venice biennale 07
I am always disappointed in the Biennale, and this year is no different. Looking for art beyond: big, noisy, kinetic, indescipherable, sad, aggressive, and depressing, is becoming more difficult with every passing day. Art in America is no different. The articles I wade through, slogging away in search of communication, concern "old" artists who are alway buried in psycho-babble, but at least I know that art still exists somewhere on this universe.
The New York Times is becoming my favorite method of keeping in touch with world art. They have several multimedia sites featuring the Biennale, including a Michael Kimmelman video report. Even Michael, whose reporting I find perhaps the most easily digested on line, had a hard time convincing me that actually attending the event would be rewarding. At best, it may serve to satisfy curiosity.
Since I live in the "belly of American closed minds", Cincinnati, Ohio, where Art Coverage is a dirty word, it takes a little doing to find actualy information on the state of the profession. When artists meet, this dearth of info is a predictable and frequent topic of discussion. The first question is always, "Why?" Why is this large and fairly sophisticated city so determined to completely ignore one of it's finest assets. After all, the prestigious Art Academy of Cincinnati is here, as is DAAP in the University of Cincinnati, and some extraordinary imported shows of acknowledged leaders in contemporary art which are generally ignored by publicity. If no one knows they're there, no one attends and becomes better educated.
It's a sad thing to read of fantastic exhibits hitting the road, and completely bypassing this area. The excuse is nearly always dat ole debbil money. And why does the community seem not to support art? Could it be because they simply don't know it's out there?
The New York Times is becoming my favorite method of keeping in touch with world art. They have several multimedia sites featuring the Biennale, including a Michael Kimmelman video report. Even Michael, whose reporting I find perhaps the most easily digested on line, had a hard time convincing me that actually attending the event would be rewarding. At best, it may serve to satisfy curiosity.
Since I live in the "belly of American closed minds", Cincinnati, Ohio, where Art Coverage is a dirty word, it takes a little doing to find actualy information on the state of the profession. When artists meet, this dearth of info is a predictable and frequent topic of discussion. The first question is always, "Why?" Why is this large and fairly sophisticated city so determined to completely ignore one of it's finest assets. After all, the prestigious Art Academy of Cincinnati is here, as is DAAP in the University of Cincinnati, and some extraordinary imported shows of acknowledged leaders in contemporary art which are generally ignored by publicity. If no one knows they're there, no one attends and becomes better educated.
It's a sad thing to read of fantastic exhibits hitting the road, and completely bypassing this area. The excuse is nearly always dat ole debbil money. And why does the community seem not to support art? Could it be because they simply don't know it's out there?
posted by fran watson at 9:05 AM
0 comments
