WTF (What the fuck for those unfamiliar with Twitter abbrevs) is going on here? First I read Patricia Cohen (of the venerable NY Times Art Section) telling us that Sarah Thornton, Felix Salmon, Will Gompertz and Dave Hickey (whoever half of them are) have been attacking the art world.
Then I find Michael Kimmelman calling the latest post-Modern architectural splendor a “throwback” and insultingly terming it a “bathtub.”
After waxing ecstatic over art boxes strewn about the desert by a megalomanic like Donald Judd or marvelous Matthew Barney’s adventures with Vaseline, Kimmelman is having problems with a bathtub shaped museum? Is that where the line for ridiculousness in Post-Modern art has been abruptly drawn? After supporting tedious and repetitive Post-Modernist absurdity writing criticism for the Times, all of a sudden Michael Kimmelman is drawing the line at a bathtub-shaped building?
On top of that, Kimmelman and Co. are way, way late to the game. Artsy Fartsy Danto had his own disillusion somewhere slouching towards Gommorah (After the End of Art, 1997) after which he would go on to swoon in ecstasy gazing into the eyes of Marina whatever-her-last name is at MoMA (Museum of Multimillionaire Art). After After the End of Art Donald Kuspit declared his outright disgust in The End of Art (2004). Can’t either of these guys come up with something a bit more original than the End of Art? The Excruciating and Interminable Death-Rattle of Art? How I Made a Comfortable Living Hyping the Art Bubble? They’re in the supposedly creative class and that’s the best they can do? No wonder they stand in awe before a Dan Flavin colored fluorescent tube. Who coulda ever thunk of somethin’ like that? Just wild! Wild and crazy stuff! Wow… must be art. It sure couldn’t just be colored fluorescent tubes that all those monied collectors are snatching up and art museums are celebrating.
But are we finally really approaching the much-heralded Real End of Art we’ve heard so much about by every single fucking art critic doing their utmost to end it? Or is this just the simulacrum of the End of Art? Will the revolution be televised? Will it go out with a whimper instead of a bang? Will I blink and miss it as I sit in a stupor in front of a youtube video? When will someone realize the next step after Damien Hirst is a vivisected human being in formaldehyde? (The “attractive 24-year-old artist Jackie Traide has already given us the hint: http://www.zoenature.org/2012/04/woman-vivisected-in-london-store-window/)
So many deep questions. We’re up shit creek without a paddle if these art critics are going to bail on us. They’re the only ones that can explain it!
I notice that Tom Friedman wrote a column titled “Send in the Clowns” in yesterday’s Times and wonder if he’s calling for the next brigade of art yoyos to appear. Of course, I can’t read the column since my gag reflex gets out of control even trying to click on a Tom Friedman link. How people can still read columns by this preposterous head case who spent over a decade cheerleading America’s entry into glories like the Iraq War and corporations sending American jobs overseas I have no idea.
It would be so much better if they’d let Thomas Friedman do the Art Criticism and Michael Kimmelman write the columns telling America how to run the world. All the news and art criticism money can buy.
Sing it, Chrissie:
Here’s some real news: