Installing Sol LeWitt

Installing Sol LeWitt



For those of you unfamiliar with LeWitt’s work, much of it doesn’t exist like most artworks do, as a tangible painting, drawing, or sculpture. Rather, it is a list of instructions on how to create the artwork. As a conceptual artist, LeWitt believed that it wasn’t the finished work that was the “art”; art instead begins and ends with an idea. .....Katie R.



Then why do we need the actual painting at all?



Actually, I find LeWitt paintings to be rather pleasant,
at least, no less so than the decorated walls
of Burger King or Starbucks,
which also are painted according to a list of instructions.

And what's especially interesting about this post
is the comment from Rhona Hoffman,
the local LeWitt dealer,
who wasn't quite sure the instructions
were being followed properly by Matt,
the museum's "technical painter"


In her first comment, she noted :

” A tape painting?’I will read the rest of the article later but think that Matt is up the creek."



Then, in her second comment, she apologized for that above phrase, but still wondered:


"who did come from the Estate to do the drawing?"



So, perhaps the "finished work"
actually is the painting
that's up on the wall?


What's also notable about this entry
is Matt's admiration for LeWitt.

Not as a good designer,
but as:

"a dominant force, completely respected"


I saw the work in progress the last few weeks,
and will see the final version today,
but I suspect that the A.I.C. blog entry
will be far more memorable
than the art itself.




(just like it was
for the airplane engines
on the roof)

Remembering James Wood (and Alan Artner)

Former Tribune art critic, Alan Artner's 1200 word tribute to former A.I.C. director, James Wood, appeared in the Chicago Tribune yesterday (June 20)


But hardly any details were offered to support its laudations.

Of course, there is the Modern Wing, and if that would not have happened without James Wood, then he deserves a lot of credit.

And the same thing for the dark and quiet Ando Gallery of Japanese screens and ceramics.

But how can we judge his contribution to the "numerous groundbreaking exhibitions" unless we know which exhibits were turned down, and which ones really had to be fought for?

And what is involved in "a higher level of professionalism"?

Has anyone ever described his predecessor, the former Kansas University President, Laurence Chalmers, as un-professional?

The problem is that the administration of a not-for-profit corporation, like the Art Institute, happens behind closed doors, and nobody can get behind those doors except a journalist from a major newspaper.

We don't need the kind of adversarial relationships that a columnist like John Kass has with Mayor "Shortshanks" Daley, or Governor "Deadmeat" Blagojevich.

But we do need a reporter who is looking for a story, instead of looking for approval from the powerful people he is covering.

From the little that I know about James Wood, he shared my enthusiasm for the Japanese Print room (which may be why it happily continued to be put on regular rotation), but he also had a taste for minimalism in contemporary art, and so I think we were shown a bit too much of Ellsworth Kelly and Jasper Johns.

But more importantly, it was at the beginning of his tenure that the Art Institute discontinued both it's American Painting and Sculpture Show and the Chicago Vicinity Show.

Two shows which the museum had been conducting regularly for the previous 90 years.

Why were they cut?

Perhaps because it was no longer fashionable to entertain an idea of Chicago art or American art as distinct from an international artworld.

So to assert the former would be to lose status in the latter.

But who knows?

This decision, along with all the others, was made in a boardroom closed to the public, and the city's most important art critic appears to have been more concerned with being the Director's friend than with being his critic.

A Parting Gift Before Matisse Leaves for MoMA

A Parting Gift Before Matisse Leaves for MoMA



Having gone through
the entire program
on the kiosks at the
Matisse exhibit at the Art Institute,
I can report that
it was pretty much worthless
except for effortlessly delivering
the self-contentment
of erudition.


As if browsing through x-radiographs
of the seven stages
in that painting's eight years of development
somehow gives one
a deeper understanding of how
Matisse developed that painting.

It doesn't.


Because those small, sketchy, rugged
little radiographs
give so little idea
of how this large painting actually appeared
in each of its stages.

The radiographs are just a gimmick.

Too bad the "parting gift"
wasn't one of those still-lifes
or studio views.

Roger Hiorns in Conversation

Roger Hiorns in Conversation
(an entry on the A.I.C. blog)


The roof of the Modern Wing is a spectacular setting





As recorded here, when it first opened.

But what can compete with all that
late 20th C. Chicago architecture ?

Only things which, themselves,
are also out-sized and
perhaps a bit ridiculous.

Like the Scott Burton chairs,
or now the rusting mega-jet engines.

The Romantic side of me
enjoys seeing awesome ruins,
especially train wrecks
and tall buildings in demolition.

So I've got no problem with these giant, corroding engines
and am looking forward to whatever other crazy junk
the curator of contemporary art
wants to put up there.

But I do get annoyed
by the art talk
that inevitably must accompany it.

The "symbolic power of culturally “dominant” objects" ??

How thrilling to feel dominated!

And who better to explain that domination
than that cute, fey, blond young Brit, Roger Hiorns,
with his long, slender, delicate hands
fluttering in the air:






So, I think the video
is the best part of this installation
(and actually,
is the only part
that I'm going to see,
since I've seen
free standing jet engines
up close before)


But there is a dark side
to all this frivolity.

Because this is art
that despairs of our civilization
rather than attempting to improve it
(like the great artists of the past did,
or almost every blue collar worker
of today)

The only admirable artists
in the above video
are the skilled hard-hats
who delicately maneuver
the tons of art-junk into position.

The Art Institute Blog

On October 26, 2009 the Art Institute began
it's own blog
and announced that :


We’re looking forward to using this space to give you behind-the-scenes access to the museum. Think of it as the deepest, darkest secrets of the Art Institute. Kidding of course, but we’re really excited to tell you all the stories that—quite simply put—don’t have a place in our other communications. And it’s certainly a work in progress, so we look forward to your feedback along the way.




Well, that's exciting!

A chance to interact with museum personnell
concerning things that interest me.


But will they -- or can they --
really answer any questions?

Or.... is this just
a very cost effective
promotional tool
written, on demand,
by staffers who hope
nobody pesters them?

Below are the comments
I have posted to date:


*******************




What our Director is Reading June 8, 2010

Wow!
This is the most fascinating entry, yet,
since it's done by James Cuno, the director,
as he discusses the Enlightenment
and the notion of an
"encyclopedic museum"

Jim C. (as he signs himself)
is a rather game fellow
who has always responded
to the various letters
I have sent him over the past four years,
usually asking why the inclusivity
that is applied to the encylopedic collections of historic art
does not apply to contemporary paintings and sculpture
(where all traditional portraits and landscapes are
categorically excluded)


To this post of his,
I query whether reason
can be applied to the vetting of art works
and ask why the democratic ideals
of the Enlightenment
have not been extended to
American cultural institutions, like his own,
that are invariably run
by self-selecting boards of directors
drawn from the social and economic elite.


And as always,
he graciously and carefully
responds to my query,
while side-stepping
my questions.

BTW, this is a ground-breaking post
in a couple of ways.


It's the first entry on the AIC blog
that actually invites discussion
about important issues,
and it may be the first time
that the director a top ranked museum
has made himself available for interaction
on the internet.

And it's way - way more serious
than the chit-chat on the Indianapolis Museum of Art blog
which is mostly about their damn garden.


But so far, there
have only been two responses
other than my own -
one of which was an "attaboy"
and the other a "oh, this is so exciting"

Looks like hardly anyone
really cares about what their museum is doing.

Because, of course, everyone (except me)
knows that it's not their museum.



*******************




On-line Sleuthing April 23, 2010

In this post, Sam Quigley
Vice President for Collections Management,
Imaging, and Information Technology /
Museum Chief Information Officer,
proudly announces how much additional
information is now being added
to entries in the museum's online collection.

So, I asked him why the images are so small.

It's not like publishing a book
where it costs more to make
the pictures really big.

And his response to this question
was to ignore it
and then turn the comments off
for his post.

Guess he didn't want to answer me
(or anyone else)

But this is a very important issue,
especially to those interested
in what the museum keeps off view
-- because the online image is often the way
it will ever be seen.

For example, last year the A.I.C.
showed many of its tapestries
for the first time in over 50 years,
and now, once again, they are all off view.
The details on those objects
are wonderful and delicious,
but few will be able to see
them again in their lifetime.


And then there are those around the world
who will never visit Chicago,
but may wish to see a work
which is discussed by art historians,
as I have been doing in my reading
of Norris Kelly Smith.

Since his primary aesthetic interest
is in music,
perhaps Mr. Quigley
simply does not agree that the
most important information
about a work of visual art
is how it looks.

Which is a real problem.

Not that the A.I.C. is the very worst
in this regard,
but it certainly is not among the best.
Here's a run-down of various other museum web sites.





*******************




Behind the Paint March 3, 2010

Whatever happened to this statue?
I vaguely remember
seeing it decades ago,
but when will it ever go
on display again?

Apparently, the blogger
has no idea.

BTW - most of the posters on this blog
remain anonymous to everyone
except each other,
since they don't share their last names
and there is no such thing
as an online personnell directory.

Why is there such a corporate culture
of secrecy at the A.I.C. ?




*******************



Coming Soon January 12, 2010

Why can't this blogger tell us
where the Chinese art
will be located
when the AIC reopens
it's Asian rooms next Fall?

Will the new space
have room for more than one
horizontal scroll display case?

Does the A.I.C. staff assume
that nobody cares?