4.21.2009

it had to be said

"In the last years of the boom, numerous artists came to the fore who have their esthetic heads up the esthetic asses of Gerhard Richter, Andy Warhol, Richard Prince, Cady Noland and Christopher Wool. They make punkish black-and-white art and ad hoc arrangements of disheveled stuff, architectural fragments and Xeroxed photos. This art deals in received ideas about appropriation, conceptualism and institutional critique. Before the schadenfreud-aholics concur, I am not talking about artists like Wade Guyton, Kelly Walker or Josh Smith, all of whom deploy the above artists in optically original and intellectually complex ways, but hordes of wannabe followers who do so in safely imitative unoriginal ways. These second-stringers have spawned a cool school, admired by jargon-wielding academics who write barely readable rhetoric explaining why looking at next to nothing is good for you. Many of these artists have sold a lot of work, and most will be part of a lost generation. They thought they were playing the system; it turned out that they were themselves being played...

'Younger' should be much more exciting than it is. For long stretches it is just the same old rote conceptualism and latest iterations on retreaded ideas (curators everywhere love this kind of art). The show is filled with frustrating moments, most of which occur when the curators conform too completely to biennial habit, choosing art that follows standard conventions of late-late-late conceptualism...

'Younger than Jesus' indicates that the alchemical essence known as the sublime, the primal buzz of it all, is no longer in God or nature or abstraction. These young artists show us that the sublime has moved into us, that we are the sublime; life, not art, has become so real that it’s almost unreal. Art is being reanimated by a sense of necessity, free of ideology or the compulsion to illustrate theory. Art is breaking free. Even the New Museum itself, founded in 1977, is 'younger than Jesus.' Since it reopened in December 2007, it’s become, despite its clinical spaces and a couple of misfires, the most consistently challenging, polemical art institution in the city. It, like the art in this show and everywhere, is being reborn." Jerry Saltz
"JESUS" SAVES

5 comments:

kenn tam said...

hi

I read this article you quote from, and his writing in the New Yorker in general. I wholeheartedly empathize with his desire to see more dynamic and emancipated art practices, but i can't help but interpret some of his writing as empty boosterism for a more youthfully invigorated art, regardless of what it actually is or attempts to do. It seems like Saltz is so desperate for inspiring work that when he stumbles upon something even mildly interesting, he can't help himself to some irrational exuberance with hyperbole like 'sublime' or 'breaking free', or 'reborn'. Where is his criticality when assessing these works? Sure its new, weird and fucked up, but is that the only criterion for good art? In short, I feel Saltz has become utterly predictable in his near-whining criticism of the establishment, while bestowing lavish praise on the new and oftentimes young.

Anonymous said...

Saltz is a joke.

Anonymous said...

Saltz is right about being critical about the imitative unoriginal wannabe punkish appropriations. it is made into more by people who stretch it beyond what it is with their theoretical stylings.

Good art should not be celebrated by the age of the artist but it is interesting to see trends emerge from a generation and I think he attached himself to a couple of worthy insights.

Anonymous said...

I like how Saltz doesn't name names when calling out the posers and only the worthy artists get his endorsement. But I think we can easily fill in the blank he left for us.

Extension Springs said...

Great work…I am inspired from your writings, impressed with your facts. Very fine articles, I will suggest my friends to read the blog