6 December 2003 to 29 February 2004

The “feminine” used to be equated with fragility, delicacy, and quiet refinement. Polly Apfelbaum’s works are all of these things while also revealing the artist’s capacity to subvert such equations and redefine “women’s work.”

Her midcareer survey curated by Claudia Gould and Ingrid Schaffner and organized by the Institute for Contemporary Art, University of Pennsylvania. Currently to be seen at the Contemporary Arts Center in Cincinnati, the exhibition showcases a remarkable range of material in works from the late 1980s to the present, from Daisy Chain (1989/2003) in identical 8 ½-foot rectangles made up of wooden shamrocks, flowers and club shapes to her latest contribution, Oblong (2003), an installation of wallpaper covered with one-inch ovals in a repeating sequence of rainbow colors.

But it is Apfelbaum’s “fallen paintings” that most captivate attention. These pieces, velvety fabric dyed with blotches of vibrant color, ooze across the first floor of the exhibition. Painstakingly pieced together by hand, their distinct patterning is similar to a quilt. Even the more chaotic Reckless, or Split (both 1998) have an organic rhythm that suggests Mother Nature had a hand in their creation. With titles like Bubbles and Blossom, Apfelbaum’s work is playful, girlish and feminine with a capital “F.”

But “feminine” as a concept encompasses so much more than smooth fabrics, handiwork and delicacy. To be feminine can also mean sensual, sexual and sly. It begets intelligence and strength. It means pushing the boundaries of one’s position and being-or at least trying to be-all things to all people.

To convey these ideas successfully, Apfelbaum indiscriminately pulls from, questions and builds on the traditions of postwar abstraction: the drippings of Pollock, the stained effects of Frankenthaler and Louis, the repetition and serialization of minimalism. Apfelbaum tears down the modalities of media. She calls her floor pieces “fallen paintings”, but their structures and placement are akin to sculpture, while her process is more like printmaking. In this, it is as if Apfelbaum has created work that really is all things to all people.

Apfelbaum injects into traditional abstraction materials, shapes and words that have personal and emotional connotations. Pocketful of Posies (1990) is a splotch of cartoonish, 1960s-inspired flower cutouts made of steel and placed in a group on the gallery floor. The material is minimalist; it’s cold and manufactured. But the flower shapes provide the organic element that makes the material warm, the shapely curves prominent making the piece playful and sexy; more Austin Powers than Carl Andre.

This balancing of the playful and the serious is a big part of what makes Apfelbaum’s work so interesting. The seriousness comes from her technical skill, the careful choice of materials, and her arrangement of parts to create a comprehensive whole with many meanings. The playfulness often comes from the shapes she chooses and punning titles.

Title Page (2003) is installation wallpaper that lists in rainbow colors titles of some of Apfelbaum’s works. The enormity of this display – the wall is two stories high and about twenty feet long – forces you to take it seriously, to view it as a list of accomplishments or rolling credits. (This image is reproduced on the inside cover of the exhibition catalogue). But the playful nature of the titles like “Lady and the Tramp” and their cotton candy colors beg us not to take anything too seriously and remind us that even intelligent art is, to some degree, decorative.

The post Polly Apfelbaum appeared first on artcritical.

I’m Saul Ostrow’s first official guest in his new apartment, and he’s happy to be cooking for someone other than himself. Saul has just transplanted from New York to become Dean of Fine Arts and Chair of Painting for the Cleveland Institute of Arts. His wife, the painter Shirley Kaneda, helped him move in, having just started teaching herself at the Pratt Institute after moving back from L.A. The couple maintains a loft in New York, and he returns there every three weeks. As he labored over his northern Italian version of pasta rustica and bean salad, we talked about his ideas for revamping the Institute.

“I’m still trying to figure out my job. My predecessor emphasized abstract painting, but figurative styles are the stick at CIA.” Billed as America’s only five-year college of art and design, the school is known for its industrial design and medical arts programs. “Cleveland has real world programs that actually lead to gainful employment,” he says. His goal is to sustain the prestige the school has earned in that respect, but to bring it up to date by incorporating more cutting edge art theory and techniques to the studio practice. “We’re still trying to decide whether to call it visual arts or studio arts,” presumably to get away from the stuffiness of “fine arts.”

When asked why the CIA chose him, he responds quickly and confidently. “Because they know that studio art is informed by criticism and theory. That has been my focus, and they are serious about rethinking their program along those lines.” So why did he actually take the position? “I like to accrue titles. ‘Dean’ and ‘chair’ were two that I didn’t already have!”

Eventually, he says, “I want CIA students to be coveted by graduate schools. I want to turn out students who paint because they have made the decision to paint, not because they view other forms of contemporary art as inauthentic.” As chair of painting, he teaches the fifth-year painting class and an elective course that includes third- to fifth-year students. He says, rather surprised, “these are really bright kids, and they’re hungry. I’ve completely confused them though, I’ve ruined their lives because I’ve made them think.”

He knows there are differences in approach among the faculty, but his ambition is to keep that diversity. “We’ll all know who the best students are, but for different reasons.” A big challenge is introducing technology into painting, “letting the painters know that [technology] won’t replace the painter.” Sculpture will also be a big focus. “I have fifteen fifth-year painting students versus six sculpture students. I want to know why sculpture is not appealing.”

“There’s a tradition of fiefdoms,” he says. “I want them to refer to themselves as visual arts students instead of ‘painting students’ or ‘sculpture students.’ Whatever direction we feel our culture is going, that’s the reality. The lines between disciplines are blurring.”

He speaks most emphatically about revising the school’s approach to art history. “The liberal arts program at CIA is good, but it’s not geared toward the studio. The focus is more geared toward connoisseurship or genealogy, whereas I’m interested in how the studio has been conceived. It is not always pristine, the relationship of artist to studio to the world shifts. Artists don’t shroud themselves in their studio and then deliver their gifts to the world. That’s a mystique that started in the fifties that still exists, and that why changing the approach is important.”

As we carry our feast into the dining room and sit down to eat, our conversation turns to his other major projects: the book series for which he is editor, called “Critical Voices in Art, Theory and Culture” (Routledge Publishing of London) and an exhibition he is organizing for the Paine Webber Galleries in New York, scheduled to open in the fall of 2005.

For his next curatorial project, Ostrow is looking at what he describes as “those artists caught between Greenberg’s formalism and minimalism. People like Ann Truitt and Lyman Kipp, really early Olitski, Ray Parker. Artists who were working in more of a pictorial formalist style rather than color field.” He explains further that unlike their color field counterparts, these artists still held onto composition. “These artists all used a really weird palette. Most of them appear to have chosen their colors from an interior decorator’s manual. Weird beiges, muted cadmiums, avocado greens,” he says with a laugh. “These are artists who were working from about 1956-1974. I wonder what these artists look like now? These artists couldn’t create a dialogue of their own, so they fell back into what they were comfortable with.”

There’s a lesson in this for his students. “I want them to understand that the internal dialogue an artist has isn’t always linear. They have to take risks. Pollock’s drip paintings were risky, but they also weren’t the only paintings he made.” This is the other problem with teaching art history to studio students, he explains. “They can’t grasp the concept of change.”

The post Saul Ostrow appeared first on artcritical.

When I decided to leave New York City for the flatlands of central Ohio, my friends and acquaintances wondered if I had lost my head. “Why,” they asked, “would you leave New York City if you want to write about art?” As if no good art worth writing about existed outside Manhattan. Why Ohio? Other than the draw of cheaper rent, I already knew that great art could be found here. The state’s three major cities-Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati-may not be widely acknowledged as cultural and artistic trend setters like New York and Chicago (at least, not yet anyway), each in its own way has built unique and expanding arts communities that continue to bring in (and produce) the best and the brightest artists and exhibitions.

Cleveland
Possibly the most liberal location of the three C’s, Cleveland once was referred to as the “mistake on the lake” -a name borne from not only its proximity to Lake Erie, but also due to its roughshod economic history and an infamous chemical fire on the Cuyahoga River. This “mistake” reversed its reputation by creating a downtown scene that turned Cleveland into a model of urban rebirth.

Three art venues top the list in Cleveland. The first is the Museum of Contemporary Art or MOCA (formerly the Cleveland Center for Contemporary Art). Founded in 1968 by gallerist Marjorie Talalay and Nina Sundell, daughter of Leo Castelli and Ileana Sonnabend, the venue had access to cutting edge art from the start. It remains committed to presenting major shows of current art by the artists who frequent the pages of Art Forum and Art in America.

The oldest art venue in the city is The Cleveland Museum of Art, established in 1913. In the throes of its own major expansion designed by architect Rafael Vinoly, the museum is focusing on smaller, more frequent exhibitions. “The History of Japanese Photography” and the “Charles Isaacs and Carol Nigro Collection of American Photography” are the most recent, with latter highlighting the recent acquisition of 22 images that range in date from 1850 to 1911. The collection includes an 1850 montage of daguerreotypes from Southworth and Hawes titled Medallion Portrait of a Woman. This is a unique piece indeed, with an oval-shaped central image of a woman surrounded by various profile views. Given the rarity of the daguerreotype, finding multiple images in one piece is a unique example of the technical excellence and unique approach honed by Southworth and Hawes during photography’s infancy.

In an effort to put more focus on contemporary art, The Cleveland Museum of Art has instituted its first contemporary art curator. More significantly, the museum created a small gallery space for rotating exhibitions of current art. Titled “Project 2.4.4” the space’s exhibition schedule is kept flexible so that it can respond more immediately to current art. The most recent show was titled “Metascape” wherein contemporary artists dealt with the traditional theme of landscape in completely untraditional ways. Works included pieces from artists such as Benjamin Edwards who also participated in “Painting as Paradox” at Artists Space last fall and Julie Mehretu, whose work was also included in “Drawing Now: Eight Propositions” at MoMA QNS last winter.

Where to find the most contemporary of the contemporary in Cleveland? Why, at SPACES of course. SPACES was founded in 1978 by artists who, like many artists at that time, either lacked the credentials to show at major venues or the commercial draw that warranted gallery exhibitions-or both. Designed to help artists who are new in their careers, are experimenting with new ideas or are under-recognized, SPACES is often the first place to show an artist’s body of work. With a miniscule budget of around $400,000 per year, SPACES originates six shows per year-three of them curated and three non-curated group shows.

“Elements: Matter, Body, Mind and Spirit,” the venue’s current show, features new work by four artists who “attempt to visualize the metaphysical” through works of sound, video projection, sculptural installation, weaving, and translucent works on paper. One artist who approaches this theme in the most literal manner is Deborah Carlson. With ideas rooted in Hindu spirituality, Carlson weaves, binds and hangs richly textured and colored works of wax, wood and fiber such as Wonder Drop (2002). These works evoke the sacredness of scrolls, tapestries and other handmade or primitive religious symbols. The physicality of their materials reminds us of the role symbols play in our attempt to connect with the supernatural. These are spectacularly crafted. Which is not to say that the works of Jee Sun Park (her sculpted, repetitive and phallic wood forms resemble the work of Eva Hesse) and Peggy Kwong-Gordon (delicately powerful paintings on translucent paper) are not crafted just as marvelously, only that they require a different interpretation of “metaphysical” -a definition that is more about the abstract nature of time versus the supernatural.

Columbus
On June 2 The Columbus Dispatch reported that AmericanStyle Magazine ranked Columbus as one of the top 25 arts destinations in the United States. Finishing at No. 12, Columbus placed ahead of Pittsburgh (No. 13), Cleveland (15), Baltimore (23) and Atlanta (25). Topping the list of favorite venues for Columbus was The Ohio State University’s Wexner Center for the Arts, which regularly showcases the work of prominent contemporary artists and hosts lectures and symposia by influential critics and artists of recent years. Examples include the recent exhibition “From Pop To Now: Selections from the Sonnabend Collection” and lectures by performance pioneer Marina Abramovic and art critic Carter Ratcliff. Also mentioned were several galleries in the city’s popular Short North Arts District: the Rebecca Ibel Gallery which features the work of established U. S. artists in all media, the Hawk Galleries and its amazing, technically resplendent works in glass, and the Riffe Gallery, which showcases the work of Ohio’s artists and curators and the collections of the state’s museums and galleries.

Forced to reduce exhibitions and staff due to budget constraints, the Columbus Museum of Art is still producing quiet, but stimulating exhibitions as well. The current exhibition “By George! Columbus Celebrates American Master George Bellows” is one such exhibition. Born and raised in Columbus, Bellows (1882-1925) is considered one of the finest artists of his generation, and the museum is the world’s foremost repository of works by the artist. This tribute exhibition showcases its collection of the artist’s paintings and lithographs. Divided into four themes: Columbus, New York, New England and sports, 60 works demonstrate the diversity of Bellows’ œuvre.

In Polo at Lakewood (1913), the swooping gestures and suspended motion that identify Bellows are evident-the handling of paint will be familiar to those who already know of the diagonal energy in his more widely-known image Stag at Sharkey’s (1909, Cleveland Museum of Art). Also present in Polo at Lakewood is Bellows’ use of blue and white for intense, almost gleaming light. White horses bounce off undulating green pastures, bright white spectator’s dresses flip-flap in the wind. This image demonstrates Bellows’ move from a Social Realist approach to a modern approach given his exposure the European trends displayed in the Armory Show of 1913. Through this and other glowing canvases, the exhibition is a sentimental homage to one of Ohio’s favorite sons.
Cincinnati

With a rather tame exhibition schedule at the Cincinnati Museum of Art, and the Taft Museum’s renovation, the biggest buzz in the Queen City is the grand reopening of the Contemporary Arts Center (CAC). The building, designed by architect Zaha Hadid, is the first and only major museum expansion project designed by an independent female architect. Now a freestanding structure, the Lois & Richard Rosenthal Center for Contemporary Art provides spaces for temporary exhibitions, site-specific installations, and performances through its distinct role as a kunsthalle. The new galleries are of varying sizes and ceiling heights that allow for connections and interlocking designs that offer numerous spatial configurations meant to accommodate the sometimes-enormous scale and diverse media of contemporary art.

Recognized contemporary artists such as Vanessa Beecroft, Janet Cardiff and Yinka Shonibare are featured alongside established and emerging artists from around the globe in the CAC’s reopening exhibition “Somewhere Better than This Place: Alternative Social Experience in the Spaces of Contemporary Art.” To better explain the premise of this lengthy title, the CAC’s press release quotes philosopher Michael Foucault: “There are…in every culture, in every civilization, real places….in which all the other real sites that can be found within the culture are simultaneously represented, contested, and inverted,” he wrote in 1976. Labeling these sites as “heterotopia”-specifically the territories defined by institutions such as birthing centers, prisons, fairgrounds, and mental hospitals-these sites are spaces in which people can analyze and critique troubling aspects of society, and consider possible alternatives.

Foucault? In Ohio?
Setting a certain standard for ideas in art in this very conservative city is noting new for the CAC. The Center established itself as a leader in 1940 as one of the first American institutions to exhibit Picasso’s Guernica. The Center continued its pioneering tradition by featuring the work of hundreds of renowned artists early in their careers including Laurie Anderson, Jasper Johns, Louise Nevelson, Nam June Paik, I.M. Pei, Robert Rauschenberg, Kara Walker and Andy Warhol. Most notably, the Center was at the center of an important First Amendment legal case in 1990 when it successfully defended the right of Cincinnati’s citizens to view an exhibition of the photographs of Robert Mapplethorpe.

The idea behind this grand reopening exhibition is clear and the building is spectacular, but the exhibition can be a tad overwhelming. Works inhabit all six floors, each serving as an exploration of the relationships among society, place and art and encouraging direct interaction between the Center’s audiences, works of art and the building itself. A sense of order is conveyed by arranging works according to four key themes: the social construction of identities; discourses of social order; changing patterns of social relations; and social encounters organized around shared experiences of the sublime. The works reflect the role of contemporary art museums as places distinct from all others, in which “outside” culture is both represented and critiqued, and unique social activity is created.

With so many works and so many ideas, the exhibition functions as a contemporary historical survey. Oxymoronic for sure, and with so many works in so little time with so many ideas and references, one can get lost in the intellectual soup. But hey, at least we’re thinking.

Cheap rents there may be, but cheap experiences these are not. All over the state, unique art experiences can be found, and you don’t have to fight the subway crowd to get there. Call them “cow towns” if you will, but Ohio’s cultural centers hold their own against larger metropolitan cities. The art is beautiful. . . wish you were here!

The post Greetings from Ohio. . .Wish You Were Here! appeared first on artcritical.