Image courtesy artla.com

I n its quest to further the arts, and art education globally, ArtLA.com is currently accepting submissions for it’s 2012 Outstanding Student Artist Of The Year Contest that is offering a $10,000 cash prize and more to both US and International students of all ages and is not exclusively open to arts majors.

Deadline for submissions is April 10th. Subsequent voting on entries will take place on ArtLA.com. The three contestants with the most votes will go through to a semi-final where a panel of expert judges will choose one winner to receive a cash award of $10,000, an Apple Macbook Pro, Adobe Creative Suite 5.5, an ArtLA.com Presidential Package Membership, a $500 Blick Art Materials Gift Certificate, and an exhibition of their works at the Bergamot Station Arts Center in Santa Monica, California. Judgments will be made on grounds of creativity, technical ability and originality.

To apply, a student will go to artlastudents.com and register. They will then need to upload an image of their artwork for the competition. Once they have uploaded an image there is a link at the bottom of the page that they can copy and paste and send to anyone they would like. They can also have people go to www.artla.com and click on search and vote at the top of the page. These people will then search by the artists name, medium, etc. and then they will need to enter their email address. Please note that the site will only allow one vote per email address, per day, but the entrant can have anyone vote for them. In addition, anyone who visits the site can of course vote for the art that they like.

The language used in the official rules section of Artla.com is intimidatingly legal, but rest assured it all checks out.  Just be sure to keep checking back with the site and, if you are selected as the winner, make sure to jump through these hoops:

“In section 3 part B it states that the prize will be forfeited if not claimed within 30 days of winning. You can have the prize mailed to you, but you assume the risk if it gets lost in the mail. However, should you win the competition there is an affidavit that must be signed and returned within 10 days.  If that affidavit is not returned within 10 days then you forfeit the prize. So there are 2 ways that you could potentially forfeit the prize. As long as the affidavit and/or liability release is returned within the 10 days and you can be contacted or you claim the prize within the 30 days, then you will receive the prize should you win the competition.” – Kara Williams, Membership Director, ArtLA.com

Entry forms and instructions are available at http://artla.com/

For more information please contact Tim Broughton by any of the following:

Phone: 310.586.9789, Cell: 310.570.3090, Email: media (at) artla (dot) com.

ArtLA.com is a professional web-based technology platform made for artists to bring their business online. It has over 42 years of combined art and marketing experience, with over 2,000 registered artists and art patrons and it is the most advanced art site for research and acquisition of art, as well as reaching newly emerging artists.

This post was contributed by Thomas Hollingworth.

Captionless work used to promote LegalArt’s CSA courtesy of LegalArt.

A t midnight last night, LegalArt, a Miami based organization founded in 2003 to provide artists with affordable legal services, grants and educational opportunities, announced the inaugural season of Community Supported Art in Miami.

What is Community Supported Art?

“Over the last 20 years, Community Supported Agriculture has be­come a popular way for consumers to buy seasonal food directly from local farms. With the same buy-local spirit in mind, LegalArt is pleased to bring Community Supported Art (CSA) to Miami, to support local art, artists and collectors. This project is modeled on Community Supported Art in Minnesota, created by mnartists.org and Spring­board for the Arts.” – from the About section on LegalArt’s CSA page.

On January 18th starting at 11:00 AM EST limited edition CSA shares of art  will be available online

For one price of $450, CSA members (but not necessarily members of LegalArt it seems) will each receive one work from each of the nine featured Miami artists: Jenny Brillhart, Kerry McLaney, Julie Friel, Gustavo Roman, Jason Hedges, Valeria Yamamoto, James Herring, Michelle Weinberg and Kathleen Hudspeth. Once a month for three months beginning February, three of the nine artists will congregate at a pre-disclosed location where CSA members can collect their works and meet the artists included in that month’s share.

Jason Hedges’ Redfish Small, also used to promote LegalArt’s CSA, courtesy LegalArt.

“By the end of the third delivery, buyers will have received nine individual pieces of art and the artists will have met fifty new collectors.” – LegalArt.

“The artists will have met fifty new collectors of their work”… So I guess there is a limit to fifty members? In which case Legal Art will raise $22,500, some of which will of course go to providing the selected artists with stipends to produce their fifty $9 works thus “offering a very competitive price to encourage new collectors and art lovers.” No shit? At least the artists have a chance to network, but with collectors of this caliber, who needs enemies! Don’t forget to tip folks!

But seriously, LegalArt is a non-profit entity so can we really expect them to ask for anything above the realm of charitable donations? The art is really just a bonus and the whole CSA thing just marketing, but fun, and so long as the ends justifies the means – i.e. funds that equal support for art – then I guess its a good thing, providing its harmless. At least the artists involved must have benefited enough by virtue of the organizations existence not to be grumbling too loudly for once, but what about the galleries? CSA’s in the vernacular are designed to support local food producers and by definition boycott the agriculture and food industry. They exist because consumers desire quality and information they can trust. Will the analogy in art translate then into seeds of doubt that when sewn spell doom for dealers by turning consumers against the art world, or simply help to promote artists? I wonder if anyone is getting tax deductible receipts!

Anyway, about the work… are we talking editions? To this end, Legal Art’s marketing is a little tricky – first stating “nine original works” followed by “each is unique as the one of a kind works are slightly different” and finally “original, limited edition works” – but it would seem that CSA members can each expect to own fifty works each numbered between 1 and 50 of 50. Not a bad deal at all (for the buyer) if the photos included in this post are to be believed. And exclusive to boot! Which of course is always an all important consideration when deciding to fund creativity.

The shares will apparently sell out fast so be sure to visit at 11 AM Sharp!

For more information visit legalartmiami.org or contact Dominique Breard at 786-347-2360 or dominique@legalartmiami.org

This post was contributed by Thomas Hollingworth.

.

IMPORTANT NOTICE CONCERNING THE FUTURE OF ARTLURKER:

Two controversial anti-piracy bills: The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its Senate companion, the Protect IP Act (PIPA) if passed will put the burden on website owners to police user-contributed material and call for the unnecessary blocking of entire sites. Small sites like Artlurker won’t have sufficient resources to defend themselves. Big media companies may seek to cut off funding sources for their foreign competitors, even if copyright isn’t being infringed. Foreign sites will be blacklisted, which means they won’t show up in major search engines. SOPA and PIPA would build a framework for future restrictions and suppression within the US.

“Congress says it’s trying to protect the rights of copyright owners, but the “cure” that SOPA and PIPA represent is worse than the disease. SOPA and PIPA are not the answer: they would fatally damage the free and open Internet.” – Wikipedia, who today is participating in an internet blackout in protest of the bills.

MIAMI DADE RESIDENT? Call your elected officials to tell them you are their constituent, and that you oppose SOPA and PIPA

SOPA STRIKE – SIGN THE PETITION

Screen shot from my gmail at 8:40 this morning.

Oh so this is what 2012 is all about? It seems as though someone got into Aaron Young’s email last night and has sent out an urgent cry for help. No doubt totally unaware of who Aaron Young is, that he would ever be so polite, or that I am the last person in the world he would ask for assistance, the hacker also probably doesn’t realize how lucky they are that Aaron will never find them and get the chance to peel out big masculine donuts all over their face(s)! This happened to my wife last year. She was apparently held at gun point in Wales and needed money. We all know that Europe is expensive, but what is it about these trips that seem so implausibly dangerous? Nice try guy. Good luck getting a new email (and contacts list) Aaron.

This post was contributed by Thomas Hollingworth

C-Print from Investigations (2007 – 2011). 30 x 40 inches.

On Friday December 16th Miami was officially introduced to the work of emerging artist Dogan Arslanoglu when “Investigations”, a solo exhibition featuring a photographic series by the same name, opened at 6th Street Container Gallery in Little Havana. With 30” x 40” digital prints made by photographing a television monitor close-up with 6” x 7” color film over a four year period (2007 – 2011), Arslanoglu represents footage from American television broadcast archives.

C-Print from Investigations (2007 – 2011). 30 x 40 inches.

Stills rendered from various iconic clips including a 1940′s atomic bomb test over Bikini Atoll and the Max Headroom Broadcast Signal Intrusion of 1987 are paired with vintage commercials advertising Coca-Cola, cereal, dental hygiene and cosmetics. Cropped into abstraction, many images are difficult to identify without a hint. The eye instantly recognizes the classic Coca-Cola can, but the atomic blast, equally ingrained in the social conscious, reads more ambiguously despite being depicted more completely – a glowing muddy, yellow-orange hamburger illuminating a hierarchy of cultural association grossly out of whack. Similarly in the Max Headroom still, the eerie sheet of corrugated metal with which the notorious masked culprit anonymizes his surroundings becomes little more than an intense, composition in glorious RGB.

C-Print from Investigations (2007 – 2011). 30 x 40 inches.

“Film is considered to be an important art form, a source of popular entertainment and a powerful method for educating – or indoctrinating – citizens.” – Wikipedia.

In “Investigations” we are shown that film as an artifact, a man-made evidential whole, can be questioned and ultimately dissected. Rendered with photography, pixels – elemental particles of red, green, and blue – are examined as building blocks, individual parts of larger configurations and in turn, cultural history. That which is familiar appears less obvious and that which is more obvious is somehow less familiar.

C-Print from Investigations (2007 – 2011). 30 x 40 inches.

Synopsized and revisited, what was once shot in a certain light from a certain angle, utilized, archived for posterity – which for a society of passive viewers oblivious to everything left outside of the frame and so fundamentally shackled by the media is evocative of Stockholm Syndrome – and presumed to be final is in fact open to interpretation. By photographing within pre-existing frames, Arslanoglu looks beyond the original point of view, directing nostalgia towards a synopsis that is all his own. In this way, emphasis is placed on the importance of a pro-active viewer who is able to open a dialogue between audience and television producer, and the notion that although it may be impossible to know what happened outside of the frame, there is always room for editing (and interpretation) within.

C-Print from Investigations (2007 – 2011). 30 x 40 inches.

In spite of their eclectic, often puzzling nature, all images in the series share these commonalities. They are a reminder of the heavy weight we put on a secondary reality made of virtual pixels, and Arslanoglu disenchants our identification with our own history and consumerist behavior through a secondary life of awful tints and graceless gestures. As no titles are provided it may be difficult for the casual spectator to identify exactly what events or commercials are depicted in the images, but an abiding sense that these new images are no doubt cynical and reflective of the absurd idea that American culture depends so greatly on vapid configurations of light that can only be made physically tangible when printed as a photograph prevails regardless[.]

This post was contributed by Violet Forest.

Left: Evo Love as Lil Miss Fortune. Right: David Rohn as The Amazing Ultran.

In the immediate aftermath of this year’s Art Basel Miami Beach, which for those who participated would ideally have been the time to relax and self congratulate, an ominous stirring began on the Facebook page of one Evo Love. The subject was plagiarism, the accused, Miami artist and Artlurker contributor David Rohn. Initially dismissed by staff here, the libelous accusations by Love, at first limited to comments [on Facebook] like “He’s a thief”, “He’s a sham”, and “I am in the process of exposing this fool” were elevated yesterday when the issue was mentioned in an article on artnet.com

The issue raised by Love, who like Rohn is an artist based in Miami, is that Rohn copied her idea of presenting a fortuneteller. On two occasions in 2010, Love had presented her Lil Miss Fortune act – at Stash Gallery, Miami and during the Fountain Art fair in Miami. Rohn presented his version of a fortuneteller, The Amazing Ultran, at SCOPE MIAMI 2011, one year on.

In an email entitled ‘Your Artist David Rohn is a Copy Cat’, the first of four emails sent to Miami gallerist Carol Jazzar on December 8th, Love stated “I know David Rohn […] He was inspired by me… period. He stole it… And it seems kind of odd to me that in his whole career as a performance artist – he decides to do it after he sees me do it… It’s BS. He copied everything down to my booth, the way I performed, costume & make-up, how much I charged, how I wrote the fortunes down…”

In a subsequent email she claimed “Last year David passed by Fountain Art Fair 2010 and watched me perform this piece Lil Miss Fortune on the sidelines. […] I actually saw David watching me. Those who know David, know he stands out… He’s quite the Dresser. So I recognized him immediately.”

Love says she knows Rohn, Rohn claims not. Love claims that he watched her performing Lil Miss Fortune, Rohn claims not. While there is no tangible proof to substantiate either party’s claims I have to credit the plausibility of Rohn’s denials as I too was previously unaware of Evo Love, her work and/or Stash Gallery (as too was anyone I have bored with this issue). In addition I happened to be present on every day of the Fountain Fair last year documenting WetHeat’s Hot Bed project and while I did see a fortune telling booth (actually outside the fair), not once did I see anyone manning it. So absent in fact was any sense that this was an active fortunetelling event that I was wholly convinced its inertness was an intentional comment or frustrating exercise in absenteeism, a notion reinforced by the presence of an accompanying sign that read “Closed Shit Out Of Luck”. Further more, and this seems to be important considering the accusations at hand, to the best of my knowledge Rohn had not considered developing the character of a fortuneteller until my wife and I asked him to perform as one for the Transit Antenna fundraiser held in Miami’s Design District in April this year. Leading up to the event I worked closely with David to develop his character – Madame Plotsky, a female clairvoyant based on London Esotericist Madame Blavatsky – right down to how he would solicit clients, how much he would charge, and what he would wear. We even loaned him tarot cards and helped him set up his booth.

I obviously know David and am therefore biased and I certainly do not seek to use this website to further my own or anyone’s agendas so there seems little point me defending him as a character witness, however, I do feel justified in stating that that Rohn has consistently, over the course of many years, created archetypes through the medium of performance that actively engage his audiences. Had I not helped him to develop this one, I would say that it was an inevitable progression of a substantial oeuvre.

So what is there left to discuss? Originality in art? Something so fundamentally moot is hardly worth addressing, is it? What seems more pertinent a subject is not that one should or should not feel that they have been ripped off, but how one deals with that feeling. There seems to be no system in place to accurately discern innocence or guilt in such cases and as a result, those who feel wronged often seek the validation of popular opinion, and a media war ensues. And that seems to be what is happening here. Love has clearly chosen to attack Rohn; emailing his associates, rallying support on social networking websites and even possibly soliciting coverage of the dispute. But ultimately, you have to ask yourself “Why?” In this case it seems that neither artist particularly stands to benefit from having the monopoly on fortunetelling in Miami, and I can’t believe that other people subsequently performing as fortunetellers could do much damage to Love’s career in anyway. Nor do I credit the notion that Rohn’s career would stand to benefit inequitably from copying Love. The catalyst for this present, unfortunate circumstance then seems to be hurt pride on Love’s part, and maybe a little hunger for recognition disguised somewhat vainly as a righteous exercise in artistic justice. It must sting to see someone doing your thing a year later, but can the assumption that you have been plagiarized be justified and either way is it good form to shout thief so vehemently? Sure there are obvious, unavoidable parallels between the two ‘works’ but we are not really talking about the works are we? We’re talking about the event, the idea. And despite actually being able to own the rights to an idea, no one can really own an idea, can they? Especially something as culturally rooted and frankly played out as a fortuneteller. I mean you don’t see McDonalds bashing Burger King. But a recipe – ingredients and the way something is prepared – is something different all together, that said, although I saw neither performance, I am sure they each had a unique, if not ‘acquired’ taste[.]

This post was contributed by Thomas Hollingworth.

Jerry Saltz. Image courtesy of Art and Culture Center of Hollywood.

Jerry Saltz: senior art critic for New York Magazine, judge of Bravo’s Work of Art, and compulsive facebook user. There is little introduction to made for one of the most magnetic personalities in the contemporary art world. In anticipation for his lecture just past at the Art and Culture Center of Hollywood, Jane Hart, Curator of Exhibitions facilitated a little interview for me with Jerry. We spoke over the phone and discussed his take on everything from facebook to the meaning of honesty in art criticism and his daily ritual of sitting in front of the computer from 7:30 am to 1 am.

Art criticism is such a funny animal and with the supersonic spread of blogging, tweeting, facebook status updates, etc it’s become even more so. You use both shorthand and longer prose formats and I wonder if you have a preference for one or the other?

JS: I would like to collapse both formats. I don’t make a distinction between “serious” and “not serious” writing. I always write about serious stuff that I’m thinking about in either format. I write for the reader. Most things I read are too long and don’t get to the point. You can go through five paragraphs before you get to one critical adjective that maybe has a point. Density in all things is good.

An art critic has to make themselves as vulnerable as what you’re writing about. You have to get out there and make yourself as available as possible. I don’t like being the critic on top of the mountain, speaking down to the masses. I want the many to speak to one another… to create a horizontal conversation. Art criticism should be chaotic and should recreate the experience of looking at art. It should not be easy to process, because looking at art is not easy to process.

And besides, art criticism doesn’t pay anything. And in all likelihood in the future it will pay even less so. So what that means is that you have total freedom in what you write about. There is no writing for money. You’re writing for the reader and reading about art can be as exciting as looking and talking about art.

Going back to what you had mentioned about the vulnerability, which format to find to be most honest?

JS: Every format! Look, if you’re not honest, the reader will know it in two seconds. You fall into the Mitt Romney role. Artforum is pornography. I can’t understand what they’re saying and they’re not taking any kind of a risk.

And beyond that honesty is really only a lie. A critic is like an artist inventing their ideas, language, persona, syntax, etc. It’s a fabrication. It’s really the idea of Wallace Stevens’ “supreme fiction.”

The effects of the onslaught of Art Basel Miami Beach have been widely discussed among locals in the art community as both a blessing and a curse. Based on your previous discussion on art fairs in general and their relationship to artists and art-making what are some of the positive and negative/ social and economic ramifications of this kind of event on a relatively young art community?

JS: Ok, Art Basel Miami Beach: good for emerging artists, good for the blood, good for parties and touching antennae and having a good time. How can it be bad, if you have the entire volunteer army of the art world at your doorstep? To say it’s a bad thing is being ungenerous. Even as fucked up as things have gotten, as horrendous as the equation between capital and quality has become within this system.

And it has to die; in fact it’s dying as we speak. I just posted an article today in response to Adam Lindemann and Charles Saatchi already turning on the system they helped to create. But this doesn’t mean we have to throw out the baby with the bastards. In fact, the babies need the bastards and vice versa.

One of his recent posts in New York Magazine is a sharp lashing of  Adam Lindemann’s supposed moratorium on this year’s Art Basel Miami Beach (he did in fact attend), and Charles Saatchi’s harsh criticism of the current state of the art world and collecting.

After we spoke, Adam Lindemann posted this response in the NY Observer.

“More on Miami – I’ve heard complaints from a lot of local artists about the void in Miami after Art Basel. Is it a viable place for an artist to work and hope to enjoy some success beyond our swamps and beaches? Is New York still the Shangri-La of the art world?”

JS: In Miami you can have a life, a studio and afford to work. Wherever you are, an artist needs to test your ideas out on strangers on a regular basis.

If you move to New York you won’t die, you’ll live in a shit hole, and you will have an inner life, but your outer life will die. In Miami, you can have an outer life and an inner life. I have no outer life, which is why I look the way I do. But I wouldn’t change it for the world.

(Jerry’s concept of the inner life refers to artistic practices and time spent thinking, talking and working, while the outer life could possibly include everything else.)

So what’s better? Do you have to move to New York to get rich and famous? I don’t know… it helps.

I have two secrets. I am going to tell you the second one first. I have very thick skin. I never take criticism personally because I know that there is probably a grain of truth to it. Even though it hurts, I always address them back. If you’re writing to be loved, then you’ve got trouble. I’ve never been asked to write for Artforum and they would never ask me to either. My voice would make no sense there.

The first secret is energy. Put yourself out there and produce, produce, produce. I have no degree (except my three honorary PhDs), and started in my forties, I’m a late bloomer. But I just put myself out there every day.

Finally, who is your favorite comedian?

JS: Sarah Silverman, Larry David, and I’m old school so Chris Rock.

One could argue this point, but Jerry Saltz is one of the art world’s most distinct figures. He is known for his unabashed critical observations of the contemporary art world and of course his wit. People either love him or hate him… either way they find themselves reading what he has to say. Saltz’s approach to art criticism is considered brazenly honest and straightforward, and he is not one to squirrel away from voicing his opinion, a quality that has also gained him cult status among fans.  Jerry credits his self-proclaimed “privileged” role and unique approach to beginning his career late in life. If you can imagine it, he once drove semi trucks across country and did not begin writing about art until his forties. Even now, when asked about being an art critic and how he came to be, Jerry has this to say:

JS: I feel lucky to get whatever I get. I’m where I am partly out of desperation. I came into the game so late, and I had to admit how badly I wanted to be in the art world. And I don’t consider myself a critic. At best, I consider myself a folk critic.

Upon finishing up the interview, Jerry invited me to communicate on facebook and exchange ideas with him on his page. I may be taking liberties here, but I invite all you facebookers (even the ones with the secret accounts) to do the same. Even if you hate him, go ahead, he can take it[.]

This past Saturday Jerry Saltz gave a lecture as part of the Hot Topics Discussion Series at Art and Culture Center of Hollywood.  For more information about past and future lectures in this series please go to: http://artandculturecenter.org/hot-topics.

This post was contributed by Melissa Diaz.

Hennessy Youngman giving his “His History of Art” lecture at NADA Miami Beach.

This year’s installment of Art Basel Miami Beach mania brought the usual army of art world celebrities to Miami. Among the throngs of the who’s who was newcomer to Miami Basel, Hennessy Youngman who gave a lecture labeled “His History of Art” at NADA Miami Beach. In keeping with the popular ART THOUGHTZ series currently available on Hennessy’s Youtube channel, Youngman tells it like it is with help of a prepared slideshow and a glass of Hennessy to steer the course.

Audience at Hennessy Youngman’s “His History of Art” lecture at NADA Miami Beach.

Youngman has become a hit among art students who find the marriage of his humor and criticality refreshing in the sea of bloated art speak. This was made evident in the huge turnout that packed the lobby of the Deauville hotel for his performance. Much of his success comes from embracing the role of outsider with insider knowledge that makes him both approachable and intellectually stimulating. Recently, his popularity is also garnering him critical acclaim, named as one of the top ten highlights of 2011 by art critic Michael Ned Holte for Artforum’s annual “Best of” edition.

For the NADA performance, Youngman’s lecture, which in keeping with Miami time started behind schedule, began as teaser of slides and comments referring to the secret of success for artists. Youngman described a timeline dating back to everything and everyone from ancient cultures to conquistadors and scientists. Including all examples of human creativity and innovation. For all of this, Youngman said we can credit one thing… the ultimate secret to success and what he referred to as the “artist’s ally” in all things creative. This, Youngman finally reveals is one thing and one thing only… cocaine. And if you were paying close attention, and considering that this lecture was written for Youngman’s first Miami performance, you might have seen this one coming.

Hennessy Youngman’s “His History of Art” lecture at NADA Miami Beach.

Upon wrapping up his lecture with a barrage of slides that included everyone from Marcel Duchamp to Claes Oldenburg to Damian Hirst, Youngman took a scientific approach to proving the positive effects of cocaine on the practices of all successful artists. In the end, proclaiming, “cocaine is the eternal friend of people who need to do shit.” The crowd, filled with everyone from hipsters to an impressive turnout by local artists sipping on green Grolsch bottles were enthralled by Youngman’s energy. So much so, that Youngman headed into the crowd in a stand-up comedian style tête-à-tête with members of the audience. At one point singling out the only collector he could find to try to sell him some work. Wherever he went in the audience and whomever he chose to sit down with, everyone was wide-eyed and star struck and snapping pictures with smart phones. I can honestly say that the audience was in love with Hennessy Youngman.

Hennessy Youngman speaking with Peggy Nolan.

Hennessy Youngman is the creation of artist Jayson Musson, whose work has become synonymous with the characters he develops. However, Musson is no one trick pony. Other examples of work that represent more traditional art forms include a set of colorful abstract “paintings” made from woven Coogi sweaters currently on view at David Castillo Gallery in the group exhibition Don’t Get High On Your Own Supply. For these paintings, Musson borrows from the visual language of Abstract Expressionism and uses materials that reference pop culture icons like rapper Biggie Smalls (The Notorious B.I.G) and Bill Cosby, cleverly joining versions of “high” and “low” art forms. Also included in the exhibition are classic ART THOUGHTZ on Bruce Nauman and Post Structuralism.

Courtesy David Castillo Gallery, Photography by Alissa Christine.

Musson is also currently part of a two-person intervention exhibition at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, where Hennessy Youngman has created an audioguide to accompany visitors through the museum’s collection along with two videos in the ART THOUGHTZ vein that are also in dialogue with the museum’s collection. An intervention, that Musson notes, hasn’t been exactly welcomed by the museums more conservative docents[.]

This post was contributed by Melissa Diaz.

l’Encyclopédie De La Performa 2011. Courtesy if the author and Art in America Magazine.

On Nov 2, as part of the Performa 11 Biennal activities,’ L’Encyclopedie de la Parole’, a French performance group dedicated  to using speech as the central element in performance, produced a series of carefully chorused Speech Pieces based on familiar spoken texts taken from political rhetoric, YouTube’s  ‘most-watched’ videos and other pop American language sources.

Unlike spoken word performances, Slams and Rants, the work here is traditional-style rehearsed composition with a group of speaker/singers and a choral conductor. And the reference to older forms is an invitation to examine the appropriated content more closely: having been elevated here in a well-rehearsed aesthetic context that reinforces the sense of nuance and care that is central to this group’s exploration into linguistic constructs.

The French appreciation of language, the significance of words and their pronunciation, of complex verbal structures in that ‘diplomatic’ language alongside the more haphazard, innovative and free-style aspects of the American use of language is a striking mix that arguably brings out the qualities of both approaches; in this case American content presented into a French style structural form.

The group is composed of Francophone and Anglophone artists singing together; the words are carefully, maybe even over-pronounced so that we fully understand them, even though there are a number of different accents involved. The effect of American language constructs that went viral in one way or another, being turned into a kind of slo-mo, fastidious chant, is humorous and then revealing in the same way as other close-ups of pop phenomena.

On one hand, the greater significance of the content is in each case distilled down to it’s bottom line essence by virtue of being re-presented in this re-focused context; on the other the vapid superficiality of some of what goes viral is also laid bare. Not least here, the way language is used to express emotion becomes almost comic when elevated to song, then repeated in chorus structure.

In a sense, the emphasis on language, removed from its context and sung, can be considered analogous to the use of text in visual forms: Lawrence Weiner and Jean Michel Basquiat used words and phrases to add dimension and to express the back and forth of ambiguity and meaning that language is capable of; particularly when extracted from it’s original context.

In this case Presence, the primal, electro-magnetic even of Performance, and spoken word, replace text (and language) used in 2 and 3 dimensional traditional forms, but abstracted in a parallel way: Basquiat’s use of pop phrases clipped from common usage come more to mind here than, for example, Lawrence Weiner’s more heady single word byte constructions from a content angle are comparable in the way these demand that we focus on the actual non-contextural meaning. The polished  presentation is closer to Bruce Nauman. whose blinking neon phrases and video of a clown on a toilet agonizingly moaning out the letters of the alphabet come quickly to mind.

L’Encyclopedie has here blended 2 disparate cultural practices; the informal and formal, the structured and unstructured, in a way that reveals aspects of both; they’ve mined language in ways parallel to other contemporary forms; the focus on language is a striking reminder of the  complexity  power of word, and not least when the ever expanding theoretical language around art continues to become central to the actual content of art[.]

Link here to a video of L’Encyclopedie de la Parole.

This post was contributed by David Rohn.

Here follows an interview with MoCA North Miami Associate Curator Ruba Katrib and the University of Wynwood and O Miami Founder and Director P. Scott Cunningham on the subject of Reality Conference 2011, a conference about reality television organized by Cunningham and Katrib and presented by the University of Wynwood, a 501c3 non-profit dedicated to advancing contemporary literature in Miami. The responses to the questions below were generated jointly by Cunningham and Katrib.

How do you qualify/define Reality TV?

In its infancy, reality TV was just TV that didn’t use actors. In other words, it didn’t pay the participants at a market rate. (Though a handful of people did make some real money off of game shows.) What’s happened since the debut of The Real World is that reality TV became a genre with conventions that are as defined as those in a Western, and the line between actor and “real person” has been continually eroded. I think in the next ten years we’ll see that line eroded even further, at least in terms of the market. With the advent of social media, many, many “average” people have made themselves into marketable personalities in the manner of 1930s actors.

The release on Reality Conference 2011 seems deliberately open ended. Does Reality Conference 2011 seek to qualify/define Reality TV through attendee participation?

No. It’s open-ended because this is the first time we’re doing something like this. We also realize that everyone has their own unique relationship to reality TV, so we hope to present a range of interests and investments in the genre during the conference without any qualifying intention.

Considering that those in attendance at the conference will have been exposed to reality TV shows, many of which begin “America’s…” can we expect a jaundice appreciation for the genre of reality TV? And if so, is this important? And if so, are you taking steps to broaden the vista?

Some people may dismiss reality TV as an inadequate subject matter, but if so, why attend? Unless it’s to come and argue, which is great.  But simply saying, “reality TV” is dumb, is a conversation-ender. Lots of very, very intelligent people are involved in the creation of these shows. If Barthes can find something interesting in fake wrestling, we can find plenty of material in reality TV. We’re really not interested in broadening anyone’s vista. That’s his/her problem.

In terms of format, for the sake of discussion, do you feel it is important to subjugate this expanding genre by differentiating and subsequently pigeon holing its many incantations into ‘types’ such as fly on the wall programming (focused on industry – restaurants, fishing fleets airlines hotels etc), skill based, often individual starred shows (such as Man Vs Wild and various instructional/dramatic home improvement shows) and contest based shows (like Big Brother, American Idol/Top Model, Art Star, Survivor and The Batchelor)?

That could be very useful, yes, but we also wouldn’t want to reduce comparisons between shows just because of an arbitrary distinction. In general, as organizers, we’re not interested in classifying anything. For most part, the presenters generate the specific topics; we are more interested in what specific angle fascinates them and this is an opportunity to share. We just want to open up the discussion.

The concept of reality TV is by no means new and subjects covered by reality TV include many industries, even within the art world such programming has seen multiple epochs. What makes now a pertinent time to discuss reality TV?

TV has become the dominant American art form, supplanting film, which long ago supplanted the novel. The high art of TV (The Wire, Six Feet Under, Mad Men, etc.) is well-discussed but the low art of reality TV has not received as much critical attention, which is a shame because it says much more about us than any of the high art shows. Also, reality TV is increasingly pervasive as a genre. There was a point when maybe it seemed it would wear it self out, but we all know with the increasing success of many shows and the endless spin-offs, the novelty is gone and reality TV is here to stay.

Considering that “Reality television frequently portrays a modified and highly influenced form of reality, at times utilizing sensationalism to attract audience viewers and increase advertising revenue profits.” (Wikipedia) will it be a priority to of Reality Conference 2011 to illuminate the inherent irony of reality TV?

Again, as organizers, we don’t have any priorities, other than getting smart people involved and having a good time with it. We think the irony of reality TV is obvious to everyone involved.  Irony in general is so pervasive at this point we’re not even sure we can call it irony, and certainly not in any classical sense.  Again, the novelty of reality TV has really worn off, and increasingly many people are “coming out of the closet,” admitting that they are avid watchers of particular shows, which do have a cultural and social impact. The Reality Conference is an occasion to publicly share what most interests us about this captivating genre that we spend so much time pretending to despise, even while we rush home to catch the latest episode of the Kardashians[.]

Excerpt from Nov 21st Release:

REALITY CONFERENCE 2011, December 10, 2011 1 p.m. – 5 p.m. Lester’s Bar 2519 NW 2nd Ave. Miami, FL 33127 (map)

The Problem
Why is “reality television” so awesome? Discuss.

How Do I Attend?
Attendance at REALITY CONFERENCE is free but space is limited. Register here.

Call for Abstracts
If you’re interested in participating, please send a brief description, no more than 300 words, outlining a presentation, paper, panel, or performance on any topic related to “reality TV.” Abstracts are due on November 23rd. The presentations will be no longer than 15 minutes long with 5 minutes of questions from the audience. Prior experience in academia is not required. Please put “Reality Conference” in the subject heading and send abstracts and inquires to: scott@universityofwynwood.org. Submitters will be notified by Monday, November 28th.

This post was contributed by Thomas Hollingworth.

Installation view, main floor, photo by Stephan Goettlicher.

Re-Framing the Feminine: Contemporary Photography by Women from the Collection of Francie Bishop Good + David Horvitz, the current exhibition on view at Girls’ Club, an alternative exhibition space in downtown Fort Lauderdale, explores the varying narratives and complex relationships between female photographers and their subjects. Curated by Dina Mitrani, whose Wynwood gallery specializes in contemporary photography. Mitrani’s background lends one of the strengths of the exhibition that demonstrates a careful consideration of the medium and it’s variances in deployment and development from the 1950s to the present.

Tina Barney, The Grandaughter, 2004, chromogenic print.

The exhibition seeks to explore a uniquely feminine approach to photography – that is capturing subjects both figural and psychological that reflect a woman’s view of the world and what matters most to us as women.  A view that is as subjective as it is generalized in the selection of the works in Re-Framing the Feminine. While feminism as a topic is not new nor cutting-edge in discussions in modern and contemporary art, what is intriguing about this small survey is the polemical underlying psychology interplay of feminine notions of narcissism and vanity. Even in the face of extreme poverty as in Maria Michelogianni’s  Barbie in Athens where even in the direst of states, a little girl still holds a Barbie up as an emblem; or the exuberant wealth of Tina Barney’s New York socialite world, the primal need to explore and represent women as both strong and now sexual is shuffling its way into debates on contemporary feminism. Whether subconsciously hinted at or boldly stated, these issues are at the core of neo-feminist discussions like Ariel Levy’s Female Chauvinist Pigs, a controversial defense of a kind of reverse misogyny that seems to be taking hold of contemporary society and pop culture.

Isn’t Cindy Sherman exploiting the sexual nature of female archetypes in her Film Stills to the benefit of her artistic innovation? What of Kristine Potter whose The Gray Line series feminizes trainees at West Point Academy? It points to a trend of women artists using technology along with conceptions of beauty, vanity and hyper-self awareness to achieve a certain level of control over their subjects. In the case of Sherman, it can be viewed as an act of aggression against the preset notions of femininity and art, while in Potter it can be understood as a means of injecting a bit of feminine vulnerability to a world of typically staunch masculine stoicism. For Untitled #7, she masks the face of a male soldier with the floral pattern of a military camo net.

Gismo – Aye!, 2006, C-print.

One of my favorite works was Miami collaborative GisMO’s Aye!, primarily because it resonated with my own Miami upbringing. The image of an aging “chonga” applying mascara to the point of discomfort was a particularly poignant reflection of the feminine preoccupation with outward appearances. A reflection that is mirrored by Delia Brown’s Some of My Clothes, a series of 98 4×6 photographs that show the artist blankly modeling the contents of her closet.

Obsession with appearance and the self is not limited to adult womanhood. Many of the works in the exhibition explore of the controversial subject of the sexual disposition of young girls. Sally Mann’s photography has widely been mined for it’s ambiguous approach to her child subjects (her own children).  Virginia at 3 is a particularly complex example of Mann’s work that straddles the realms of sexuality and innocence, two concepts that are commonly associated within negative terms. The young Virginia leans against a bed where her sibling lies resting, her little hand on her hip and the other on her breast, suggests an early determination of the power of her femininity and her body. Through the lens of neo-feminist discourse, this kind of imagery empowers her young subject with the potential knowledge of her own future sexual prowess. It isn’t a bad thing, but the idea of children exploring their sexual identity, as innocently and naturally as it is, is not a topic that makes people comfortable.

Sally Mann - Virginia at 3, 1998, gelatin silver print.

In other works, youthful sexual exploration isn’t as benign. Colby Katz, whose work explores the raw artificiality of children’s beauty pageants is represented in the exhibition by Rayne-Lin, Little Miss Firecracker, LA. The photograph shows the tiny figure of a somber little girl dwarfed by the trophy she clutches and enormous crown on her head. Emotionally void, the little girl’s face falls downward, the opposite of the self-assured Virgina in Mann’s portrait.

Photography is the most deceptive medium in that it suggests realty in the way no other art form does. This deception is what good photographers have capitalized on for years to manipulate stories and raise issues through their work. For women, it has been an enormously popular outlet exploring notions of gender and identity. In a way, Re-Framing the Feminine suggests that female photographers seem to turn the camera on themselves even when they are not. Even the psychological spaces favored by artists like Ania Moussawel and Candida Höfer, reflect the stereotypical concepts of fragility, delicacy and beauty associated with femininity.

Installation view, mezzanine, photo by Stephan Goettlicher.

At its inception, photography was a product of male relationships with machinery. ‘The man and the machine’: a symbolical pairing long associated in Western societies with progress, power, and linked to colossally masculine concepts like Fordism. Yet, at some point, perhaps around the chronological starting point of this exhibition, female photographers began to rise to prominence. With leading figures like Diane Arbus, Sherman and Nan Goldin (who are all represented in the exhibition), photography seems to be  the medium in which women have managed to gain the boldest presence. It appears that the female relationship to the camera – the woman and the machine – deserves a little historical revision and scholarly attention in light of the shifting voices of feminism. Re-Framing the Feminine is a concise survey of such a dialogue that deserves further exploration.  It’s exemplary of the power of a simple survey exhibition to raise questions rather than offer watered down answers to monumental questions. However, instead of “re-framing,” it would be nice to see forthcoming explorations go beyond the frame, and back to the machine and how women command it both in front of and behind the lens[.]

Re-Framing the Feminine is currently on view through September 30, 2012 at The Girl’s Club. A catalogue for the exhibition is slated for release in the spring with an essay written by the prolific photography historian and critic, Vicki Goldberg. Re-Framing the Feminine will also the thematic backdrop for the upcoming installment of Artists in Action!,  a series of behind-the-scenes lectures and demonstrations by artists at the Girls’ Club.

This post was contributed by Melissa Diaz.