I never gave much thought to Mark Rothko or his large colored soaked canvases but with the play Red in town and a planned tripped to Houston where the Rothko Chapel is located I would get my fair share of the man.

Red is about Rothko and a fictitious studio assistant during a two year period when the painter was commissioned to create several large paintings for the Four Seasons Restaurant in NYC. The play was fantastic—full of energy. I tend to forget that painting can transcend time and place. Both the act of painting and being a spectator of the work can be a very spiritually moving event. Red reminded me that painting is very human.

It was then off to Houston and the Rothko Chapel. I didn’t know what to expect except some Rothko paintings and some sort of chapel. The magic was in the conflation. The first thing that struck me was the quietness of the chapel. The stillness was beautiful. I don’t know if I ever equated quietness and beauty before but I do now. And of course there were the paintings. The paintings hovered on the walls. As time passed I felt I was becoming one with the paintings…with the stillness. The whole space evoked inspiration.

Both of these experiences are making me give more thought to Mark Rothko.

A review of Red from Time Out Chicago is here.
www.rothkochapel.org

I came to the auditorium at 112 S. Michigan with high hopes for an engaged debate on art criticism in Chicago and expected a lively discussion about the recent book The Essential New Art Examiner – a republication of seminal essays from the Chicago-based magazine which began in 1974 and ended in 2002. I had been a writer for the New Art Examiner in the late 90s until its demise and was rather itching for a conversation. But this was not to be. There were glints of subjects that could have sparked rich topics of conversation – Jim Yood the moderator had started out by saying the NAE had “challenged authority and power” – but for the most part the panel proved that art criticism in Chicago does nothing of the sort today, and worse still would simply have no idea of what this meant. As far as the conversation went the pot never got to simmering let alone boiling.

For me this is a rather sad state of affairs. I had to wonder how the “elephant” in the room – major issues surrounding art world power, control and impenetrable art theory – remained invisible to most of the seven panelists. What seemed more visible were the “emperor’s new clothes” – art writing that responded to the kind of and inbred art world thinking that pours out of art schools like SAIC. This is the situation that has displaced critical consciousness and inquiry. Perhaps I was wrong to be surprised considering the style of the media and blog-based writing reflected by most of panelists– Jason Foumberg of New City, Abraham Ritchie and Steve Ruiz of Artslant.com and Lori Waxman of the Chicago Tribune.

In saying so I do not wish to overlook the considerable efforts of two of the panelists – Kathryn Born and Terri Griffith- who do not profess art world training but whose indispensable efforts brought the recent Essential New Art Examiner into existence. Students in art departments all over the country retained their old copies of the NAE because they got dynamic art discussions and answers which they could not find on the pages of Artforum or Art in America. We live in a time of commercial and institutional – dare I say corporate – influence which makes independent structures with alternative points of view, like the NAE had once offered, rare and valuable particularly today. Creating the new book is an important step in sustaining this value. One of the panelists, the former NAE editor Ann Wiens, was thorough in discussing the particular 1980s art world background she came from. She was interested in bringing in “lots of peoples points of views” to the NAE and mentioned the time she spent working with the New York art critic Donald Kuspit. Her answers to questions were well grounded and brought a sense of Chicago art history that was useful, stressing the magazine’s importance to the city as the only source “chronicling the work being made at the time “and “interested people who mattered in our community.”

Aside from this most of the discussion was lost in space. I could not grasp the basis out of which most of the panelists interpreted art, and perhaps this is because they write for media formats and publications that don’t demand it. There was the sense that the younger writers are looking for answers but do not know where to find them. In an art world lacking critical consciousness and suffering from amnesia about its history it’s easy for writers to cling to self-reference and the centralizing mechanisms of the mass media. This makes the art world boring and complacent. Plenty of descriptive art writing abounds, but there is no stabilizing force which allows coherent meanings or interpretations to emerge. I could not discern how these writers linked art with human experience or life outside of the artist’s self-proclaimed intentions. Most of the writers on the panel had started their careers after the NAE had disappeared, which goes some way in explaining the loss of a “center” for the discussion of art in Chicago. The NAE was a “town square” to use Ann Wiens’ metaphor, where artists could meet and discuss – it was a focal point for debate. Jim Yood as moderator was talkative and humorous, but his questions offered no real challenges or issues of controversy. Conversation was mostly anecdotal and nostalgic, ever cycling around details of the New Art Examiner’s past without hitting any target of deeper interest or sparking debate. Finally things came to life during the question and answer session by a few older members of the audience. One question brought up discussion of the time when Kathryn Hixson, the last editor of the New Art Examiner, had mismanaged the magazine to the point of bankruptcy and how this continues to remain a sore spot for many who knew how important the magazine was to Chicago’s ever-fragile art infrastructure. The NAE was originally created as a bulwark against censorship “without fear or favor.” In its last days it looked more like an imitation of Artforum.

I was alarmed by the incuriousness of the panel as well as the SAIC students in the audience. The narcissistic attitudes of artists have been deeply inbred by countless art programs over the past 30 years. This has lead, for the most part, to a fairly uncritical acceptance of what is being taught. Donald Kuspit once said we have gone beyond self-censorship to self-ignorance, which makes for quite an Orwellian situation. The framework of power over what is considered art – disseminated from art school to gallery to museum – is effective because it is invisible. For all of the contemporary art world’s claim to being “liberal” and “progressive” it is deeply conservative at heart, and the panel discussion was point in case. Yes the doors to the auditorium were open, but in a sense the public was not really invited. We live in an art world – I would call it a “post-art” world – where meaningful human content and experience is ignored and where the purveyors of culture don’t seem to know the difference and couldn’t care less. That is the real crisis.

Diane Thodos is an artist and art critic who lives in Evanston, IL. She has written for The New Art Examiner Art on Paper, and Dialogue magazine among others. She currently writes for Artcritical.com and Neotericart.com and has written numerous artist catalogue essays. She is a 2002 recipiant of a Pollock Krasner Foundation Grant and had a 2009 retrospective at the National Hellenic Museum in Chicago in 2009. She is represented by The Kouros Gallery in New York City where she exhibited in 2011. The Thomas Masters Gallery in Chicago, the Alex Rivault Gallery in Paris, and the Traeger/Pinto Gallery in Mexico City also represent her.

As a former writer for the New Art Examiner I was excited to read Derek Guthrie’s Oct. 11 interview. The School of the Art Institute of Chicago is planning a seminar around the recent publication of The Essential New Art Examiner, and Derek’s unwavering challenge to the set the historical record about the NAE straight is long overdue.

To fill in a bit on recent history – when the NEA came to its sorry demise in 2002 it had not only been financially mishandled but dispossessed of it’s true critical verve and diversity of purpose. Under the editorship Kathryn Hixson it had fallen on both monetary mismanagement and a program of ideological relativism in its choice of what to review and how to write about it. It no longer represented a plurality of critical voices and art exhibits but sought to imitate standard postmodern strategies and jargon – the pabulum that other fat rich commercial art glossies had been publishing for decades. Kathryn and the board had broken both the NAE’s finances and spirit, jettisoning what had made the it the most unique forum for art world debate on a national scale. It nurtured the fledgling voices of beginning art writers who would never have had a chance to publish otherwise. Even back in 1989 when I worked for an art library in New York the NAE was always the art first periodical picked off the shelf and always the first to get ear worn with use, more so than Art in America and Artforum. Everybody knew the NAE was an important alternative, even in the powerful art center of New York City.

This is why I cannot overstress the importance of having meaningful discussion on the NAE’s actual history regarding its founders Derek Guthrie and the late Jane Addams Allen for the upcoming SAIC seminar. First it is a real shame, exposing a kind of censorship in fact, that SAIC did not invite to sponsor the attendance of the remaining original founder Derek Guthrie to come and speak. Second it is imperative that the late Jane Addams Allen be memorialized at this event for her tremendous effort and foresight in establishing the NAE as such an outstanding exception among art periodicals. The NAE was Jane’s continuation of the progressive humanist tradition begun by her great Aunt Jane Addams by establishing it as a periodical for diverse opinions and voices against the power of censorship. Its original masthead read “The Independent Voice of the Visual Arts.” It did not escape my notice that this was later changed to the innocuously banal “Voice of the Midwest” under Kathryn Hixson’s unfortunate editorship.

I cannot agree more with Guthrie when he states that we live in a culture where independent spirit, meaningful discussion, and genuine intellectual debate have been trumped by tribal politics and institutional control. Such powers often disguise themselves in a cloak of seeming diversity, when they are quite the opposite – the wolf of censorship hiding in the sheepskin of tolerance and pluralism.

In 1973 when NAE was founded it was a time of social and political upheaval which we are experiencing again, right now, all over the world. Movements of protest are rejecting social, political, and economic standards that have turned out to be a lies. Masses of people are railing against manipulative propagandas disseminated by power élites. The NAE was born in such circumstances and the time has come again to seriously question who gets to have control. In this upcoming seminar will the SAIC prove to be a handmaiden to political intrigues and ideological revisionism as a way of “honoring” the uncensored and intellectual diversity and of The Essential New Art Examiner? Don’t forget it was the NAE who had a big hand in putting Chicago on the national, even international, art map in the first place. By not sponsoring Derek Guthrie to speak will its students and attendees be subject to censorship – fed a limited menu of issues for debate, controlling what can and cannot be discussed? Will the seminar point to the weakness of this fear – that those who have power cannot allow the presence of challenge or meaningful dialectical discussion? Or will they take up the gauntlet and invite him to inject some critical vitality into our over sanitized art discourse? We shall see…..

Diane Thodos is an artist and art critic who lives in Evanston, IL. She is a 2002 recipiant of a Pollock Krasner Foundation Grant and recently exhibited at the Kouros Gallery in New York City in 2010. She is represented by the Alex Rivault Gallery in Paris, the Traeger/Pinto Gallery in Mexico City, and the Thomas Masters Gallery in Chicago.

MDW Fair which had its debut earlier this April ran again this past weekend with the intent of being a bi-yearly event. This time around the Fair—once again on three floors of the GeoLofts building on Chicago’s South side—offered the same high energy and most of the quality venues that were present the first time out. There were also some exciting new exhibitors.

The first floor had the Hand in Glove Conference. As their website states: a new semiannual conference for independent visual arts facilitators working at the crossroads of creative administration and studio practice. This conference was open to people engaged in the pragmatic realities and imaginative possibilities of organizing exhibitions, re-granting programs, publications, residencies, public programs, platforms for projects, and a variety of other programming that challenges traditional formats for the production and reception of art at the grass-roots level.

The second and third floors held the small not-for-profits, artist-run spaces, independent galleries, collectives, curators and publishers from around the country. Strong showings included Erik DeBat at 2612 Space, Paul Nudd at Western Exhibitions, Brian Kapernekas at 65Grand, Tom Torluemke at Linda Warren, Kristina Paabus and Raul Mendez at Hinge Gallery and bookmaking at North Branch Projects.

Let’s hope that MDW Fair will continue and become a driving force in the Chicago art scene.

There are a few art sites on my regular reading list. The following is a list of those that I visit most often (besides NeotericArt).

Mark Kostabi’s column on Art net.
Though, he hasn’t added anything here since 2005, he gives a lot of advice and insight into the art world.

The Mark Kostabi show
OK, I risk being perceived as a Mark Kostabi fanboy, but this is entertaining.

The Kalm Report
OK, I don’t read this, but James Kalm covers the New York art scene like no one else. Watching his reports is almost like being there.

James Kalm Rough Cuts
Like the above, but shorter and not as polished.

No. 9 An Artist’s Journey
Tony Fitzpatrick’s writing sometimes outshines his artwork.

Edward_ Winkleman
Interesting insight into the art world by an Art Dealer

Joanne Mattera Art Blog
…especially the Marketing Mondays posts

Facebook
Of course, I like to keep up with what my colleagues, friends, etc. are doing.

Art Letter
Paul Klein’s boosterism of Chicago art and artists is inspiring.

There are others that I visit on a less-regular basis for various reasons and the list fluctuates throughout the year, but this is the core of the online art world that I am perusing at the moment.

What are your favorites?

Once again the Merchandise Mart became Artropolis for the last weekend in April — the collection of Chicago’s annual major art fairs. Although smaller than previous years, they were well-attended and the energy level was high. Unless you were looking for a lot of blue chip work, there was something for almost everyone. In addition to art, there were panel discussions, other programs, New Insights (up-and-coming MFA grads) and more, making the fair a trade show of sorts, an area where the Mart excels.

For the first time, NEXT shared the floor with ArtChicago. It also seemed to be a little more tame. There were no antique Firebirds crashing into each other, heavily armed ice cream trucks or Jello wrestling. It did have thumping music and free-flowing Grolsch during the opening party, though.

Throughout its histories, the Chicago fairs have ebbed and flowed. I hope they get back to full strength in the future, helping Chicago retain its status as a player in the art world.

Linda Warren | Chicago

Boma Modern | Santa Fe

Martin du Louvre | Paris

Forum Gallery | New York

Carl Hammer | Chicago

Catto Gallery | London

Woolff Gallery | London

Tony Folliard Gallery | Milwaukee

Thomas Masters | Chicago

Walter Wickisier Gallery | New York

Diana Lowenstein Fine Art | Miami

Villa del Arte Galleries | Barcelona

101 Exhibit | Miami

Jerald Melberg Gallery | Charlette

Verve Gallery | Fort Lauderdale

Russell Bowman Art Advisory | Chicago

Contessa Gallery | Cleveland

Eight Modern | Santa Fe

Jill George Gallery | London

Alpha Gallery | Boston

Rize Art Gallery | Amsterdam, Naarden

George Billis | New York, Los Angeles

Western Exhibitions | Chicago

Balloon | Chicago

Molesworth Gallery | Dublin

Mixed Greens | New York

New Insight

New Insight

Christina Ray | New York

NEXT Projects

NEXT Projects

The MDW Fair put forth a gallant effort this past weekend—full of energy, fun and more energy. The Fair was spread out over three floors of the GeoLofts building on Chicago’s South side. Between more established galleries were interspersed independent galleries and artist collectives plus a wall of tables full of art-related publishers—print and online. The first floor offered a “Sculpture Garden” and panel discussions concerning art making, selling and the overall business of art were also held on the third floor. There was a steady flow of people mingling about and enjoying the art and festivities.

The MDW Fair was a great success. The art world needs these types of fairs and let’s hope this one comes back stronger next year.

1. Art should be one’s main pursuit. If that’s the case, everything else will be in support of art making. You don’t want your art taking on a secondary role. This includes lifestyle activities, second careers, day jobs and hobbies. One should even consider the effects of raising a family on an art career—at least the career should be off and running first. Too often, since the art career is very slow in developing, an artist pushes it to the back burner and lets more immediate needs take precedence.

2. Find people who have a vested interest in your success. It is almost impossible to grow a career without third-party validation. These people will help an artist as the artist helps himself/herself. One can’t do this alone.

3. Work on numbers 1 and 2 above without worrying about money. Money will follow as one moves forward on step 2.

If these three things are distasteful to an artist or in any way cause conflict to how an artist is living, then that artist is not a professional. He/she is an amateur and there is nothing wrong with being an amateur. It does not mean being a novice. With that said, living a well rounded life where art making is not a major activity is still honorable and can be rewarding…but there definitely is a difference between an amateur and a professional.

It was a bold statement when the Chicago art scene needed one. After a downturn in the economy and The Fire, Chicago’s art scene seemed to have lost the luster it had in the 1980s. It was said during the high point of that decade that the number of galleries in SuHu was only second to that in Manhattan.

However, by the early ’90s the Chicago art scene was a shadow of its former self. Some notable temporary art shows, put on by artists like the Cold House group, proved there was still an artistic spirit in Chicago that was still hungry, even if the art world couldn’t sustain it. World Tattoo was the embodiment of that spirit. Since the nomad galleries were fleeting, the work may not have been shown in the best light. World Tattoo was different. It was a strong, solid permanent exhibition space that took a stand on the corner of 13th and Wabash. Arms folded and with the sneer of a bouncer at a biker bar, it said “Fuck you!” to those that would write off the Chicago art scene. “There is good work being made here and you need to take a look!”

It eventually closed down and the space was taken over briefly by another exhibition space, Izzo’s Artery, before it was inevitably swallowed up by the condo revolution, as the South Loop became a place to eat and sleep. Fitzpatrick moved on to focus on his work, yet continued his leadership in the Chicago art scene. This time, though in a more mentor-like role, with his Firecat Press and by example.

Fast forward 17 years and the Chicago art scene again finds itself in need of a kick in the ass and Fitzpatrick is once again happy to oblige. Last night I saw the opening at Firecat Projects, a new space dedicated to showing new work in a more dignified manner than we’ve seen in recent months. Run by Tony and his business partner, Stan Klein, it occupies his former studio, as the artist now works at home. The inaugural show is the first solo show of his work here in two years. To some this may seem kind of self-serving, but he can do this because it’s his, damn it (and he’s the Fuckin’ Mayor)! And what better way to stir shit up? The show kicks ass.

Firecat Projects steps in at just the right time. The Chicago art scene has been sort of languishing since the heady blogosphere days of the mid-oughts. It is a time when stupid little contests (Loop Open, I’m looking your way) and filling abandoned store fronts with art are supposed to get us excited about the Chicago art scene again—however, these efforts fail to stir the hearts of anyone. Firecat Projects proves that there is still a bold spirit in Chicago that will not rest.

With my last visit to the Smithsonian American Art Museum I came across a section of the museum that I was not familiar with: The Luce Foundation Center. Open since 2006, the Luce Foundation is the first visible art storage and study center in Washington, D.C. This innovative public space provides three floors of more than 3,300 works from the permanent collection in 64 secure glass cases. You will find paintings, sculptures, miniatures, craft objects, and folk art.

It’s a strange experience seeing these beautiful paintings hung one on the top of the other in rows and rows of these glass cases. At first it seemed like I was looking at someone’s knickknacks in a curio cabinet, albeit very expensive knickknacks. After my initial reaction, it was wonderful seeing all this work instead of it being locked away in some basement like most museums. It would be a step in the right direction if other art museums adopted this open storage paradigm.

More information on the Luce Foundation here.

First floor

View from the first floor

George Bellows – “Mr. and Mrs. Phillip Wase”

Row after row…

Carl W. Peters – “Little Village”

Second floor staircase

Edward Hopper – “People in the Sun”