomber's windshield

The guest book bears the signatures of the 690 visitors who stopped by in between the museum’s opening on January 1st, 1941 and Smalley’s death on October 31st, 1963, right around the time that Jeff McKissack was toiling away on his plant nursery, that Cleveland Turner was hopping off the bus on his way to California, that John Milkovisch was beginning to stash bundles of flattened beer cans in his attic. That averages out to about 35 visitors a year. But drawing a crowd was never the point, nor was making money. As the sign at the front door read, “Please bear in mind this is a private museum and we cannot expect too much from the exhibits.” Still, it’s tough to imagine that those 690 guests didn’t get much more than they bargained for.


"We cannot expect too much of the exhibits"

David David Smalley was born in Indiana in 1889, named after his grandfather and uncle, both Davids. His grandson Frank Davis suspected he was drawn to Texas by his sense of adventure. D.D. married the daughter of the sheriff of Hempstead, which until a decade prior to his arrival was still known as “Six-Shooter Junction.” They settled on Tulane Street in the Houston Heights in 1912, and Smalley found work in the classified department of the Chronicle. It might have been a good fit for the gentle, shy Smalley, but he’d soon find more exciting work when he was hired to survey the Texan frontier as a draftsman and mapmaker for the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1918.

“He liked this place because he could drive 30 minutes outside of Houston and find a damn dinosaur,” Davis told the Houston Press’s John Nova Lomax in 2002. “Free! He went through piles and piles of gravel there on the river bottom and found it.” He also found arrowheads (one of which was still embedded in a human kneecap) and pulled Civil War cannonballs from the mud at the bottom of the Brazos River. Smalley never went to college. Davis told Lomax: “There wasn’t anything in college that was half as exciting as what he was doing in his everyday life.”

A contemporary newspaper account states that Smalley contracted influenza, which weakened his spinal column. Frank Davis contended that family lore had his grandfather falling off of a hayloft and onto a wagon wheel. Whatever the case, beginning in 1924, Smalley spent over a year in a body cast at the Southern Pacific Hospital on White Oak Bayou. He was free to use his hands and his limitless imagination, however, and whiled away the hours making beaded purses and model airplanes. One day, he asked a nurse to bring him a knife, some wood scraps, wire, glue, and a 16-ounce flask. From these materials, he constructed a tiny rural scene inside the bottle, with a farmer playing the banjo and his wife chopping wood on the front porch of a fully furnished farmhouse surrounded by barnyard animals. He entitled it “My Old Kentucky Home.” Smalley would go on to make more of these bottle scenes during his convalescence and the proceeds from their sale was enough to buy a radio transmitter for his ward with a set of earphones for every patient.

He became a lifelong ham radio aficionado. “Radio is a pair of legs for you,” he told an early newspaper reporter during his hospitalization. “You can get all over the country with it.” His daughter Laura got around with it, too, and courted her future husband, a Pennsylvanian, using the radio set he kept in his backyard workshop. He built his robot out there and figured how to run lethal amounts of electricity through his own body without harm. He rigged his shack with a foot-operated sound system that teased visitors with eerie creaks, groans, and thumps while Smalley maintained a poker face. He completed correspondence course after correspondence course, studying astronomy, geology, paleontology. He hosted a local radio show where he performed as a one-man-band and challenged his listeners to call in and stump him with a tune he couldn’t play. When he entered his first attempts at painting in a contest at Houston’s City Auditorium, his work took first, second, and third place. With a family to raise, a full time job, and Sunday school classes to teach, it’s hard to imagine how he had time for it all, but then again, as he once told his grandson Frank, “when you’re busy doing something, it makes its own time.” The local papers published articles about Smalley, proclaiming him the “King of Hobbies.”


Popular Mechanics in the Miniature Museum

When the Smalleys moved from the Heights to a bungalow at 1406 Welch Street around 1940, D.D.’s collection was relegated to the attic at his wife’s behest. He lovingly arranged his rocks, his bones, his pesos, his gas masks, his costumed flea, and his splinter from Old Ironsides on cramped shelves that lined every wall, and beneath the model train set in the center of the room he stashed his near-complete runs of such magazines as Popular Mechanics and Life, along with countless cigar boxes containing even more treasures (clock parts, spools, European postcards), as well as a quarter of a million postage stamps. He wasn’t interested in the rare or valuable ones. Instead, he enlisted the help of his grandchildren and their friends in steaming ordinary stamps from correspondence that arrived at the Southern Pacific office. They then sorted them by color and denomination, and with white silk thread Smalley tied them in neat bundles one hundred thick. Then he wrote “100” on the back of each packet with a sharp pencil.

Stricken with cancer, Smalley spent the end of his life amassing and repairing a collection of more than 900 clocks; he carefully set them so that each kept a slightly different time. Ostensibly he wanted to spare his family the deafening sound of 900 clocks chiming at once. The end result, however, was a conversation-stopping five-minute cacophony of overlapping chimes. In between there was a constant, anxious ticking.

Ten years after his death, Smalley’s family first contemplated selling the house. But what to do with the thousands of items still stashed in the attic? Rather than breaking down the display, Frank and his sister Vicki decided to open it back up to the public, at least for a little while. “I often run into people interested in all sorts of things who claim they were started out by my grandfather,” Davis told William Martin (yes, the same William Martin who interviewed Jeff McKissack), in an article about the museum’s re-opening published in Texas Monthly in 1974. “He used this place to get people interested in things. Very little of the stuff in here has any value by itself. It only has value as a collection, as the record of the life and mind of a very interesting man. To give the pieces to different members of the family, or to museums, or just to throw it away, would destroy that record. We hated to see that happen.”

To help with the project, Davis enlisted his friend Helen Winkler, an art historian and administrator who in the late ‘60s had studied under Dominique De Menil during her term as director of the art department at the University of St. Thomas. She’d soon move to New York City to help establish the Dia Art Foundation, a multi-disciplinary contemporary arts organization that commissioned massive site-specific environmental works by James Turrell, Michael Heizer, and Walter de Maria. But in 1972, she was simply looking for a set of speakers. Davis, a reformed hot-rodder and a folk musician who was also recording the psychedelic rock of the Red Krayola and the 13th Floor Elevators as an engineer at producer Walt Andrus’ studios, had them.

“The living room of his house, which was his grandfather’s house, was filled with eight by four foot Mylar speakers, just incredible sound,” says Winkler as we sit poring over photos and documentation about the Museum at a long table in her immaculate West End residence. It’s something of its own miniature museum, or perhaps a miniature gallery, with an eight-foot Dan Flavin fluorescent light sculpture in the foyer, a huge collection of art books, as well as panels of monochrome optical glass and a long row detailed kachina dolls made by her late husband, the artist Robert Fosdick. “Frank asked if I wanted to see his grandfather’s museum, and he took me upstairs. It was filled with so much stuff you couldn’t get around, but that was okay, because you could spend hours just sitting in one spot and looking. I was totally fascinated. It was the most magical place I’d ever been.”


Miniature Museum interior

Davis and Winkler struck a deal with the rest of the Smalley family. What if they installed a back entrance that led directly to the attic? That way, the family could rent out the property and the museum could remain undisturbed. “They said yes,” says Winkler, “so we took everything out of the museum, and we cleaned everything, painted the interior, and brought everything back in and installed it.” Winkler helped to raise about $800 to finance the endeavor, and she and Davis spent weeks dusting, repairing and arranging. The kitchen exhaust fan connected directly to the attic and it had blown in so much dust during the intervening years that in a maneuver that surely would have tickled Smalley, they decided to preserve some of it in a jar and add it to the display. From 1973 to 1978, the museum was open from noon to six on Saturdays and Sundays. Winkler and Davis were sometimes on hand as docents; Winkler would occasionally bring by a visiting artist like Flavin or DeMaria. Minimalist sculptor Sol LeWitt was so impressed he later mailed her a bird’s nest to be added to the collection. The museum drew more visitors in the first few months after its reopening than it had in Smalley’s lifetime, but when thieves broke in and absconded with some antique rifles, valuable metal ores and pieces of the model train set, the family shut its doors. “It wasn’t a museum after that,” Davis told Lomax. “It was a crime scene.”



Still, the particularly curious could arrange to view the museum by appointment until Davis and his sisters sold the house in 1994. Susanne Theis obtained an emergency grant from the Cultural Arts Council of Houston and Orange Show volunteers donated more than one hundred hours of labor cleaning, cataloguing and packing the collection in the attic’s stifling heat throughout the month of August. Davis was filmed giving a walk-through tour and photographer John Lee Simons documented every inch of shelf-space so the items’ arrangement could be properly reconstructed in the future. Theis declared it a “wunderkammer,” a German word meaning “wonder cabinet” that was often applied to the curio collections of royalty and aristocrats in the centuries before the rise of the modern museum. But wonder or not, for the next eight years, Smalley’s treasure trove sat dormant in a barn on Smalley’s granddaughter’s farm near San Marcos.

Karl Kilian had known Helen Winkler since their school days in the art history department at the University of St. Thomas. While she’d gone on to establish Dia, he’d opened the Brazos Bookstore in March 1974 to sell hand picked texts and to bring writers and readers together for book signings and lectures. In 1999, friends of the shop started a non-profit organization called Brazos Projects to host related events in an adjacent gallery space, including exhibitions of furniture made by sculptor Donald Judd and architect Frank Gehry, and a rare showing of painter Cy Twombly’s photographs of famous art pals like John Cage, Franz Kline and Robert Rauschenberg.

Most of these exhibits were mounted for just a month or two. But in 2002, Brazos Projects hosted a revival of Smalley’s museum that ran for a full nine months. Nobody could fully appreciate the magnitude of the collection unless they visited three or four times, Kilian reasoned. “I liked the totality of it,” he says. “The scale, the intent, the quality. I was just relentlessly charmed by the candor of it. Between Frank and Helen and the work that Smalley made, there’s no bullshit. There’s just you and the pieces, and they’re not trying to impress you or win you over or anything, they’re just there in their there-ness. It’s such a clean encounter.”

At Winkler’s urging, Rice University architecture professor Danny Samuels led a team of nine students who constructed a steel Unistrut frame replicating the proportions of the Welch street attic, from the spacing of the shelves to the pitch of the roof. From the frames’ arch dangled bare lightbulbs just like the ones that lit the original collection. Winkler and Davis were on hand every weekend to guide visitors through the display. In fact, a workshop was installed in the rear so that Frank would have a place to keep up with the constant maintenance that the fragile items required. Just as in Smalley’s lifetime, kids were encouraged to handle the materials, and with their help, Davis revived the practice of postage stamp-stacking, using the many boxes of unsorted stamps left behind from the museum’s earlier incarnations. When a child had bundled one hundred stamps. Frank would take a pencil stub from his grandfather’s jar and mark them accordingly.

“Kids just adored Frank,” says Kilian emphatically. “Every Sunday kids came. There were six-year-olds teaching their three-year-old brothers and sisters to count with the stamps. And everybody wanted Frank’s approval. ‘Can I help, Frank? Let me do it, Frank! Can I bring it to you, Frank?’ It was really incredible to see.”

And then, when the exhibit ended, the collection went back into its boxes. This time the repacking was more organized, and Smalley’s treasures now reside in a commercial storage space in downtown Houston rather than Vicki Fruit’s stuffy barn. “I think everyone would love it if it could be displayed permanently someplace,” says Helen Winkler. “The Orange Show always wanted it, but they didn’t have a space. And then the idea of maintaining it makes it a kind of elusive magic. I keep hoping that someone with an interest in folk art of a strength such as this would get it and want to put it back together.”

Flipping through a small album of snapshots, Winkler is clearly drawn back into the place’s magic. “This is the jar with his pencil stubs,” she says, “I think they all had his initials on them. These are the mastadon teeth; he had a whole mastadon. These are dinosaur turds. This is a skull, he had a lot of skulls.” What does it all say about D.D. Smalley? “Obsessive compulsive,” says Winkler without hesitation. “But with a good heart. Never could stay still. He probably would have been hospitalized today.”

Dolan Smith's Museum of the Weird

$
0
0
Pete Gershon

[When Pete Gershon wrote Painting the Town Orange: The Stories Behind Houston's Visionary Art Environments (which we reviewed last week), one chapter dealing with four Houston artists had to be excised for space reasons. Gershon has graciously given us permission to publish the chapter as four separate blog posts on The Great God Pan Is Dead. This is the third post. Please check out the first post about Grace Bashara Green and the second about David David Smalley]

Everything seems pretty normal at Dolan Smith’s house on lower Harvard Street. The cheerful home renovation contractor greets me at the door along with two happy dogs and his wife, Leslie, the creative director in the marketing department at the local university. Dolan is fifty years old but looks fifteen years younger; he seems like the kind of fellow you’d enjoy introducing to your parents.

Dolan and Leslie live in one of the historic, tastefully redone bungalows in the Heights that all the savvy young urban professionals are vying for these days, with hardwood floors, granite countertops and French doors. There are a few edgy works of art adorning the walls, but everything looks picture perfect and clean as a whistle. It’s not quite what I was expecting on my first visit to the man who for eight years turned his previous home into a shrine to the truly bizarre and named it the Museum of the Weird. He offers me a Coke, shows me their well-kept backyard and then invites me into the outbuilding that houses his studio. It’s also where he keeps what remains of the Museum.


Hernia, skull, chupacabra

On all sides of a steep, narrow staircase hang framed artworks, both Dolan’s own paintings and modified thrift store finds, as well as numerous wooden plaques bearing cryptic, handwritten messages, and several small shelves of creepy oddments: jars containing desiccated rats and a wooden skull carved by an inmate at Huntsville State Prison in the 1930s. “This is my hernia,” he tells me, handing me a small jar full of liquid and a shriveled knot of flesh. After a beat, he continues. “Actually, it’s really just a snail. But I had this strangulated hernia, and I wondered, how can I make an art piece about it?” He takes down a couple of other jars from the shelf. The lumpy growth inside one marked “dog cancer” is real, he insists. The shriveled carcass inside another labeled “baby chupacabra,” however, “is probably just a squirrel or something.”

Dolan's studio

At the top of the stairs is Dolan’s studio, bright and mostly empty save for a few large paintings and two chairs where we sit and look through Tupperware containers that hold the snapshots and scrapbooks that tell the tale of his erstwhile Museum. “I was a hoarder,” he explains with a hint of Texas twang in his voice, “and before I put the museum together it was just a big, disorganized pile of crap. I always told myself, ‘oh, you know, I need all this stuff in case I want to use it for my sculptures.’ I could rationalize it that way. Then later I realized, yeah, both my parents did this. It’s some kind of a hereditary thing. I have to work hard to keep things from taking over my space, and because I’m an artist, I’ve tried to turn it into a positive.” Dolan was born in 1962 in Forth Worth, where his father John taught English at Texas Christian University . But it was his mother Lee, an artist, who inspired him to take up painting and sculpture. In 1985 he received his Bachelor’s degree in Fine Arts from the University of Texas in Austin, and earned his MFA at the University of North Texas in Denton four years later. Along the way, he took a summer job at a Christian Scientist nursing home and asylum as a way to get to New York City and tour its art museums. He won a couple of awards for his paintings, and joined some arts associations. In 1990 he mounted his first solo exhibition, “Triplets in Uniform – The Circus Show,” at the Annex Street Gallery while living in Seattle.

He grew tired of renting apartments, he says, and property in Seattle was too expensive to buy. Having come from Texas, he knew something about Houston’s art scene, and at the tail end of the oil bust years he’d heard that land in Space City was still dirt-cheap. He settled on a dilapidated 1939 bungalow at 834 West 24th Street, and bought it for less than $20,000 in October of 1993. “It was a falling down piece of crap,” he says, sifting through one of the boxes. “I probably have pictures here somewhere.” The previous owner, and elderly African-American woman named Mrs. Whitehead, was a fellow hoarder and Dolan marveled as he went through her discarded albums of old photographs.

He gutted and rebuilt the place himself, and started his own construction company – he’d always been good with his hands, and it went right along with his interest in sculpture. It was more practical, too. “I was doing these paintings, and they were so personal and horrific, well maybe not that horrific… it just wasn’t very commercial.”

Whether or not his paintings are horrific is up to the viewer to judge. Across from us is a huge canvas that shows a smiling woman in a red dress on horseback, supporting a smaller grinning figure riding along in a little basket. It’s a touch surreal, maybe, rendered in something of a Frieda Kahlo style, but hardly horrific. To our left is The Confirmation of Marie, painted in 1997. It’s another large canvas, painted in shades of grey. In a semi-realistic scene that reminds me of a Magritte dreamscape, a severe-looking woman in a low-cut nightgown hovers over a second lady sleeping nude on a sofa, poised to slice off one of her nipples with sewing shears. Another painting, shown in an old photo of the Museum, shows a mustachioed man whose penis protrudes through his fly to urinate on the head of a groveling monkey-boy.



“Maybe I could have done better in New York,” he sighs, “but they just didn’t sell well here, so I started moving more towards sculpture and construction, that hands-on part of me. And once I started the museum, I started building it out, and making these environments.” It’s the first time I’ve heard an artist use this specific term to refer to his own creation. “Oh yeah,” he says, “I was really influenced by the Orange Show, and I’d spent time in Europe, seen the Palais Ideal and all these crazy environments they have over there. Those are really important for me.” Clearly here’s an artist who hasn’t labored in isolation.



Smith opened his Museum on Christmas day, 2000. Access was granted on an appointment-only basis, and word quickly spread throughout Houston’s community of artists and freaks about its constantly evolving assemblage of sculptures, paintings and found objects. Guests passed the rusty Man of 10,000 Nails (a dead ringer for a sculpture that resides in the Menil Collection’s Surrealism exhibit) to arrive at the front door with its crazy grillwork of welded pipes and scrap metal pieces. If they didn’t get cold feet, they walked beneath a die cut metal sign that warned, “enter at your own risk” and into a foyer covered floor to ceiling with crucifixes and voodoo dolls.

Smith’s living room and kitchen served as the main gallery area. Highlights included the Shelf of Delicious Advertisements, an open cupboard stocked with vintage cans of such delicacies as artichoke hearts and salmon that would occasionally burst and yield forth their fizzing contents. There was the Fantasy Frij, an old refrigerator covered in images of women in various stages of undress. There was a paper mache wasp’s nest and a large model of the human heart. And beside the sofa there was an enormous painted cardboard rendition of the Olde English 40-ounce malt liquor bottle that Smith built in 2002 to wear as a costume for his 40th birthday party. “I got so drunk that I fell down, and I was like a giant turtle flopped on its back,” he told his friend Kelly Klaasmeyer when she wrote up his story for the Houston Press in 2008.



In between were seemingly thousands of curious trinkets, from a Wheaties box (“Breakfast of Champions”) bearing the pasted-on image of a smoking, stubble-faced schlub to a wooden cross inscribed with the phrase “there is no water in hell” to a small, amorphous white figure wearing an alarmed expression. “Like, what is that?” Smith laughs, pointing to its image in an old photograph. “A cloud? Toothpaste? Someone brought that back from Taiwan and gave it to me.”

He transformed the yard out back into a twisted sculpture garden. At its center was an army tank made from wheel rims and scrap metal that shot water into a mosaic tiled, brick walled pool. Sometimes it served as a hot tub; other times, it was a pond filled with floating plants. Old tires were a recurring motif. A neat stack of tires with a tin pail for a head and a drawn face with an upturned nose was affectionately named Pig Boy. Another stack of tires was topped with an overturned sink with a forlorn expression painted on its underside. He bore a painted inscription that read, “Hit Me.” For a while there was a tire Christmas tree inside decorated with garlands and decaying, painted ornaments. But after it toppled over one day, Dolan just cleared away the mess and never bothered to repair it.



There were several tiny outbuildings on the small property, and these were used for the Museum “office” and bathrooms. The women’s bathroom had proper plumbing as well as a “Planet of the Apes” motif, while the men’s room simply had a hole cut into the floor (plus, the amenity of a makeshift shower, should the need arise). In 2003, Smith built a pet columbarium on the yard’s western wall out of lengths of pipe, beer cans, cinderblocks, bricks, and mortar. A bathtub set into the wall vertically became a devotional grotto with the addition of the sculpture of a buxom young woman, her missing head replaced by that of a ceramic frog. Beside it was an old water heater with a propane attachment. “Is this where you cremate pets?” Klaasmeyer asked during her visit. “I’m not supposed to,” Smith responded with some hesitation, “but if the dogs kill something…” Pointing out a flat metal disc atop the cylinder, he added, “That’s where you can set your coffee to keep it hot.”

The Halloween’s eve dedication of the columbarium was celebrated with a costume party that ended badly after a guest released a series of helium balloons carrying flaming stuffed animals. It was a spectacular sight until one of them snagged in a neighbors tree and set it on fire. Leslie, dressed as the blood-drenched prom queen Carrie, burst through the back door and, seeing the flames, began screaming. Dolan grabbed a fire extinguisher and had the blaze under control by the time firefighters arrived, but the police were not amused. The balloon launcher, clad only in a g-string made from teddy bears, was carted off to jail, and Smith was placed on the seven-year arson list. “Whatever that means,” he says, rolling his eyes, then, counting on his fingers, remarks, “Hey, I must be off of that list by now.”


The scar room

By far the darkest feature of the whole place, and certainly the one that garnered the most attention, was the backyard gazebo known as the “Scar Room.” It housed a collection of plaques made from scrap metal and wood upon which Smith had recorded the stories behind 86 scars, both physical and mental, a tragicomic litany of discomfort, pain and strife. They were first unveiled to the public five months before the museum’s opening, in an exhibition entitled “The Scar Show” held at a wood-paneled church-turned-independent movie house called the Aurora Picture Show. “I have many wounds and have wounded many others,” he wrote on an explanatory plaque. “I have wounds that turned into scars and some traumas that will never heal. This exhibition is an investigation into those meanings, and expedition into the land of ones own memory.”





Some of the scars are flat-out comic. Scar #68 (1999) reads: “I contracted scabies from trying on clothes at Target in 1995. My girlfriend was really mad. dolen 1999” Others peel back the layers of his own tortured autobiography. Scar #82 (1999) relates a tale from his Christian Scientist upbringing. Dolan accidentally cut his leg with a new Swiss Army knife and his parents reluctantly brought him to the emergency room. Smith wrote, “I think my father was very disappointed that I did not call down Jesus Christ for an immediate and completely miraculous healing.” Scar #20 (1999) is an attempt to come to terms with his dyslexia: “It took a very long time to read, it took a long time to write corectly. It takes things longer for me to understand what people say. People think I’m not listening. People think I’m stupid. People think I’m crazy cause I jump around a lot when I talk, because I don’t make sense. I took a long time to figure out I’m dislexyc. When I told my mother she said, yeah, I do that too, I switch my words around. When I told my father he said I was just dumb. dolen 1999.” At the center of the exhibit is the scar man, an eight-foot-tall jointed human figure with a terrified expression, also made from scrap plywood and metal. He is a monumental piece of anguished folk art where concussions, hemorrhages, food poisonings, dog bites and broken bones are annotated in their proper anatomical locations. While Smith’s Scar Show was leavened with black humor, the plaques are still painful to read. How could one man be subject to so much trauma, and live to make art about it? When the plaques went up in the Scar Room gazebo at the Museum of the Weird, he added a shelf and a plaque that read, “The Shelf of Scars – Please feel free to leave a scar with us.” Many did, and some were as funny or as harrowing as Smith’s own: “In 1976 I was sliding down the slime in the drainage ditch in LA. Then I hit a dry spot. Smush, my chin hit the cement. The doctor had to scrape the slime from my chin-bone, then he stitched it up.” Another reads: “When I was about 12 my mother started burning the hair off my arms with a candle. She said I was too hairy for a girl.” Dolan’s Scar Room became a kind of anonymous group therapy session.



The Scar Room had other attractions, too. There was The Wheel of Truth or Doom. Dolan’s still got it, so we go downstairs from his studio loft to have a look. A push-button operated wheel turns inside a plywood shell to determine the users fortune. “They’re all bad,” admits Smith, as the spinner comes to rest on “You will spend time in jail. Cherish your freedom.” When the Orange Show came to call on their 2002 Eyeopener tour, one woman got very upset when she received her fortune: “You will drive your car off a cliff.”

“I’m sorry, ma’am,” Dolan apologized, “but the wheel never lies.” He offered her a second spin, and a third. The same fortune appeared each time, and she stormed off in a huff.


strangled baby doll

Almost hidden among the room’s other features was a glass jar containing a baby doll, strangled by a rubber hose and floating in clear liquid. “My first scar,” he says, taking the same jar down from a shelf and looking at it tenderly. He shakes it gently, clouding the water with sediment from the rotting hose. “I was born with my umbilical cord wrapped around my neck four times, and I almost died.”

“I’m scared to open it,” he adds, grinning. “This thing would really stink.”

The Museum had really struck a nerve with the local art scene’s fringe element, which voted it “Best Shrine to the Abnormal” in a poll conducted by the Houston Press in 2002. It was written up in the taste making Texan art bible Artlies, and Dolan graced the cover of the glossy Houston lifestyle magazine 002. Meanwhile, the site itself continued to evolve. Smith built a suggestive art car called the Eyegina with a fiberglass and metal sphere; later, inspired by a viewing of the cult film Altered States, he cut off its top and grafted it onto the backyard Jacuzzi to make a sensory deprivation chamber. He turned his own bedroom into a miniature Chinese Theatre that seated six and featured secret compartments from which actors could spill forth.

He married Leslie in 2006, and moved with her into their “normal” home. He held onto the Museum of the Weird for two more years, but no longer able to claim his homestead exemption, the tax burden became unbearable. He considered forming a non-profit and hiring a staff, but friends in the local art scene warned him it might be more trouble than it was worth. “Not only that,” he says, “but I was getting tired of the museum. I didn’t want the hassle; I just wanted to make art. What was I going to do, was I really gonna do this for another ten years? You know the Watts Towers in LA? That guy just walked away in the end. I never really understood it until I got to that point myself.”

Dolan disposed of many of the Museum’s attractions in a blowout yard sale in December 2008, and it was left to realtor Weldon Rigby to sell the place. “Truly unique,” he declared in the sales flier. The asking price was $150,000, the value of the lot itself. In a gentrifying neighborhood, one imagined the house was a tear-down if ever there was one. But Rigby quickly found buyers in John and Kim Ritter, two art car people displaced from their Galveston home when Hurricane Ike punched its way through the coast.

Bill Davenport and his shop, Bill's Junk

$
0
0
Pete Gershon

[When Pete Gershon wrote Painting the Town Orange: The Stories Behind Houston's Visionary Art Environments (which we reviewed last week), one chapter dealing with four Houston artists had to be excised for space reasons. Gershon has graciously given us permission to publish the chapter as four separate blog posts on The Great God Pan Is Dead. This is the final post. Please check out the first post about Grace Bashara Green, the second about David David Smalley and the third about Dolan Smith's Museum of the Weird.]


Bill's Junk

“Every shopkeeper is an artist,” proposes Bill Davenport. And while he may not be Salvador Dali or Andy Warhol—both of whom designed store window displays—I can’t help but be impressed with the arrangement of clutter that fills Bill’s Junk, his 11th Street storefront. “Store display is a form of art, and I suppose junk stores have more flexibility than most. The kind of things I deal in are second-hand objects, so as you can see, I have a lot of scope of how I can arrange things.” The walls and shelves are filled with some twenty years’ worth of Davenport’s scrounges from the flea markets, yard sales and trash piles of Houston.

A painting of a goat-headed demon embracing a naked woman as New York City erupts in flames behind them immediately catches the eye. Here’s a tiny block of wood painted to look like an electric range resting on a leather-bound scrapbook stuffed with articles on infectious diseases. Beside it are some unusual rocks, plastic dinosaurs, one of Dolan Smith’s scars, and a twist of sparkly pipe cleaners made by a friend of one of Bill’s pre-teen sons. Its tag reads: “cybernetic organism - $22.”

“Okay, maybe that one’s a bit overpriced,” allows Davenport. “But then again, for a cybernetic organism, it’s not a bad deal.” There are stacks of used CDs and boxes of weird stuffed animals and an array of misshapen ceramics, the forlorn school art projects of decades past. It’s not too far a leap from the display found at Cleveland Turner’s house, a whirlwind of junk with no rhyme or reason to its placement except for one man’s aesthetic instincts.


"Balloons" to "Bill's": Bill's Junk in 2009

It’s become perceived of as something of an art installation within certain circles, owing to Davenport’s background as a sculptor who uses the most modest materials, but that wasn’t the original intent. In 2006, Davenport and his wife, the painter Francesca Fuchs, purchased the 4000-square-foot building at 1125 11th Street. Built back in the 1930s, for some seventy years it functioned as a fleabag flophouse, with a series of what Davenport terms “sad, pathetic businesses” downstairs: a procession of barbers, lunch counters, and most recently, a ramshackle party supply store. The latter’s window painting has been modified, transforming the word “BALLOONS” into “BI LL ‘S”. Davenport himself spent sixteen months renovating the structure from top to bottom, moved his studio into the back, made an apartment for his wife and two boys on the second floor, and pushed his surplus objects into the storefront.

“Sure, people buy things,” he says, “but there’s never been any thought about whether something was saleable. I don’t make any money doing this. I just don’t want this stuff in my studio, so I’ll just put it up here and maybe someone will take it. I’ll tell you what does sell quickly: dead insects. Dead bees, moths, you display them properly and they never last more than a couple of days.”


Bill Davenport and some of his junk for sale

Davenport, who was born in Greenfield, Massachusetts in 1962, picked up art degrees at the University of Massachusetts and Rhode Island School of Design. After graduation he taught a wood shop class at a Quaker school in central Massachusetts but moved to Houston in 1990 when he was invited into the Glassell School of Art’s Core Residency Program. He reaches into a cabinet and produces an example of the kind of sculpture he made at Glassell. It’s made from five small, unpainted scraps of wood, some with angled cuts, glued together.

“I’ve always made things that looked like people’s bad shop projects and then put them into gallery settings,” he says. “People get mad because they’re so badly made.” Shaila Dewan summarized the general attitude toward Davenport’s work in the tagline to her 1999 Houston Press article, "The Antihero: Is Bill Davenport’s art stupid? Yeah. Brilliant? That, too.”

He shows me another project from his time at Glassell. It’s a small wooden box, painted Pepto-Bismol pink, entitled Counter. I imagine how sensual and luxurious the textures of its sloppily applied paint and its badly fitted joints must have looked under bright gallery lights. “It’s very much a conceptual piece. It’s about making the piece, and the desire to make it. The things that I love the best are things where people worked really hard to do something they don’t know how to do, which for me is what all great art is. Sometimes they come up with something the most highly trained artist couldn’t accomplish.”


Yes, everything is really for sale!

To illustrate his point, he points to a yard sale painting hanging in a corner near the ceiling, an unassuming landscape depicting a sailboat on a mountain lake. “I mean, look at old Mr. McKenick here,” Davenport says. “Some of the things he did here, the boat, this tree over here, didn’t really work, or they’re pretty commonplace. But then you get to those mountains in the background, and you’re like, wow, that’s better than just about anything you can imagine.”

Davenport went on to teach classes in sculpture, painting, art history and art appreciation at just about every school in the Houston area, along the way working with painting, crochet and large-scale outdoor sculpture as his preferred mediums. A bin on the curb in front of the store is filled with one of his current sculptural modes—mystery objects, wrapped in newspaper and wound with colorful yarn. A price tag dangles from each, for example: “Object that could bring you luck - $3”.

His work is handled by Houston’s prestigious Inman Gallery and he’s equally well-known for his daily blog updates for the Texas art website of record, Glasstire, for whom he’s written since 2001. When he opened Bill’s Junk in 2008, a steady stream of friends and strangers came to browse. Then one day, Toby Kamps walked in, and asked him if he’d be interested in recreating the store for an exhibit he was curating at the CAMH called No Zoning.

“Up until then it wasn’t an art project,” says Davenport. “I had a lot of fun arranging stuff, yeah, but it wasn’t art. I mean, it was art, but I wasn’t thinking of it like that. It was a case of a curator making the art by designating that it was. I had to think really hard about whether I wanted to do it.”

Davenport accepted the invitation, but he admits it was with mixed feelings. “It was a bit of a crisis. You’re an artist. Important curator comes to your studio, and he doesn’t want your art, he wants your junk. What do you do with that?” In this case, he went with the flow, and replicated his shop within the CAMH’s gallery space, selling thrift store art, decorated sea shells and macramé owls to show-goers—in fact, eager buyers emptied out his store three times before the exhibit came down. The process had come full circle. Not only was the collection of cast-off materials art; now so too was the act of its resale. With Bill’s Junk, Davenport was making a sly (and possibly inadvertent) commentary on the art’s commercialization.

“From a critical point of view, you could say his work with Bill’s Junk is an important turning point for this kind of site work,” says architect Cameron Armstrong. “When an artist creates a space like that and then turns the process around, turning the accumulation into a dispersal, and that dispersal becomes its meaning. I think that’s amazing.”

Armstrong says, “the things we’re talking about, this all comes up right out of the soil of Houston.” He shakes his head and adds, “You’re going to have a hard time explaining all of this to outsiders.”

Night Paintings by Guillaume Gelot

$
0
0
Robert Boyd


Guillaume Gelot Night Paintings installation, left to right: Dark Lands,Chair and Darkness

Scott Charmin's second show, Night Paintings by Guillaume Gelot, opened last night. It wasn't exactly what I would have expected after seeing his work in New Paintings by Brandon, Dylan, Guillaume and Isaiah last year. (Scott Charmin's first show featured Dylan Roberts, who was also in the New Paintings show. I wonder if that means we can expect solo shows from Brandon Araujo and
Isaiah López next?) Where Gelot's work in New Paintings had been modest in its approach and a bit self-deprecating, this work is more overtly conceptual and visually challenging.


Guillaume Gelot Night Paintings installation, clockwise from upper left: Market Forces,Moon 1 and Desk

There seem to be three kinds of work here. There are works that have a nasty "fuck you" to them, exemplified by a small painting called Pure Shit that contains the very faint words "pure shit" as its sole bit of content. These paintings made me think of Mark Flood, and Gelot in fact painted everything in this show in what he described as a "shack in the back yard of Mark Flood's studio." 

 
Guillaume Gelot, Painting II

The second kind of painting in the show are a group of super-hard-edge conceptual paintings. Some, like Painting II, Desk and Chair are similar to the space holders an architect or interior designer might use to figure out where to place furniture in the room. The big grid paintings, Moon I and Moon II, also fit into this category.


Guillaume Gelot, Josephine I

Third are the sexy paintings, Josephine I and Josephine II. These relate back to the "pussy" pictures he included in New Paintings but are more coy. In both of them, he employs a minimum of line and color to depict "Josephine". They are elegant but dehumanizing--Josephine doesn't have a face or hands. Her brains and manual skills are not important, apparently. Thin and elegant like a Cycladic figure, Gelot depicts her as a sexual object only, lacking a self.


Guillaume Gelot, Josephine II

So what do these three things have to do with each other? I think they all overlap. Painting I and Painting II are kind of nasty, too, after all. They are saying "fuck you" to painting, reminding you that paintings are things meant to occupy space on a wall in a pleasant way. Your interior decorator decides you need a 24 x 24 inch square painting and orders one up from a gallery which can supply the right sized piece.


Guillaume Gelot, Market Forces

Which in turn links them to Market Forces. What is in the paintings, this exhibit implies, is not so important as long as there is a market for it. Barely visible words take the place of images and painterly virtues. And if demand for 24 inch square paintings is up, then by God market forces will answer increased demand with increased supply.



Guillaume Gelot, Portrait

Portrait, with the word "portrait" painted in white on a pale pink bathroom seems like it could be yet another dehumanizing depiction of Josephine, and is given an extra twist by being hung in the toilet. Your Eyes may also be another image of Josephine, replacing those well-known windows into the soul with the words "your eyes." And the fact that it says "your eyes" is significant. Someone might say to someone else, "Your eyes are beautiful." This painting reminds "you" that "your eyes" are two words. Don't feel flattered.


Guillaume Gelot, Your Eyes

But what really links the various works is the way the show was hung. That's why I included so many installation views. The works are mostly black, white, and/or grey. Gelot's staging of them is like a graphic designer putting together a printing page. It's deft and appealing. The sense of negativity that amusingly permeates the show is somewhat mitigated by its handsome installation.


Guillaume Gelot Night Paintings installation, left to right: Josephine I, Moon IIand Josephine II


Guillaume Gelot Night Paintings installation, left to right: Darknessand Painting II

So a show with paintings like Pure Shit, Dark Lands and Darkness ends up being about installation design, and the relationship of the fairly minimal work with the humble architecture of the Scott Charmin bungalow. Minimal painterly means? A strong dialogue with the architectural setting? This is starting to sound a little like Minimalism. It's almost like you aren't in an exhibit of individual paintings but are instead in a minimalist installation. The architecture is as much a part of the work as the paintings. The gridded windows looking out into the black night are as much a piece as Dark Lands, Chair and Painting II.  I assume this was Gelot's intention, but I don't know. Either way, it's striking and it works.

Night Paintings by Guillaume Gelot is up at Scott Charmin through May 9. 

Lonestar Explosion 2014 - bear by Jana Whatley

$
0
0
Dean Liscum

Immediately upon seeing Jana Whatley's bear at the Houston International Performance Art Biennale, before I learned the title, I came up with my own titles:
  • Relationship from a woman's viewpoint
  • Mother
  • Labor relations
  • Mule of the World (after Nanny's observation in Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God)
As you can see  from those titles, a Chinese knockoff factory could easily reverse-engineer my politics and personal issues. Every artist has to contend with the things we (the audience) carry. That's their burden.

The performance started simply enough. Whatley bent at the waist and a man of relatively equal proportions climbed on her back.



She stood there. The audience waited. She stood there some more, bearing his weight for a minute, then 5 minutes, then 10 minutes, then 20, then 25, until she could no longer stand.



Then she collapsed to the floor. The man remained on her back until



she gathered her strength and rose to her feet, again,



with the man on her back. Then fini.

During this performance, Whatley didn't say anything. She didn't make eye contact with audience members. She breathed. She sweated. She struggled. She bore her burden until she couldn't bear it anymore. It was exhausting to watch. (You can watch a portion of her performance here.)

The tension/the conflict/the essence of this piece seems to be primarily woman against herself. It's all about the artist. The man-burden Whatley carries, the audience are irrelevant. Of course, there is the more obvious symbolism of gender-politics embodied by the two participants, but it's unadorned with much additional theatricality. The man-burden isn't wearing a suit and tie or track suit or cowboy boots and hat or skinny jeans and a shirt two sizes too small or normicore. Whatley is wearing a flowery print dress, which might be a clumsy gesture to reinforce her femininity, but it's unnecessary. Her feminity and her power are obvious, and the piece derives its power from her straightforward struggle.

My fellow audience members brought their own interpretations to this standard endurance piece as I did mine. Together, we watched, walked away, interacted with other performances occuring simultaneously, but ultimatley we returned. I suspect that this was because regardless of how one chose to interpret the performance, it plainly compelled enduring.

New York Women

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

The phrase "New York Women" suggests many things, but in this case it is the name of a small exhibit of work at GGallery curated by Barbara MacAdam, an editor for ARTnews. The show consists of work by five women in a variety of media.


Rosy Keyser, Recliner, 2014, sawdust, obsidian, mica, oil enamel on canvas, 20 x 18 inches

McAdam wrote a recent profile of Rosy Keyser in ARTnews. In it, she quotes curator Eric Crosby as saying that "Keyser’s work is at odds with so much painting we see today." He is talking about its energy and force, but as a general statement I think he's wrong. This work seems to fall in the general category of "new casualism"as defined by Sharon Butler. This seemed especially true in her use of what Butler calls "non-art materials."Recliner at least has a canvas underneath the sawdust, obsidian and mica that form its corroded, blasted-looking surface. Dance TV eschews even canvas.


Rosy Keyser, Dance TV, 2014, oil, acrylic, linen, medium, a/v tape and wood on straw mat, 24 x 18 inches

Both of these works suggest damage and even violence. Keyser's use of black implies soot and burning. The work is fully abstract, but feels like it could be closeup depictions of sites of violence visited long after the terrible events--bomb sites or the remnants of burned dwellings. The size of each of these paintings is modest, but both Recliner and Dance TV punch above their weight. These are not polite abstractions.


Joan Waltemath, Umarmung or Marsha's two ways (West 5 1, 3, 4, 7...), 2007-12, oil, zinc, phosphorescent and fluorescent pigment on honeycomb aluminum panel

In contrast, Joan Waltemath's abstractions are quite polite--or at least they lack the violence of Keyser's. Waltemath is an art writer and her approach (at least in the paintings displayed here) is more intellectual compared with the more visceral Keyser work. It was interesting that the two artist's work were hung together in GGallery. Waltemath's three paintings are all tall and thin, filled with right angles, squares, rectangles and lines. Like Mondrian, she doesn't worry about machine-like precision--some of the edges of the geometric shapes are obviously hand-painted, and the areas within the rectangles are not perfectly flat areas of color. She combines a subtle painterliness with rigorous design constraints. The work is lovely to look at, but is provokes cool appreciation rather than an emotional response.


Diana Cooper, Road to Nowhere, 2012-14, nixed media, dimensions variable

Diana Cooper's work in the show was less impressive than some of the other work. She is best known for sprawling assemblage installations, but the pieces displayed at GGallery were more restrained. I liked Road to Nowhere best. The outer photos are, as best as I can tell, a footpath. The way the path recedes and curves off to the right makes it look, for a distance, like a wave about to crash, and this effect is multiplied by repetition of the image. I'm not sure what to make of this grouping of photographs, but it is pleasant to look at.


Elisabeth Kley, foreground: untitled, 2013. ceramic, dimensions variable; background: untitled, 2013, acrylic and ink on paper, dimensions variable

The least interesting work to my eyes was Elisabeth Kley's ceramics and drawings. The drawings themselves are designs for ceramic vases. This is work that I suspect is quite meaningful to the artist, but which doesn't communicate well to the viewer. At least, not to this viewer. The designs aren't particularly interesting.



Nancy Haynes, Burnt Prairie, 2012, oil on linen, 20 x 26 inches

The best work in the show was a group of six paintings by Nancy Haynes. They are unabashedly beautiful. Each of them features some choppy brush strokes along the top and bottom edges of the canvas. They make a series of staccato lines that are not quite parallel to the edge of the canvas. They frame a central area of color which consists of a slow fade from left to right. The central colors are blue and brown and grey.


Nancy Haynes, Retinal Boundary, 2012, oil on linen, 18 x 21 1/2 inches

The choppy framing edges at the top and bottom, against the smooth area in the middle, come across as horizons, as if Haynes were painting a landscape with a huge looming sky. Except each painting has two of these horizons. If they were representational images of a landscape horizon, hiving one at the top and bottom would be a surreal image--but not a very exciting one. The fact that the top and bottom edged function like horizons but are abstract gives these paintings a feeling of the uncanny that we get from many of the best surrealist paintings (The Empire of Light, II by Magritte, for example).


Nancy Haynes, Retreat, 2012-13, oil on linen, 18 x 21 1/2 inches

But the surrealists are not the painters on thinks of looking at these works. With their gorgeous framed voids, one might think instead of Mark Rothko. It's interesting that an artist like Haynes, whose earlier work could be quite conceptual, would flirt with the sublime (in the Burkean or Kantian sense) like this, but that is what it seems she is doing. But I can think of another contemporary painter whose work seems equally split between two tendencies: Mark Flood. Some of his work is sardonic conceptualism, some of it--the lace paintings--is beautiful with intimations of the sublime. Interestingly, he like Haynes also frequently makes paintings that surround a central pool of color with an edge. In his case, the edge is lace and the center is a void of color. Nancy Haynes is somewhere between these two Marks--which is kind of a weird place to be. But so what? The paintings struck me as beautiful. These photos don't do them justice. They should be seen in person.

I didn't come away from New York Women with any understanding of Barbara MacAdam's curatorial concept. And maybe expecting some obvious link or common aspect in these works is unnecessary. It's enough to see some work that pleases me. Why it's here is not all that important.

Big Daddy John Hernandez

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

San Antonio artist John Hernandez makes wacky sculptures of cartoon creatures in bizarre vehicles like this one:


Ed "Big Daddy" Roth, Dragnut plastic model

No, wait a minute--that's Dragnut, a vintage Ed "Big Daddy" Roth plastic model manufactured by Revell.


Ed "Big Daddy" Roth, Mother's Worry plastic model

And here's Mother's Worry. (Both swiped from this "Big Daddy" Roth model webpage.) Hernandez uses things like this as his inspiration for much of the work in his current exhibit Parade at Avis Frank Gallery. I've heard Hernandez's work described as being influenced by pop culture, but this stuff wasn't just pop culture when it appeared in the 60s. It was "junk culture." It was considered the nadir, the most juvenile crap imaginable. The preadolescents who assembled Revell dragster models were assumed to be future glue heads. No one with the possible exception of the irony-filled Tom Wolfe took this stuff remotely seriously.


John Hernandez, Out of the Pan, 2014, acrylic on wood, plastic and styrofoam, 6'6" x 3'3" x 2'5"

My, how things have changed. Of course, there are now a lot of "lowbrow" artists who mine this territory, with whole magazines (Juxtapoz and Hi Fructose) devoted to their work. But even in the sixties when Ed "Big Daddy" Roth was churning this stuff out, there were fine artists who noticed and played off junk culture in their own work (Ray Yoshida and Öyvind Fahlström, for example). At the time, they were seen as just a part of the Pop Art movement.


John Hernandez, Out of the Pan, 2014, acrylic on wood, plastic and styrofoam, 6'6" x 3'3" x 2'5"

The contemporary "lowbrow" artists who mine this material are not cool ironists. They're artists who heard a whole lot of theory in college and said "fuck that noise." They are about pleasure and they don't care if it's "low" pleasure. But one of the reasons the art world accepted Pop Art in the 60s was that they believed that it was cool, ironic and at root, intellectual. And while that may have been true of Roy Lichtenstein, I think we can now safely acknowledge that Andy Warhol was a fan--he did pictures of Liz and Marilyn because he liked them. And while Mel Ramos might have been making ironic juxtapositions of sex objects and consumer products, we have to admit now that Ramos likes painting sexy naked ladies. My point is that whether they were Pop artists or Lowbrow artists, there have been contemporary artists who have been really inspired by junk culture from the late 50s until now. And John Hernandez is one of them.

Hence Out of the Pan, which at first glance appears to be a marble statue of a "Big Daddy" Roth-style monster dragster. This thing is over six feet tall. The gear shift knob has to be extending four feet from the "car." This was always a thing in Roth's artwork--gearshift knobs that come way out of the car. Hernandez has taken that exaggeration and exaggerated it even further.  Of course, it's not actually marble--it's made of wood, plastic and styrofoam, painted to look like marble. But by making Out of the Pan essentially life-size and making it look like marble, Hernandez is commenting on the cultural place of this kind of stuff. Life-size marble statues equal classical art to us. I can't think of a large scale marble statue I've ever seen outside a museum (except for Andreas Lolis's sculptures at Frieze, and they are obviously ironic in the same way Out of the Pan is). In this piece, Hernandez offers up Roth as a modern Phidias. It's an amusing piece of artistic blasphemy.


John Hernandez, Pinocoboat, 2014, ink on paper, 29 x 38 inches

Pinocoboat shows another mutant in a Roth-style vehicle. Instead of a gear-shift knob, his appendage (I  can't quite call it a hand) is holding an umbrella. The drawing is pretty large, but it pays homage to comics artists and commercial illustrators who drew in crisp black and white pen-and-ink for reproduction on a printed page. For example, the sharp, pointed shading in the figure's hair and on the tongue-like ramp are hallmarks of a certain type of comics illustration, while the stipple recalls an older style of illustration (but one that survives on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, which features excellent portraits of news makers drawn in stipple).


John Hernandez, Pinocoboat, 2014,acrylic on wood, 32 x 23 x 7 inches

But Hernandez's color version of Pinocoboat is totally different. Almost all the drawn lines are gone, replaced by intense candy coloring. The drawing really wanted to be on a printed page, but this wooden wall relief feels just right for a gallery wall.


John Hernandez, Revolver, 2014, silkscreen, 23 x 20.5 inches

Revolver made me think that Hernandez might be influenced by the Hairy Who, particularly Karl Wirsum. The whole image has a psychedelic, 60s feel--the multi-color bullets, the vibrating red-blue vortex (labelled "SWIRL") at the center of the gun barrel. Happiness is a warm gun indeed.



John Hernandez, Blue Guitar, 2014, acrylic on wood, 7'4" x 3'6" x 5"

The bug-eyed figure in Blue Guitar looks completely familiar. A kids' cereal mascot perhaps? With this piece, Hernandez edges close to Jeff Koons territory. I guess this is the danger of making art out of junk culture sources. On one hand, you may end up with amusing and surprisingly thoughtful work like Out of the Pan and Revolver. On the other hand, you may end up painting a seven foot tall advertising mascot, or whatever the hell that thing is. That's why I end up feeling ambivalent towards work in this genre. There's a thin line between junk culture-inspired work that is interesting and expressive and work that amounts to valorizing trivial cultural detritus by making it really big. And work in this show fell on both sides of that thin line.

Real Estate Art: 2630 West Lane Pl.

$
0
0
Robert Boyd

Swamplot caught this one. This Afton Oaks townhouse is packed with art, some of which looks familiar.


For instance, the blue-grey painting in the top center of the photo above looks like a Dorothy Hood. Is it?



And this red painting with torn white lace on it--could it be a Mark Flood?

The rest of the art doesn't appear familiar to me. So as usual, I'm tossing it out to you readers. Do you recognize any of the art in this house? Were my guesses right?










Here's What Happened to Mimi Pond

$
0
0
Robert Boyd



Back in September 2009, I wrote a post called "Whatever Happened to Mimi Pond?" I had been introduced to her by her husband, Wayne White, who had just built a big installation at the Rice Gallery. Pond was a cartoonist I had been aware of in the 80s but who had dropped off my radar. Not that she was not working during those years; I was just unaware of it. By the time I met her in 2009, she was working on a book about her youthful days in the late 70s working as a waitress in Oakland. She had some pages up on her blog. I couldn't wait to read it, and finally four and a half years later, Over Easy, is here.

The brief outline is that Margaret (soon to be renamed "Madge" by her new boss) is an art student. She runs out of money in her final year of art school and drops out to work at the Imperial Cafe (a fictional version of Mama's Royal Cafe). In essence, that's it. The book is as much about Madge's co-workers and boss and customers as about Madge herself, but what appealed to me is that it's about work. Work is an under-explored subject for comics.


Mimi Pond, Over Easy page 43

The fact the the Imperial is kind of a bohemian hangout doesn't lessen the working class vibe, but it complicates things. As I was reading Over Easy, I was thinking about Ben Davis'9.5 Theses on Art and Class. He wrote the following:
3.0 Though ruling-class ideology is ultimately dominant within the sphere of the arts, the predominant character of this sphere is middle class.
3.1 "Middle class" in this context does not indicate income level. It indicates a mode of relating to labor and the means of production. "Middle Class" here indicates having an individual, self-directed relationship to production rather than administering and maximizing the profit produced by the labor of others (capitalist class) or selling one's labor power (working class).
Madge is someone who is constantly escaping the working class. Her family background is working class (and her parents display flashes of class consciousness), and going to art school is a way to become middle class in the way that Davis describes. As an art student, she displays class consciousness in a funny aside on art history majors:
If I had any interest in art history before taking her class, it had been squelched by Mrs. Feiffer's dry delivery--that, and the fact that Patty Hearst had been an art history major at U.C. Berkeley, just two miles away.
Patty only reinforced my feeling that art history was a subject fit only for a spoiled debutante, someone who'd take up with a bunch of whacked-out revolutionaries at the drop of a hat. They'd finally caught her in San Francisco, during my first semester at art school.
I wondered: if she'd chosen any other major, would any of this have happened?
But by losing her grants and scholarships and grants for her fourth year of art school, Madge was suddenly thrust out of the middle-class back into the working class. She starts at the bottom--dish-washer at the Imperial, eventually working her way up to waitress. By the end of the book, she is having some success as a freelance cartoonist, which can be seen as stepping away from her working class existence as a waitress.

I realize I'm making Over Easy sound like a Marxist novel, turning Mimi Pond into some graphic novel version of Upton Sinclair or Theodore Dreiser. I think this stuff is sort of a substructure to the book, but it isn't everything. A big part of the book deals with la vie de bohème as witnessed through the characters. Madge's coworkers are poets and punk rockers (at the dawn of punk rock, when it was still quite scary to suburban moms and dads); they sleep with one another, they explore their sexuality and gender, they take too many drugs, etc.

 
Mimi Pond, Over Easy page 222

Over Easy is so episodic that it's sometimes hard to keep track of events. Time shifts suddenly, sometimes compressing and sometimes expanding. Her first day as a waitress is depicted over the course of 53 pages--about a fifth of the length of the entire book.

Over Easy reads like a bildungsroman, but the ending is inconclusive (but lovely). I wonder if that means Madge's journey will continue.
Viewing all 665 articles
Browse latest View live