28
07
2008
More B.P.O.Fs for July 28 (A follow up or two)
Posted by: admin in Art is the first thing that goes out the window, Plus ca change plus d'art échoue..., Minneapolis art town blues, Bullet Points of Failure (B.P.O.F.), Ah Minneapolis..., Struggling small art organizations, The failure of American Art Museums, Art museums and filthy lucre, The art world is its own worst enemy, Americans pretty much hate artists, Artistic failure in AmericaMary Abbe of the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s been busy of late. She’s the source of two of today’s Bullet Points of Failure (B.P.O.F.), both of which follow up on items I’ve been covering here on CAFA in recent weeks.
- In Anxious artists’ fears quelled, protest averted with attorney’s answers, Abbe writes to follow up on the MAEP kerfuffle. Apparently, on July 24 a group of artists attended the MIA’s annual members meeting, attempting to mount a protest, only to see it wither “under the weight of parliamentary procedure… Board president Brian Palmer, a Minneapolis lawyer, defused the situation by answering each question with judicial precision and disquisitions on the museum’s legal responsibilities. The Minnesota Artists Exhibition Program will continue unchanged and independent, he said. Questioners would need to ask the program’s coordinator why he resigned voluntarily if they wished to know.” And thus spaketh the passionate crowd.
- In SOS: Same old struggles at the MMAA, Abbe reports further on a story reported here previously, the resignation of Bruce Lilly, the director of the Minnesota Museum of American Art. “The resignation last week of Bruce Lilly,” she wrote, “the museum’s director for 11 years, highlights the St. Paul institution’s long-festering problems. Museum officials put a brave face on the situation, insisting that the organization would find a new leader, new quarters and more money. ‘It’s not easy, but the staff here is up to the challenge,’ said Natalie Obee, the museum’s business manager, who who stepped in as interim executive director.” Apparently, the museum has had a long cycle of debt–including an estimated deficity of $260,000 in 2007, on an annual budget of about $700,000–and is facing the loss of its current space (the second time it’s faced a move in the past five years).
Entries (RSS)
July 28th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
It’s been a few years since you became aware of the burgeoning model of failure within art. I wonder if you have reached or are yet reaching for an answer? You have a history degree in art and with this long view can you now see something inate in this post Postmodern era which likely caused an inevitable decline? Is there a decline? Or, is what we witness weekly a mere correction that seems historically correlative to economic ups and downs?
Is the world of art simply exhausted of itself as its audience is of it? Do artists who continue laboring at their work incognizant of the swirl of failure, care? And if government comes to rescue, full funding of everything, would that strengthen Art? I can’t get The Triumph of American Painting out of my mind, and wth has happened since.
As Chuck Connelly sits on his ouvre of 3000 plus neo-expressionist marvels, his work remains, if yet unseen. Its power, as such, untapped. I salute his stubborness, his independence. In some way it is supremely admirable. Maybe he is not a failure? Does income always define success? Success must be more subtle.
July 28th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
You ask good questions. I have been doing this for awhile, so you’d assume I have some answers…
The only thing I can steer you toward is the “About” page on this site, and some of the earliest posts, in which I attempted to lay out my reasoning for doing this and a strategy.
As a point of clarification, I don’t have a history degree in art. I have a fine art degree (and was a practitioner for many years) and a degree in nonprofit arts administration.
Damn, I still need to find a way to see that Chuck Connelly documentary. Anyone know when it’s coming to town?
July 28th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Well, not to flatter, but you do have a sense of art history that flavors your criticism.
July 29th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
maybe i’m somehow out of context of a quote, but did’nt warhol say “pop will eat itself”, and would that not be an ominous quote of doom especially since juxtapoz is the number one art mag now? just wondering as it struck me the other day that he said that, and even though i could have how it was being said wrong, its possibly a impending failure statement at least for american art. i like juxtapoz/pop surrrealism but most definately not (sorry, lazy spelling today) more than well, almost every other art movement. i just see a potential for more good art from it but its seems to just well, eat itself…
i like this chuck connelly guy btw, whom i looked up after reading here…