I'm from New York, so I can't say I was entirely ready for the level of racial segregation I found here in Chicago upon moving here some ten years ago. Don't get me wrong, it's not like I hadn't been here before. I've had family here for twenty-one years, did a Public Art commission years ago (when Hamza Walker was still running that program), and have shown with Rhona Hoffman Gallery for fifteen years. My traveling exhibition organized by the Walker Art Center landed at the Chicago Cultural Center in 1996, and I have done private commissions for a wide range of Chicago patrons. Long before I ever moved here with my former wife and son we had family memberships in almost all of the museums here in Chicago. In addition to watching my son's homemade parachuting contraptions fall from the tower inside of the Chicago Children's Museum numerous times, we must have seen those dolphins flip out of the big pool at the Shedd Aquarium more times than I can remember. So yes, I know a few things about Chicago. But like they say, visiting a place is very different from living in that same place.The difference between New York's social cultural stew and Chicago's segregated social circles and mindset still takes some getting used to. Try as I may, I can't recall a museum or gallery opening, after party or dinner in New York in all the years I lived there where I was the only black face in the room. At the very least there were (in addition to whites) Latinos, Asians, and assorted of folks of indeterminate race on the scene...wherever the scene was. I know some long time denizens of Harlem are skittish about the changes long afoot there, but at a recent opening at the Studio Museum in Harlem, I'm pretty sure the racial demographic in attendance was equally skewed among all of the above ethnic groups. I doubt that I could see the same heterogeneous group assembled at Chicago's DuSable Museum for an opening, though I confess to not being a regular habitué of that institution. And at any number of Chicago galleries on opening night the crowd is so monotonously white you would think you were at the Wonder Bread factory...unless you happen to step foot in G.R. N'namdi's gallery, where you will find a somewhat more integrated scene.
It's been my experience that the cultural habits among blacks and whites are decidedly different. And to be sure, I'm not talking about all blacks or all whites, but those who do make the decision to frequent museums, galleries, and other cultural institutions. From my experience (and this is purely anecdotal, but after much long and serious consideration) the cultural experience for some blacks is largely one that I would liken metaphorically to a "mirroring experience" in which one engages with the art as a way on affirming (or perhaps confirming) ones sense of self, ones aspirations, or ones personal memories. Certainly visual art that clearly mirrors (or illustrates) some aspect of "the black experience" seems to resonate most successfully with a certain audience. Unfortunately this has often meant endless versions of various vernacular scenes: fan waving, big hatted black church ladies, wise doting grandmothers combing/braiding little black girls hair, black kids splashing about in open fire hydrants in the summertime, brightly colored paintings of musicians endlessly blowing loopy "expressively" rendered saxophones, and on and on. Of course these are all experiences which in and off themselves (in real life) are meaningful, and it is far from my intention to denigrate the black church or that close generational bond that makes families an important refuge. And I love black music. Hey, I'm a drummer myself. No, not at all. Rather I am questioning a way of making art that seems akin to passing through the world with a mirror held inches from ones face, and subsequently thinking that everything in the world looks just like you, and that you look the same even as things shift and change around you. Walking about in such a state, you're likely to miss the fact that removing the mirror can also change the way you look (and think).
I just happen not to think that the most interesting role art can fulfill is to merely re-present the things we already know from our everyday lives. Rather I hope to be transformed through my engagement with art; to find out something about myself I didn't know, or to leave feeling not merely confirmed, but challenged. What seems missing in much art by black artists of a certain illustrative ethnic stripe is an engagement with and acknowledgment of that big world out there that doesn't look like you but whose various conceptual and even formal devices might be useful to you. Also missing is a certain interest or insight into that vast history of discourse that determines what marks and utterances history will deem significant. I had the misfortune to find myself sitting on a jury for a local "black art" exhibit awhile back in which all of these shortcomings were on vivid display, from photographs of sunsets and flowers to the exalted black church ladies. I know some will say that history is no more than "HIS- story", but as far as I know there is no parallel universe, ie. the universes of "us vs. them" to escape to when it comes to making a significant mark in history through ones work. It calls for ambition, skill, and an awareness and grasp of the broad context in which one is working. If your work has to exist in a separate universe apart from that larger discourse in order to be legitimated or considered meaningful, then that is a problem, since powerful ideas and utterance, in whatever form, tend to hold up quite well to scrutiny from any and all comers.
You'll excuse me if I seem to digress, but this issue of race and art has as many sides as the day is long as they say. Into this stewing cauldron of race in its varied aesthetic and social dimensions comes two show that opened recently in Chicago that attempt to engage the issue of race and art practice: "Black Is, Black Ain't" currently at the Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago and "Disinhibition: Black Art, Blue Humor" at the Hyde Park Art Center. I am not going to attempt an in depth critical examination of these shows here. Rather I offer an opening salvo in what should become an ongoing conversation. Given the complicated relationship that the University of Chicago has long had with the (black) South Side community surrounding it, the mounting of an exhibition on its grounds--at an influential art institution-- that centers on blackness as a literal and conceptual trope would seem to be a ripe opportunity for a rich dialogue and explication on race as social and cultural phenomena. That the exhibition was curated by the Renaissance Society's (black) Education Director and Associate Curator Hamza Walker could only give the occasion even greater urgency and anticipation.
In light of the possibilities such an exhibition would seem to invoke, it seems instead to be a missed opportunity, one which favors a kind of curatorial ambiguity over clear discursive risk taking. Dealing with race in such a context can be daunting and put one to the test as a black curator in a mainstream institution, potentially producing a bad case of curatorial nerves. Indeed my good friend Hamza seemed somewhat off his erudite game at the conversation with Menil Collection curator Franklin Sirmans held a couple of weeks ago. While Sirmans seemed to have come ready to dig into the work and the signifying and discursive aspects of the exhibition, Walker seemed more given to whimsical, pondering introspection...which might be fine in a private context or on the printed page. But it certainly didn't serve this situation or Walker (or the audience) well. Artist Kerry James Marshall was in the audience, and I am looking forward to the panel discussion with him, U of C's Darby English, Columbia College's Greg Foster-Rice, and SAIC's Kym Pinder. It'll be a much more substantial conversation I'm sure. Kerry didn't get to say anything from the audience at the Walker/Sirmans conversation, but there will be no stopping him on June 1st when he will be front and center at this panel discussion assembled in conjunction with the exhibition. The event is at 2:00, Sunday, June 1st at U of C's Kent Hall. (Kerry's dialogue with Bruce Mau at the Art Institute a few weeks back was also classic, incisive Marshall: forceful insight in the midst of hip institutional piety.)
Timed to create a dialogue with the "Black Is..." exhibition, "Disinhibition: Black Art and Blue Humor" at the Hyde Park Art Center attempts to tackle the way in which humor is used subversively in works addressing the black subject. William PopeL, who makes an appearance in "Black Is..." is here as well, making a more literal link between the two exhibitions. This show, too, seems to be a conspicuously missed opportunity. Organized by Blake Bradford, HPAC's Education Director, the show purports to look at, "the us of humor as a critical method to forthrightly address societal taboos, prejudices, and sterotypes." Would that the execution matched the potentially engaging set of ideas behind the show. There is an interesting program of films that do take an incisive and entertaining look at the trope of humor in black cinema currently running at HPAC. Go to their website for the schedule. (www.hydeparkart.org) (Full disclosure: I am on the board of the Hyde Park Center, and was recently selected to chair its Exhibition Committee. I had no input in the show at hand.)
Both of these shows make apparent the need for continuing discourse on race, and its latest manifestation in our socioaesthetic midst here in Chicago. I also want to mention briefly two artists who I had a first look at during Art Chicago and the Next Art Fair. It was a real pleasure meeting and seeing the work of Fahamu Pecou and Dawolu Jabari Anderson, since I'd seen it previously only in reproduction. Both seemed to be making work that--with varying results and varying skill--located itself at the intersection of race, culture, and visual discourse. Anderson is part of the Otabenga Jones artists collective in Houston. Artist Torkwase Dyson was kind and astute enough to introduce me to both Pecou and Anderson. Thank you Torkwase, and thank you reader for taking the time.
Top: Carl Pope, "The Bad Air Smelled of Roses" (detail)
26 comments:
Yowsa, yes sir!
I have tried to describe my disdain for the repeated stereotypical images of black life, and the poor execution of that genre: the beauty shops, the cotton picking pictures, and oh God! the saxophone players... I did not have the words. You found them. Well said. Just let me add that these works are produced, not only through ignorance, but also because people buy them!
Looking for and finding your visual voice is a lifetime endeavor, in my opinion.
I also agree with you about Chicago. I am a transplanted Philadelphia and it was no idyllic race-blind environment despite the "Brotherly Love" hype but it was NOTHING like Chicago! I teach on the South Side and I am appalled that folks don't get taken downtown to the Art Institute and the MCA while students in school...too long a story to attack right now.
I love faces and figures. I admire Charles White, Elizabeth Catlett, Kathe Kollwitz, Preston Jackson's paintings and sculptures and my goal is to present images of ordinary black people to not so much reflect what I know, but to present what I have learned and realize that most others don't know. When I speak about the DuBois photographs that I base my "Out of the Box" series on, paintings of middle class blacks that W.E.B. DuBois felt compelled to display during the 1900 Paris Exposition to try to dispel racism and the notion that there was a "negro type" and that negroes were inherently mentally and physically inferior and therefore, in need of paternal protection (justifying our enslavement) and not full citizenship.
Problem is, folks do not know that this was addressed visually and otherwise, now 108 years ago, and we still have to have the race talk during a presidential election.
I could just paint landscapes like Didier Nolet, but I don't feel I have that luxury.
But I damn sure want to paint the best images I can, whatever the muse moves me towards on any day.
That's what I expect from other artists. Learn your craft and stop passing off schlock to collectors.
I was in an opening last night at Griffin Gallery. It was a totally integrated event. One of the 4 women presented is white, there was one sculptor and two painters.
Nicole Gallery is mixed. My work has been collected by several of her white clients there.
I just started writing an art blog at Typepad. My husband Monroe Anderson is writing about politics for a variety of publications including his blog. The reason many artists don't know what to do is that we did not have mentors who knew what to do.
So time for a change!
See you at Kerry's panel.
Joyce Owens
www.joyceowens.com
How about their factoring in The Black Age Movement? It did start right here in Chicago. www.dablackage.blogspot.com for insights.
How about their factoring in The Black Age Movement? It did start right here in Chicago. www.dablackage.blogspot.com for insights.
Let me start by saying that I am sick and tired of racism. In a nutshell it is just plain stupid.
When you speak ”of making art that seems akin to passing through the world with a mirror held inches from ones face” I don’t know for sure that you are addressing a specific group. An awful lot of artists make such myopic, selfish art that they’ve hired people at the museums just to write wall labels for them. (Wall labels are good, but we shouldn’t have to read them to find an entry into the art!)
I was having my teeth cleaned 2 days ago, which means the dental hygienist gets to talk and I have to listen. She was telling me how much she loved the hidden art treasures of Chicago; from Loredo Taft to the Quigley St.James Chapel stained glass. Hey, I thought to myself, this charming lay-person knows her art! And then she segued into talking about all the Peter Max’s she has at home. I guess my point is that art is not universal, that art isn’t for all people, that money doesn’t by taste, that there are more artists making mundane art that those that move us and that we’ve got to accept that what any artist makes is okay and that what any collector (homeowner) puts on their wall is fine too.
Perhaps there is too much in that great big world out there for us to embrace and we shrink into our comfort zone and wrap ourselves in art that reflects (there’s that mirror again) who we are.
Better artists aim higher and most often are more proficient technically. They tend to make a bigger difference, affecting a larger audience or at least moving a smaller audience more significantly. But their work is frequently less accessible to ‘the masses,’ and those folks need art just as much as much as those who seek it out more consistently.
When you write of “vernacular scenes: … wise doting grandmothers combing/braiding little black girls hair, black kids splashing about in open fire hydrants in the summertime … after I dismiss the primary-colored paint on black velvet I segue to Kerry James Marshall. His art is accessible and important and full of the everyday, but I sure don’t get the sense that that mirror is obstructing his vision. Yes, there is a way to be encompassing.
Besides Kerry, Joyce Owens, Bernard Williams, Preston Jackson, Nick Cave, Martin Puryear, Theaster Gates, Rashid Johnson and of course Dawoud are Chicagoans (sometimes lapsed) who make significant museum quality art that is accessible.
And now that I think about it I wonder if successful Black artists make more art that is accessible than their white counterparts.
Thanks for being provocative Dawoud. We need it,
Paul Klein
Both Pecou and Anderson are appearing on my Tuesday Webcast on WHPK.88.5/stream.org
Yours Truly,
Nathaniel McLin
I agree Paul, as far as the myopia inducing mirror not being the central problem with a certain kind of work...regardless of who's making it. The challenge becomes to find a suitably rigorous and skillful formal and conceptual container for those experiences. Kerry Marshall certainly has made work that is accessible in its subject matter. The accolades the work has justly earned have come from his ambition in finding ways to frame those experiences through rigorous art production and engaging conceptual strategies. I confess that is ultimately what matters more than ones source material or inspiration, whether it be saxophones, church fans, or whatever.
I would also add that this notion that everyone's production should be judged by a singular aspirational standard is indeed also problematic. I guess what I am responding to, in part, is the question of why certain kinds of work do not, in fact, end up in certain venues such as museums, and the frustration that some artists naively express about that.
Thanks for responding.
Dawoud Bey
The reality is that we do not educate people as we should in this country.
I plan to ask people to explain their journey to attain the position that they now hold. That will be a process I hope will further educate us all. And I don't mean just the degrees anyone has, although that is critical for some fields. I mean what thought processes, what relationships, what specific certifications or bonding, what milestones had to be met and other information that will teach us how to attain various goals, be it gallery representation, museum shows, becoming a curator, art historian, art critic, etc.
Hopefully people will provide some common sense advice and inspiration
for our readers by sharing their backgrounds, their resources, etc.
I will post this on my blog,too.
Best to all. This good conversation
might be the equivalent to the salons. Think Leo and Gertrude Stein discussing Picasso and Matisse and I understand Margaret Burroughs and friends, I guess Bernard Goss, Catlett here or in Mexico, Charles White while it lasted, in the 50's and 60's?
My whole time in New York was pretty much a constant dialogue with other artist friends, showing each other work constantly, going to each others shows, whether music, dance, poetry readings,exhibitions, etc. It was about having as a broad a dialogue with those who were making interesting, challenging, and engaging work and learning from and inspiring each other.
Ultimately everyone I know who has achieved a level of success was first supported by a tight community of fellow artists who cared about and continually challenged each other and each others work before anyone else ever cared about them.
I always encourage young artists to form communities of support, and to push, support, challenge, and promote each other. Credentials and networking aside (and that is important) you've usually got to have some personal network of support that will sustain you before anyone else takes an interest.
Dawoud Bey
Whenever I go to a different city/country it's always a challenge to try and suss out the racial/ethnic climate and feel of that particular area.
People under forty from all races can be seen actively socializing together in London to a much greater degree than anywhere in the states, and yet, they've had choruses of racial epithets yelled out by massive crowds at professional football matches. In the eighties, I would have offered Yugoslavia as a perfect example of how different ethnicities, backgrounds and religions can learn to at least tolerate each other, if not thrive outright as one united community.
Like you said, you have to live in the place to really experience, and hopefully understand the subtle nuances and realities that influence and affect race, class and social standing in the entire myriad of ways that affect everyday life- including art.
Another Thank You to Paul Klein, a major advocate for all artists...and to Dawoud for opening this forum.
This is an excerpt that I wrote a while back for the Dept. of Cultural Affairs artists website
Chicagoartistsresource.org. It expresses my belief in collaboration, agreeing with Dawoud's comments.
"Only in recent years have I come to understand that art is a collaborative business. I never heard that phrase in art school. Only in recent years have I heard the term Networking applied to art production. Being a black artist did not help my situation since there were fewer of us making a living making art. Even the big name artists had jobs. There was no mentoring circuit. If I could think of the questions, I could get answers, but I had to learn the questions.
I believe the most important aspect of creating an art network is to prepare. Read about art, think about art and make a decision about what media expresses your ideas best. Then learn about your media and use it in a professional manner. Unorthodox is not a bad word, but it is often better to learn the traditions of your chosen medium before you change or totally discard them.
Look at art and interact with artists; go to artist panels and discussions in galleries, universities, city sponsored events and museums; offer your ideas and observations. It is important to be eloquent as well as passionate about your own work. This way you can meet artists who have similar concerns.
For me it has also been rewarding to promote other artists. I have had to overcome a natural shyness (thanks Mom). By helping to exhibit and promote artists I get a chance to interact with them, and they in turn, inform me about activities that could be of interest to me.
I have accidentally fallen into the curating business and it is a joy to be able to showcase artists I admire and to be able to define their work within a theme I establish. Seeing artists' works in a group setting with an established platform that can help people understand what the artist is doing is challenging and very gratifying. I am also able to showcase artists who have not had many professional exhibitions and present them to new audiences. I am a member of Sapphire and Crystals. Our entire purpose is to promote African American women artists and we have been able to build careers through this format. Joining established arts organizations is a good way to establish a network, as well.
My approach is to protect and promote the artists I believe are producing great works and to encourage and inspire students and emerging artists. Offering a service to other artists and art lovers turns out to be a terrific vehicle for networking for me."
Joyce Owens
Award winning painter Joyce Owens creates two and three dimensional works on canvas and wood. She earned her Bachelor of Fine Arts degree from Howard University in Washington D.C. and Master of Fine Arts degree in painting from Yale University. She won her first prize in grade school.
For a long time my background was solely business. I received my undergraduate degree in business and worked in the field for a significant period of time. My attraction to the arts has always been alive and my efforts to become a bigger part of the picture led me to be a corporate drop out, work for an art college and finally begin (now end) a masters program in visual arts management here in Chicago. Also, I’m from Detroit which I’m sure conjures up, for many, a lot of misrepresentations. Taken together, all these things may suggest that I’m not a good fit for the field. It often feels that way when I ask questions about artists or exhibitions. I rarely received anything that can be described as an answer even when the questions are posed at conferences, lectures or talks. That fact was certainly true of the talk provided at the opening of “Black Is/Black Ain’t”. Probably more than any other time I felt like an outsider, like I was eavesdropping on a private conversation among friends. There didn’t appear to be any interest in involving members of the audience that were not in the inner circle and already privy to the dialogue that clearly began some time prior.
The title of the exhibition is “Black Is/Black Ain’t”, that along with the invitational poster is sensational at the very least and implies ‘something’. The work, in association with that title implies ‘something’ yet that was never addressed in the conversation I attended. In fact, when the last person in the audience announced to the panel that the talk was vague and revealed nothing especially in regard to a title that somehow shouts ‘something’, Hamza responded with “Being black, what a delightfully confused thing to be”. It was a response that felt condescending; a response with the intention to keep the audience at arms length and possibly meant to stir up controversy that wasn’t fully present in the exhibition itself – because the images in the exhibition aren’t profoundly new. And if the idea and concept of Post Black has been successful, what does that mean for an exhibition like this? That kind of question was never answered.
[I often wonder how such experiences affect African American (visual art) patronage]
Black Art is a title that has been reserved for work created by black artists. In this exhibition some of the artists were not black so all I could get from the title is – some of the artists “IS” black and some artists “AIN’T”.
Sharon, you should definitely attend the talk on June 1st at the U of C in conjunction with the "Black Is/Black Ain't" exhibition. I suspect it is going to be a lot more informative and substantial a discussion than the two prior events.
I wonder if we might consider doing some of the things Dawoud referred to earlier, meeting with other artists to discuss our work, etc. One thing that is hard to get is an honest critique.
Another idea is that perhaps Nathaniel would host a group discussion on his radio program. We could submit topics to him or he could suggest some. He could host an artists round table once a month.
For example I still want to know what is happening with the museum effort that some folks were involved in. (You know who you are.)
I’m willing to do crits. At least once. There’d have to be some ground rules. Like I’d want about 5 artists. One artist at a time. All artists get to speak about there own work and each others. It’d be good if there were an audience. After the artists have a chance to share opinions I’d like the audience to participate. I think artists should submit digital work to each other and me before the event and then bring a genuine work of art or two to the crit. My feelings won’t be hurt if you want to limit it to artists and leave me out.
As for the museum project Joyce alludes to here's a simplified explanation. We went to Daley at the beginning and he got very excited. He turned to his aides and told them to find us space. Over a period of 14+ months the City offered 3 spaces – one at a time and each time withdrew the offer after about 4 months. I’m not faulting them. I understand why the offers were withdrawn which had to do with balancing the budget etc, and not with our efforts. After the third disappointment we felt that we were done trying to work with the City, but by then we were unfortunately conditioned to a grander vision than we could support without the City. Instead of a 10,000 to 30,000 foot space we were looking at 2000 to 3000 and our enthusiasm waned.
Paul Klein
Let me know what kind of space you'd want to hold this in. I know I can confidently volunteer either the Hyde Park Art Center, where I am on the board and now chair the Exhibition Committee, or Columbia College, where I am Distinguished College Artist.
Someone's studio might be more suitable? Artists critiquing each other informally is something that should take place anyway, and usually away from the glare of the public, so I assume by audience I assume Paul doesn't mean folks who come merely to watch the proceedings. Five artists showing work and an audience of other invited artists and culture workers of one kind or another would seem to make sense.
It might be more appropriate for someone like Paul and perhaps another curator as well to facilitate this, depending on the motivations for holding this event. If the intent is to get feedback and criticism on ones work from professionals in the field, that is one thing.
So I guess my question, Joyce, is what is the purpose of such a gathering? I'm one of those folks who believes that everything proceeds out of intention.
Thanks for volunteering for this Paul. I am sure we can figure something out. Let's keep this conversation going until we do.
Did you see the Jack Nicholson movie, "A Few Good Men"?
There is a famous line that reads,
"You can't handle the truth!"
My experience has been that many artists don't want criticism. But this could be a fun experiment.
Getting the practice of defending aesthetic choices, absorbing ideas that could move the work forward, exchanging mutual concerns about art practice, stimulating new possibilities for presenting an idea using another medium...all are reasons for having a
critique.
I ask my students what they were trying to achieve. If the goals were set by me I ask if they achieved them. After they hear comments from others and me I ask them what they need to change to make it better? In my opinion, the bottom line is that the work needs to stand on its own without the artist's voice or the wall labels.
Having a professional who has seen good, bad and indifferent works over decades can spot things that could take our work up a notch.
This is what I do working alone:
I talk to myself! Like the chastising voice of your mother I hear my teachers in my head. I move the work from place to place to see it in a "different light", with "new eyes". I look at it in the morning and at night. I move close and far away. I turn it upside down and sideways. I always try to sit with it for a while. I am very uncomfortable about shooting work out fast. Yeah, even when I do historic photo based work.
I am making art, I hope. I still want the beauty, the movement, the rhythm, the balance, the logic and the "me" in it, what I think about it, needs to be there.
Critique is hard because there continues to be works in major galleries and museums that seem to defy what you may have learned in school. Art changes as the society changes.
Folks think splattering paint works because Pollack did it. I say find meaning for it, find your own way through it, if this calls you. Not that folks are buying it. Unless that's all you want from your work.
To me what is missing is the understanding that we are not alone. The tradition allows us to tackle similar themes, use similar objects or ideas and produce works that look similar, and yes, even borrow, but the "me" factor separates one from the next artist.
I have a really tough time with artists who believe they originated cubism; they disparage other artists working in the Cubist tradition as
"mimicking THEIR work"! Not realizing that this is a 100 year old style.
One can walk away from a critique and reject what they heard and never use any of it in their future work, but they can never NOT hear those words. And they will always know within themselves that the opportunity to grow was lost.
Here is the Nicholson exchange:
Col. Nathan R. Jessep:
You want answers?
Lt. Daniel Kaffee:
I think I'm entitled.
Col. Nathan R. Jessep:
You want answers?!
Lt. Daniel Kaffee:
I want the truth!
Col. Nathan R. Jessep:
You can't handle the truth!
Okay Joyce. So on a more practical level, where do you think something like this should happen?
Let me know, and we can think about how to move it forward. Let's focus on that for now.
I've been teaching now for thirty two years. All of my students who could "handle the truth--from Carrie Mae Weems on up to Ben Gest--and worked tirelessly are all doing well...better than well in some cases.
Let's see what we can do about figuring out the nuts of bolts of making this work. Where? When?
I thought your idea of Hyde Park Art Center was great.
Can that happen?
The "who" is trickier. I think Paul is great and experienced and fair. But will there be other objections to him?
...Do you think we should ask if artists will sign up for this?
Maybe the challenge is not appealing to many artists...
Questions...
Please post your interest to be in a critique guys!!!!
If you and I don't object to Paul (which I sure don't!) anyone who decides to participate has to feel comfortable with him. You and I can lay down the ground rules and go from there. If there are folks who don't like to way it's set up, there are other playgrounds to play on!
I think we should limit it to a few artists, with the understanding that this will not be the last one, only the first. Those who don't show this time can be part of the non-showing group this first time around.
I don't think Hyde PArk Art Center would be a problem at all. This kind of program falls entirely within our mission. Once we decide when/how I will let HPAC staff know so we can check the calendar for potential programming conflicts. This will be the least problematic thing we will have to figure out. Assume we have a space. This actually sounds like a regular program we can implement at HPAC now that I think about it!
We can have Mr.McLin on board to lively it up as well, if he is interested. Certainly he should be in the non-showing group of participants.
Thoughts?
This is really a wonderful forum Dawoud --- and a particularly great post. I'll be tying into it regularly over at Sharkforum. I am now an ex-Chicagoan, as you know, but your descriptions certainly brought visions directly back to my mind. One thing we need to do is continue building communities of artists, which gets ever more difficult as one gets more "situated" in the artworld. And we need to cross-over back and forth over the black/white (and other) lines in the artworld. (not mentiuon calss lines too). I think one start would be to make certain that we try to get "mostly white" blogosphere folks to read "m ostly black" blogs. Get some direct perceptions.
Thanks Mark. I will certainly (as I already have) be talking about things other than race in my blog. But I am acutely aware that there are some things that need talking about that folks just don't want to address publicly. So I figure I'd get the ball rolling. Race often seems to be the elephant in the room no on wants to acknowledge. Of course, this particular post seems to have provoked more Comments than any of the others.
Joyce, I wholeheartedly agree with your first comment about race dictating art.
I do not feel that an artist has to tow any line other than the one that comes from their heart.
As far as the "Chicago Divide" of the races in the arts, it makes me crazy. It's hard enough to be a Chicago artist and exhibit in Chicago, let alone see the same faces at every event.
It bothered me so much in fact that I had to stir up the pot abit. So, last year with some blood, sweat, tears, and elbow grease; I brought together 24 south side artists, male, female, black, latino, white, asian, young and old that covered a great variety of mediums and put on an exhibition.
It was well worth it and for me one step closer to bridging the divide.
"Visioncity," your pulling together that diverse group of artists to bridge the gap and mount an exhibition embodies the inspiring words of my 60615 friend and neighbor Barack Obama (though I know he didn't say them first): We are the ones we have been waiting for, we are the change that we seek."
A similar take on the exhibit: http://www.newcitychicago.com/chicago/7720.html
Joyce said "I say find meaning for it, find your own way through it, if this calls you." That is a profound and direct statement. It is exactly what I feel is neglected in most art nowadays (probably so in many other times too).
Your critique/discussion idea is great. I hope you all together can make it work. We tried it several times here in Switzerland and it didn't "float." The younger artists simply didn't want to talk about meaning or development --- they wanted directives on how to get famous fast with the least amount of work, and were also afraid to say anything that contradicted the consensus. One thing I think is very necessary is to keep curators of the close-to-consensus variety out. (That was a mistake of mine, I thought it might give opportunities.) Their very presence seemed to turn many career-obesessed artists into syncophants. Maybe that's just the Swiss, but either way, I would go for artists and artist-friendly folks like Paul only.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品
Post a Comment