#REVIEW PRINT ARTIST 25 GOLD FULL#
By focusing on Pop Art, itself a comment on mass production and the suspect nature of authenticity, Sturtevant was taking the genre to its full logical extension. Gradually, however, the art world came around to understanding her conceptual reasons for copying canonical works: to skewer the grand modernist myths of creativity and the artist as lone genius. Other artists, including Claes Oldenburg, were unamused, and collectors largely shied away from purchasing the works. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given his own puckish understanding of authorship and originality, Andy Warhol approved of Sturtevant’s project and even lent her one of his “Flowers” screens. Over the course of her career, she imitated canvases by Frank Stella, James Rosenquist and Roy Lichtenstein, among others. Her targets tended to be famous male painters (largely because the work of women was less broadly recognized). 2014) began “repeating” the works of other artists in 1964, more than a decade before Richard Prince photographed his first Marlboro ad and Sherrie Levine appropriated the images of Edward Weston. Known professionally by her surname, Elaine Sturtevant (b. The artwork summaries are by Zoë Lescaze. This conversation has been edited and condensed. This list - which is ordered chronologically, from oldest work to most recent - is who we circled around, who we defended, who we questioned, and who we, perhaps most of all, wish might be remembered. What came out of the conversation was more of a sensibility than a declaration. Some pieces were debated heavily others were fleetingly passed over, as if the group intuitively understood why they had been brought up a few were spoken of with appreciation and wonder. Had this meeting happened on a different day, with a different group, the results would have been different. The below is not definitive, nor is it comprehensive. Rather, this list of works is merely what has been culled from the conversation, each chosen because it appeared on a panelist’s original submission of 10 (in two instances, two different works by the same artist were nominated, which were considered jointly). It’s important to emphasize that no consensus emerged from the meeting. Had the group, perhaps, stumbled upon some form of agreement? Did their selections reflect our values, priorities and a unified idea of what matters today? Did focusing on artworks, rather than artists, allow for a different framework? (Rosler, in fact, objected to the whole premise, though she brought her own list to the discussion in the end.) And yet, to everyone’s surprise, there was a significant amount of overlap: works by David Hammons, Dara Birnbaum, Felix Gonzalez-Torres, Danh Vo, Cady Noland, Kara Walker, Mike Kelley, Barbara Kruger and Arthur Jafa were cited multiple times. It was also impossible to select just 10. It was impossible, some argued, to rank art. The assignment was intentionally wide in its range: What qualifies as “contemporary”? Was this an artwork that had a personal significance, or was its meaning widely understood? Was its influence broadly recognized by critics? Or museums? Or other artists? Originally, each of the participants was asked to nominate 10 artworks - the idea being that everyone would then rank each list to generate a master list that would be debated upon meeting. On a recent afternoon in June, T Magazine assembled two curators and three artists - David Breslin, the director of the collection at the Whitney Museum of American Art the American conceptual artist Martha Rosler Kelly Taxter, a curator of contemporary art at the Jewish Museum the Thai conceptual artist Rirkrit Tiravanija and the American artist Torey Thornton - at the New York Times building to discuss what they considered to be the 25 works of art made after 1970 that define the contemporary age, by anyone, anywhere. Three artists and a pair of curators came together at The New York Times to attempt to make a list of the era’s essential artworks. The 25 Works of Art That Define the Contemporary Age
0 kommentar(er)
