November 30, 2005
mike kelley
Kelley, whose most recent show opened recently at the Gagosian Gallery in New York, was the last artist—and by last, I mean both "most recent" and "last ever"—to pull off the great gambit of 20th-century art: He made things that, upon first inspection, you would think had no artistic qualities whatsoever, things that were not and could not possibly be art, let alone significant art. And yet there they were, in a gallery or museum, and after you spent some time with them, you began to think, Yes, of course this is art; and after a little more time, you began to realize that it was very significant art indeed. It now falls to me, and art writers like me, to exercise, for the last time, the great gambit of 20th-century criticism, and explain why. . . .
more from Slate here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 10:06 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c562c53ef00d83462cca653ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference mike kelley:
Comments
Oh this Mike Kelley is so underserving of anyone's notice. The same goes for this critic's views. Both are frauds along with a huge chunk of the heralded creations of the postmodern, post-artist. Month after month I review everything in ArtForum and Art in America and Modern Painters magazines; I visit show after show. Month after month, show after show, so much vacuousness and I am so tired of it. Slate's Lewis writes of Kelley's dumpster finds within MOMA's collection, "the very force of its abjection seemed to abrogate the gravity of the collection that it capped." ... ugggh! [ The garbage of today nullifies the great genius of the past?!? ] The silence from these "authorities" is deafening on some of the true masters of the past 25 years or so; masters whose works will sing along with those of the more distant past: Basquiat (color), Kitaj (drawing), and Chapman brothers (substance). The first 2 are great geniuses either ignored or derided by critics. I have looked everywhere for reasonable reviews of Basquiat's great show in Brooklyn this year. The walls were alive there! An American urban symphony in paint. The work is fresh and beautiful and will remain so long after Kelly's dumpster finds have rotted away (their original purpose). Ok, enough, I have to get back to work.
Posted by: Christian Hargrove | Nov 30, 2005 12:39:54 PM
No one outside of the art world could give a damn about Mike Kelly's work.
Last season myself and two other artists made a tour of Chelsea and its art galleries. All three of us are well grounded in the history of art and the practical and aesthetic aspects of the plastic arts. Of the nearly 200 galleries we visited, the highest review we could come up with was "not too bad." Most everything was just horrible, either pretentious, adolescent or just poorly done. Much of the art required being in on the joke and was made inaccessible to even we three professional modern artists.
Where does the money come into this system? Is it all financed by trust funds, museum directorships and the grant making community? That's some mighty pricey real estate over there on the west side and I can't really imagine anyone sizing up a Mike Kelly piece for their living room.
Posted by: Robert Bate | Nov 30, 2005 8:01:42 PM
Post a comment