State of the Arts Category Archive: Criticism

Obama's choice of art starts plagiarism debate

Posted at 9:54 AM on October 9, 2009 by Marianne Combs (0 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism

Little did I know when I chose Alma Thomas' "Watusi (Hard Edge)" as the lead image in my post concerning the Obama family's taste for modern art, that this very image would become the subject of heated debate amongst Obama's critics.

Many people have noted the striking similarity between Thomas' "Watusi" (below, left) and a piece by Henri Matisse from 1953 called "L'Escargot" or "the snail."

Since the news that the Obama family was hanging the Thomas piece in the East wing of the White House, critics (such as Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin) have used the piece's similarity to Matisse to deride the Obama administration. And "Bob" posted on State of the Arts:

Of course, it is reproduction of a 1953 piece by Henri Matisse titled "L'Escargot" (rotated 90 degrees). But one does not really expect originality in the Obama White House.

Let's call this a "teachable moment." Alma Thomas was indeed inspired by Henri Matisse, and knowingly used his work "L'Escargot" as the basis for "Watusi" - inverting the colors and "twisting" the work to give a new view.

In fact what Thomas was doing was drawing attention to the fact that Matisse himself was greatly inspired by African art. Matisse himself wrote:

"I often used to pass ... a curio shop called "Le Père Sauvage"... There was a whole corner of little wooden statues of Negro origin. I was astonished to see how they were conceived from the point of view of sculptural language. ... Compared to European sculpture, which always took its point of departure from the description of the object, these Negro statues were made ... according to invented planes and proportions."

Those "invented planes and proportions" had a great effect on Matisse's figurative work:

Blue Nude 2, Henri Matisse

Stark referencing of other artists' work is nothing new in the art world. In fact, the Walker Art Center held an exhibition in 2007 of artists inspired by Picasso, and there were a number of instances where at first glance, it felt like "copying" (those people doing the copying included Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollack). But as curator Michael FitzGerald explained to me, much of what happens in art is the sharing of ideas, the claiming of one person's art for your own and then morphing it into something new.

So was Thomas' piece a plagiary? No. Was it heavily inspired by Matisse? Yes. Does it take Matisse's image and use it to say something new and important? Yes.

If anything, the Obamas' choice of "Watusi (hard edge)" could be seen as extremely clever. It is a work of art that points to a longstanding exchange of ideas between cultures, building off one another as they explore new artistic terrain and ideas.

Comment on this post

Arts Journal is 10 years young

Posted at 10:29 AM on September 14, 2009 by Euan Kerr (0 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism, People, Writing

Congratulations to Arts Journal which celebrated the 10th anniversary of its first post over the weekend.

AJ serves as both an arts news aggregator and as an originator of content in several different area. It taps into the arts scene through some 200 publications from all over the US and across the English-speaking world. There is always something, if not many things, of interest to read.

Readers can also sign up for a free daily or weekly digest, depending on their appetite for arts news.

Founder and editor Douglas McLennan tells a little bit of the Arts Journal story in his blog Diacritical.

In it he promises much more, including a new design: We're working on the next version of ArtsJournal, which we hope to launch in the next month or so. As the media world changes from newspapers to other sources, we want to make sure we're casting our nets in the right directions. And we want to make it easier to find the stories they're looking for. Here's to another ten.

Comment on this post

Reviews and ideas from the weekend

Posted at 6:00 AM on August 10, 2009 by Marianne Combs (0 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism, Culture

Kevin Kling, Michael Sommers, Jacqueline Ultan, Michelle Kinney, and Simone Perrin present an evening of musical storytelling in "Flight"

What a weekend! Lots of great writing about local artists of all stripes, so read on to catch up on what you may have missed...

Graydon Royce gives a glowing review of Kevin Kling's new show "Flight" at Open Eye Figure Theatre in Minneapolis. Royce writes:

Kling's tales... provide the spine (and heart) of this show and we are reminded again of how to tell a story. It's not about rhythms and cadences. It's about details -- bald eagles swooping upon a stringer of walleye, a tiny boy noticing his parents cry, a transient's toothless grin. The real work of Kling's stories was done years ago when his soul deeply understood how important it is to wonder why certain moments, regardless how mundane, have such meaning in our lives.

Nice writing, Graydon!

Dominic Papatola at the Pioneer Press gives his wrap-up of the 2009 Minnesota Fringe Festival here. For the most part Papatola seems really pleased with this year's festival, giving kudos to Fringe artistic director Robin Gillett. His biggest complaint? Not being able to find food and drink during the 30 minute breaks between shows. He'd also like free shuttles between venues.

(Note: if you just can't get enough of fringe festivals, check out this profile of the Berkshire Fringe in the New York Times. It's tiny compared to the Minnesota Fringe, and very very earnest.)

Star Tribune film critic Colin Colvert was not that impressed with "Julie & Julia," saying that while Meryl Streep is fantastic, the scenes with modern-day Julie are far less interesting, and weigh the movie down.

Meanwhile A.O. Scott at the New York Times thinks audiences are being spoon-fed formulaic movie pablum in a desperate retreat to sure successes during a recession.

From Wolverine and Mr. Spock in May through the Decepticons and wizards of July it has been a triumph of the tried and true, occasionally revitalized or decked out with novelty, but mostly just what we expected. No surprises.

Scott says the biggest success, both artistic and economic, of the summer has been "Up." This season, he says, the film with the most mature treatment of the adult themes of loss and regret is a cartoon.

Poet Kathryn Kysar reviews Alia Yunis' book "The Night Counter," in which Scheherezade appears to an elderly Lebanese immigrant and demands to be told a story each night for the next thousand and one nights. Kysar writes:

Yunis masterfully adds not only classical literature references, most prominently "The Arabian Nights," but she also delivers a searing yet humorous commentary about the difficulties confronting Arab-Americans living in the post-9/11 United States. She presents the reader with a catalog of clichés -- such as faux-Middle Eastern belly dancers in Vegas and a hippie fortuneteller with a fake crystal ball -- and challenges her readers to rethink these stereotypes as the characters' personal crises mirror larger geo-political events.

Finally, Mary Abbe has a profile of stone sculptor Zoran Mojsilov (If you've ever been to the Greek restaurant Gardens of Salonica in Minneapolis, that's his work inside and outside the building). Mojsilov is the subject of a retrospective at the North Dakota Museum of Art in Grand Forks.

So what did you do this weekend? Got any reviews for us? I'm all ears.

Comment on this post

Why blog about art?

Posted at 1:44 PM on August 6, 2009 by Marianne Combs (1 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism, Culture, Technology

(Please forgive this act of self-indulgence. Oh wait, this is a blog...)

Blogging about art has made me a member of a rarified group of people, perhaps even more rare than the group "arts reporters." But our numbers are growing, as both traditional media outlets and freelancers find value in talking about art on a more casual, daily basis.

So when I saw that PBS' blog Art Beat had posted a new blurb (that's a technical term) titled "The Art of Blogging About Art," I was immediately sucked into the great naval-gazing void. Would I find myself reflected in their descriptions? Would I agree with my art-blogging compatriots?

Yes.

And no.

Chris Amico talks with three arts bloggers: Lisa Fung (arts editor and contributor to LA Times' Culture Monster), Don Share (contributor to "Harriet," the Poetry Foundation's group blog) and Lee Rosenbaum (arts writer for the Wall Street Journal, aka CultureGrrl).

Here are some of the ideas they raised, with which I heartily agree:

Blogging about the arts allows me and my colleagues at MPR to share news and ideas with you in ways completely different from our traditional radio format. That gives us flexibility to tell a story more creatively, with slideshows and video, if we like. It also allows me to speak in a more personal voice, and engage in a conversation that I don't get to have as a reporter on our air.

Talking about art in a more personal voice in turn makes the conversation more accessible to the general public. No snooty noses in the air here - all opinions are welcome. And the more voices that pitch in, the better the conversation.

Finally, writing a blog - and having a place where people can post their comments - helps me to do my job better as an arts reporter. I hear more now from people who wouldn't have taken the time to hunt down my e-mail address and send me a personal note. Those comments sometimes lead to (valued) corrections, and sometimes lead to new posts and even in-depth stories.

So yea for art blogs. But there is one idea brought forth by the bloggers with which I must disagree, at least in terms of my own writing.

Lee Rosenbaum says in the Art Beat article that she blogs "because I felt I had a lot to say and no place to put it... I can only write so many articles for the Journal but I have ideas everyday that I feel like sharing."

Reporter/blogger Chris Amico goes on to quote Scott Rosenberg, the author of "Say Everything," as saying that most people blog out of "a desire to express themselves, to think out loud, to exult in the possibilities of writing in public..."

In my case, not so much. I may have lots of ideas or thoughts throughout the course of a day, but there are very few I feel are worth typing out. For me, writing is often a very deliberate process, and when I post something here I want to make sure that it's worth my time - and yours. I'm much more excited in hearing what you have to say in response to a post than I am in the idea of simply "writing in public."

So with that, I'll shamelessly plug some of the ways in which YOU can have a say in this blog. As with any blog, you can comment on what you find here. You can also share your favorite work of Minnesota art for our series "We Art Minnesota." And you are always welcome to sign up to be an Art Hound, to help keep me and your fellow Minnesotans in the know about cool cultural events.

Comment on this post

Michael Steinberg memorial now available

Posted at 6:06 PM on July 30, 2009 by Euan Kerr (0 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism, Culture, Music

My colleagues at Classical MPR and at APM's Performance Today have gathered interviews and other pieces from over the years marking the long and creative relationship MPR had with writer and educator Michael Steinberg, who passed away at the weekend.

You can find it here.

There is also the opportunity to share your own memories of Steinberg.

Comment on this post

Music writer Michael Steinberg dies

Posted at 3:07 PM on July 26, 2009 by Euan Kerr (4 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism, Music, Writing

Michael Steinberg, widely recognized as one of the most important writers on classical music of our time passed away this morning at age 80. Steinberg, husband of recently retired Minnesota Orchestra Concertmaster Jorja Fleezanis was diagnosed with cancer three years ago.

During his career Steinberg worked as a critic for the Boston Globe, a lecturer at several colleges and universities including Smith College, Hunter College, Brandeis University,
and the New England Conservatory. He was in later years program annotator to the New York Philharmonic while also serving as an advisor to the Minnesota Orchestra.

Born in Breslau in Germany in 1928, he spent part of his childhood in England after his mother managed to get him included in the Kindertransport, the rescue effort which got 10,000 children out of Germany before the outbreak of World War II. He moved to the United States with his mother and brother before the end of the war.

It was in England that he first discovered his love of music. In his book "For the love of Music: Invitations to Listening" co-authored with Larry Rothe, Steinberg revealed it was not in a concert hall, but in an alley behind a movie theater.

"It was Fantasia, the original 1940 version that did me in. I saw it just once, at the Cosmopolitan, a dingy movie house in Cambridge England, and although this was more than sixty-five years ago, I remember it more vividly than most of the movies I have seen in the last sixty-five weeks. I saw it just once because as a schoolboy on threepence a week in pocket money - even in 1940 that bought hardly anything, and surely not more than half a movie ticket - I couldn't afford to go again. Besides the guardians of Good Taste would not have encouraged, let alone subsidized, a return visit. But I also realized I did not need to see it again because the most important part was available for free. Behind the sweet little fleabag where Fantasia was playing, there was this alley where I could stand every day after school, stand undisturbed, and listen to the soundtrack of Leopold Stokowski and the Philadelphia Orchestra playing Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, and Stravinsky. On a recent visit to Cambridge I was happy to see there is still a movie theater on the same site, but it is now called the Arts Theatre and is a lot cleaner."

In a statement today Rothe said this of Steinberg:

"In the last years Michael defined what it means to battle an illness. He
continued to hang tough, determined not to let anything keep him from doing
what he had always done, which was to put listeners in touch with the music.
In his writing and in his talks, Michael knocked down walls with
intelligence, wit, and a broad sense of culture. He was a great storyteller.
He expected much from his readers and offered much. You get a taste of all
this in his books: The Symphony, The Concerto, and Choral Masterworks, three
compilations of his program notes. Another book, For the Love of Music,
gathers his reflections on an array of musical subjects.

Concerts to celebrate Michael Steinberg's life will be presented in San Francisco and Minneapolis at times to be announced.

Comment on this post

One show, two nights, two reviews

Posted at 1:24 PM on July 20, 2009 by Marianne Combs (0 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism, Theater

The Brave New Workshop's latest production "Save the Planet: Yes we can, but do we have to?" opened over the weekend. Two reviews of the production reveal how critics can have differing viewpoints, and how the production can change from one evening to the next.

Graydon Royce got to the show on Friday night, and his take-away was lukewarm, writing "laughter is uncomfortably absent on several occasions." Royce points out "the material seems more eager to offend than has been the case recently at the Workshop" but remarks it comes across as more bravado than bravery.

The following night freelance writer Quinton Skinner made his way to the Brave New Workshop, and his review was a clear rave. He writes that the Brave New Workshop delivers ample quantities of "sharp, smart and uninhibited comedy." He goes on to state:

What stands out... is the cohesion and energy of a cast that has worked together long enough to elevate its work to a level of deceptive smoothness and attention to detail.

From the two critiques it's not hard to glean that Royce probably has a lower tolerance than Skinner for swearing and vulgarity. Royce notes he's never heard so many references to the uterus since attending "The Vagina Monologues." But he acknowledges his bias when he writes "These are just the facts, ma'am. You can decide whether that's your cup of hemlock."

Two differing viewpoints, however, don't account for one critic experiencing awkward silences while the other walked away untroubled. Or do they?

I called up a couple of the core performers of Brave New Workshop, Joe Bozic and Lauren Anderson, to get their takes. Bozic noted that Graydon Royce came to the show on opening night, which Bozic says, tends to be a "rockstar performance" due to all the BNW "superfans" in the audience. Bozic says opening night often gets louder and longer laughs, and this opening night was no exception.

By contrast, Bozic says Quinton Skinner went to an early show on Saturday (7pm, as opposed to the 9pm 10pm late show), which tends to draw an older, more conservative crowd. Given the two reviews, you might have expected the two reviewers to have switched places. Bozic says he believes the Friday and Saturday night performances were both strong, and it's the reviewers mindsets that made the difference.

Lauren Anderson takes a different approach. "If we're doing our job right, every sketch someone will love, someone will hate, and someone will get offended by," she said.

She actually viewed Graydon Royce's review as pretty positive. But she says she has particular respect for theater critics:

My expectation from reviewers is that they see more theater than anybody else. It's like, my sense of humor started to change once I started to do comedy for a living. So now it takes quite a bit to make me laugh. I think that happens to reviewers as well. What your typical audience would laugh at a reviewer could go 'oh I've seen that before.'

So what do you think? And where do you get your information to help you figure out which shows to see?

Oh and heads up - tune in to All Things Considered tonight for a look at how blogs and other social media are changing the way artists promote their work, and how audiences get their reviews. It's the first in a two part in-depth report by MPR's Chris Roberts.

Comment on this post

What's the role of the critic?

Posted at 11:11 AM on July 2, 2009 by Marianne Combs (1 Comments)
Filed under: Criticism

Anne Midgette in her blog for the Washington Post wrote eloquently about what she believes to be the responsibility of an art critic:

The role of a critic is to cover a field. This doesn't mean simply pandering to popular taste. It means doing one's best to convey a sense of what is going on in a given discipline by writing about every possible side of it. It means trying to convey a perspective that a reader who doesn't spend every night going to concerts/plays/films may not be able to gather himself; or offering a thoughtful take that might stimulate a reader who does go to everything to see something in a different light.

For part of our role is to foster dialogue and debate. That doesn't mean setting forth judgments of taste in order that readers might fall obediently into line behind us. Quite the contrary: it may mean putting out views that one knows may represent the minority. It means being interested in the thoughts of those who disagree. It means being delighted when someone is powerfully moved by something one didn't like oneself. It also means writing well enough that someone might want to read you -- a goal that's hard to reach if all you're doing is trying to push readers to buy tickets.

It's a noble ideal: fostering dialogue, representing the minority, and writing artful prose all at the same time. But add to that Jonathan Jones' take on being a critic for the Guardian. Jones states plainly that arts criticism is only for a special few

...if nothing is properly criticised, mediocrity triumphs. A critic is basically an arrogant bastard who says "this is good, this is bad" without necessarily being able to explain why. At least, not instantly. The truth is, we feel this stuff in our bones. And we're innately convinced we're right...

Of course, by being so blunt, I run the risk of vilification. I will be seen as a vapid snob, elitist, etc. But I am no more guilty of these traits than anyone else who sets themselves up as a professional critic; I'm just trying to be honest. What do you think all the other critics believe - that their opinion is worth nothing? Unless you think you're right, you shouldn't pass verdict on art that is someone's dream, someone's life.

Jones and Midgette seem to take separate roads - one high, one low - in this argument. Yet they both end up at basically the same destination: critics are important, they're special, and they're needed. Of course they'd say that - they're critics.

So what do other people want from critics? I've noticed that varies greatly depending on whether the reader in question is an arts-goer, or an artist.

Arts-goers on the whole are the more pragmatic bunch - they want to know if they should bother spending their money on a particuar show, and what they might hope to take away from it should they attend. If the review is fun to read, so much the better. If it provokes interesting questions, that's icing on the cake.

However when it comes to artists and their cohorts, I often hear them decry the criticism in the local papers and elsewhere. Either there's not enough of it, or what's done is too "thumbs-up-thumbs-down." They say the critic doesn't know what he (and yes, in this town, it's usually a he) is talking about, or the critic has no taste. Certainly it doesn't make the job look like any fun.

So what is the role of a critic? Is it possible for any critic to foster critical debate, write beautifully and help you plan your weekend? What do you want from your local art critic? Are they giving you what you need?

Comment on this post