Jeff Longtin on tue 22 mar 05
Am I understanding this right, Robert Hughes, author of the radical art
criticism, "Shock of the New", gave the keynote speech at NCECA?
Does anyone know where I can get a copy of his speech? (Yes I'll pay)
To hear THE Mr Hughes wax poetic about clay and ceramics would pe priceless.
I was a freshman in Madison, studying with Reitz (sorta), while at the same
time I was also attending an art criticism class that centered around Mr.Hughes
book, Shock of the New. Talk about contrasts!
Totally umcomprehensible at the time, but gradually I came to understand
about which he was speaking. Sheer brilliance!
thanks
Jeff Longtin
in beautiful-spring like-minneapolis
Louis Katz on tue 22 mar 05
The Journal should be available by next year's NCECA but if it is I may
plotz. We still are waiting for last year's.
When it comes out you can buy it from NCECA.net
The talk was interesting, this guy can sure make enemies. He knew what
to say to keep us as friends but I don't remember much that really
talked about clay. Maybe someone with a better memory than me will have
more to say.
Louis
On Mar 22, 2005, at 7:52 AM, Jeff Longtin wrote:
> Does anyone know where I can get a copy of his speech? (Yes I'll
> pay)thanks
> Jeff Longtin
> in beautiful-spring like-minneapolis
Maurice Weitman on tue 22 mar 05
Louis wrote:
>The Journal should be available by next year's NCECA but if it is I may
>plotz. [...] The talk was interesting, this guy can sure make enemies. He knew
>what to say to keep us as friends but I don't remember much that really
>talked about clay. Maybe someone with a better memory than me will have
>more to say.
Louis, my memory's decent, but I don't retain much while I'm nodding
off. (rim shot)
I share your recollection that he didn't really have much to say
about ceramics.
I don't have a good memory for spoken words, but while he was
speaking, I kept waiting for him to bring ceramics into his "Shock of
The New" or vice versa, but aside from a few moderately insightful
tidbits, it felt like he took his generic speech and pasted in a few
names in a few places.
I think the guy's brilliant, knowledgeable, and uhhh... outspoken.
I've read and enjoyed many of his reviews and other writings. I
looked forward to his address, but found him and it to be
uninteresting, even boring much of the time.
I should have stood in bed.
Regards,
Maurice
ps I'll join you in a Plotzing in Portland event if this year's
journal's ready by then. What's up with that?
Louis Katz on tue 22 mar 05
Several things lead to the Journal being slow.
1. People who present at NCECA tend to be slow writers if they can
write at all. The stuff comes in late or not at all and needs editing,
lots.
2. The Publication director generally has another job.
3. I don't know what else but do know the Pubs director is a job that
attracts good people who last three or four years before they give up.
The Newsletters are hard to bring together as well.
It would be a good question to ask at a board meeting if you are really
interested, or ask an old NCECA publication person. I don't bother the
current one, too busy already and I have more important issues that I
want heard. I am awaiting for the journal to read the talk by McCarty
(sp) on clay mixing from last year and his student Matt somebody on
Matt glazes. The clay talk had a big impact on how I mix porcelain. I
now blunge it long and hard.
Louis
On Mar 22, 2005, at 1:33 PM, Maurice Weitman wrote:
> Louis wrote:
>> The Journal should be available by next year's NCECA but if it is I
>> may
>> plotz. [...] The talk was interesting, this guy can sure make
>> enemies. He knew
>> what to say to keep us as friends but I don't remember much that
>> really
>> talked about clay. Maybe someone with a better memory than me will
>> have
>> more to say.
>
> Louis, my memory's decent, but I don't retain much while I'm nodding
> off. (rim shot)
>
> I share your recollection that he didn't really have much to say about
> ceramics.
>
> I don't have a good memory for spoken words, but while he was
> speaking, I kept waiting for him to bring ceramics into his "Shock of
> The New" or vice versa, but aside from a few moderately insightful
> tidbits, it felt like he took his generic speech and pasted in a few
> names in a few places.
>
> I think the guy's brilliant, knowledgeable, and uhhh... outspoken.
> I've read and enjoyed many of his reviews and other writings. I
> looked forward to his address, but found him and it to be
> uninteresting, even boring much of the time.
>
> I should have stood in bed.
>
> Regards,
> Maurice
>
> ps I'll join you in a Plotzing in Portland event if this year's
> journal's ready by then. What's up with that?
>
Kathy Forer on wed 23 mar 05
I had a really different take on Robert Hughes' talk than the spoken
consensus here so far. Stopping short of a dialectical physicality,
Hughes set "fast and big art" in opposition to "slow art with marked
'physical' presence." He advocated expanding competence, a "strong
inner life" and a Calvinistic "assurance and doubt." He shadowed the
"corruption of the avant garde" and the threatening "recession of
culture."
I didn't hear him make fun of any craft artists, though he threw plenty
of glib jibes at "weightless, nattering rubbish," most conceptual art,
those who are "fragile to criticism" and Imperialist "transnational
ignorance." He contrasted "instantaneous media" with drawing, modeling
and building; fishing and "detached contemplation" with marketed use
and reuse. While he was too negative, too vague or too developmental to
make an argument in support of ceramics, clay or craft, Hughes
recognized and endorsed the values of the "freestanding and integral"
as craft vs. the "broken and pasted" as art.
There was probably some "behind the scenes" criticism or dialogue going
on as well. "The Shock of the Now?" appears to be the title of a new
BBC Two "The Culture Show" episode as well as an essay positing a
younger-centric critic, Matthew Collings, as Hughes' successor,
. Collins
champions at least one artist whom Hughes disparages.
Unlike my dear friend Maurice who has a good enough memory, but had jet
lag and selective hearing, looking for specific mention of ceramists, I
needed to make notes to process what I heard, to remain in the
argument, play with synthesis and not get distracted. I very much
enjoyed Hughes speech. I also appreciated Jed Perl's talk which was
quite similar in exposition. Perl found "material for its own sake" to
be a strong component of modern logic. He also emphasized yearning for
the handmade and the development of tradition through the particularity
of the individual.
Though Hughes mentioned "ceramicists" only a few times, and seemed
nearly as sketchy on his one mention, Bernard Leach and Mingei, as I
feel, the talk was a contingent embrace of the physical and a strong
rejection of the conceptual. I neglected to ask Hughes what "one or
two" conceptual art works he felt were successful, but the details seem
less significant than the broad strokes.
One of my notes reads "procedures for artistic ends." It is between a
description of Xu Bing's "A Book from the Sky" as enigma and
frustration and the need for contact beyond context, to expand beyond
our borders and find interest in difference. I'm not sure now whether
Hughes feels artistic ends justify means or the procedures lead to the
ends, but the words are interesting.
Kathy Forer
Locust, NJ
Kathy Forer on wed 23 mar 05
On Mar 22, 2005, at 2:33 PM, Maurice Weitman wrote:
> I should have stood in bed.
In your wooden shoes? The bed might have broken!
Kathy
kathyforer.com
Sabotage
"Three versions are given of the source of the word. The one best known=20=
is that a striking French weaver cast his woden[sic] shoe=97called a=20
sabot=97into the delicate mechanism of the loom upon leaving the mill.=20=
The confusion that resulted, acting to the workers' benefit, brought to=20=
the front a line of tactics that took the name of SABOTAGE. Slow work=20
is also said to be at the basis of the word, the idea being that wooden=20=
shoes are clumsy and so prevent quick action on the part of the=20
workers. The third idea is that Sabotage is coined from the slang term=20=
that means " putting the boots " to the employers by striking directly=20=
at their profits without leaving the job. The derivation, however, is=20
unimportant. It is the thing itself that causes commotion among=20
employers and politicians alike. What then is Sabotage?"
http://digital.library.arizona.edu/bisbee/docs/133.php
| |
|
