Ryan McGinley Inspires Inspid Reporting

by Art Fag City on April 16, 2008 · 34 comments Blurb

mcginley.jpg
Ryan McGinley, Running Field

Does anyone else find this really annoying?

I don't know of any young artist besides Ryan McGinley who can evoke Andrew Wyeth without seeming arch or trite. Or one modish enough to conjure an opening where downtown socialites the MisShapes have to be seen to maintain cred, yet still solid enough for the New York Times Magazine's prim photo editor to accept his invitation to dinner. His deft straddling of wholesome and hip has a broad appeal that drew a crowd to last Thursday's opening of “I Know Where the Summer Goes” big enough to have broken a Team gallery record, or at least its fire code.

Hoo Boy! Ryan McGinley evokes Andrew Wyeth, appeals to scenesters AND the New York Time Magazine’s photo editor! This combined with record breaking gallery attendance at his opening, is truly the mark of a remarkable photographer! Fawning and sycophantic reporting courtesy of Artforum.com.

{ 34 comments }

tom moody April 16, 2008 at 3:21 pm

I find it really annoying. Also the photo–“running nude with sneakers.”

tom moody April 16, 2008 at 10:21 am

I find it really annoying. Also the photo–“running nude with sneakers.”

deaner April 16, 2008 at 6:30 pm

I’m just taking this all in and don’t have an opinion yet. So, very honestly, I’d like to ask you – what do you think of Ryan McGinley’s work ?

deaner April 16, 2008 at 1:30 pm

I’m just taking this all in and don’t have an opinion yet. So, very honestly, I’d like to ask you – what do you think of Ryan McGinley’s work ?

jacson April 16, 2008 at 9:14 pm

in all fairness, they weren’t reviewing the show, that was from the photoblog documenting the opening.

jacson April 16, 2008 at 4:14 pm

in all fairness, they weren’t reviewing the show, that was from the photoblog documenting the opening.

Art Fag City April 16, 2008 at 9:22 pm

Jacson: The post doesn’t ask for a review though, it asks for reporting that is less pandering.

Deaner: I may write about the work, so I’ll know better at that time, but as a general observation, I’d say it’s really hard to have an objective opinion about his work because he’s so famous. Every time you look at his work, you’re also looking at his public personality. So I guess I’d say, that the works I’ve seen in person haven’t blown me away, but I haven’t seen the show, so I can’t judge it yet.

Art Fag City April 16, 2008 at 4:22 pm

Jacson: The post doesn’t ask for a review though, it asks for reporting that is less pandering.

Deaner: I may write about the work, so I’ll know better at that time, but as a general observation, I’d say it’s really hard to have an objective opinion about his work because he’s so famous. Every time you look at his work, you’re also looking at his public personality. So I guess I’d say, that the works I’ve seen in person haven’t blown me away, but I haven’t seen the show, so I can’t judge it yet.

Sam April 17, 2008 at 2:48 am

Well, I have to say, AFC, in response to your comment: I, admittedly, am not as informed as others on the “who’s who” bullshit that makes the art world what it is. I have seen and studied a lot of photography, though, and I can say that I really liked this show a lot. So, I can safely say I have seen his work without seeing HIM.

Second, in response to your question in the post itself, “Does anyone else find this really annoying?” I have to be honest with you: while maybe the snippet is pandering, and perhaps even annoying depending on one’s mood (not to mention its source), I found your reaction to also be a little annoying. It is elitist. You draw attention to both the quote and yourself in a way that suggests a worthlessness of his words, and a higher value to yours, despite the fact that you haven’t even seen the work that inspired the comment to begin with. At any rate, all either of you seems to be talking about here is Ryan McGinley himself, so if you don’t like McGinley, it might be better to just say so and say that you disagree with Artforum, rather than be sarcastic. It would make you sound more reputable and respectable, and make for something more interesting and worthwhile to read.

Not trying to be confrontational or aggressive. This is coming from someone who appreciates you for information in/on the art world. Just my two cents.

Sam April 16, 2008 at 9:48 pm

Well, I have to say, AFC, in response to your comment: I, admittedly, am not as informed as others on the “who’s who” bullshit that makes the art world what it is. I have seen and studied a lot of photography, though, and I can say that I really liked this show a lot. So, I can safely say I have seen his work without seeing HIM.

Second, in response to your question in the post itself, “Does anyone else find this really annoying?” I have to be honest with you: while maybe the snippet is pandering, and perhaps even annoying depending on one’s mood (not to mention its source), I found your reaction to also be a little annoying. It is elitist. You draw attention to both the quote and yourself in a way that suggests a worthlessness of his words, and a higher value to yours, despite the fact that you haven’t even seen the work that inspired the comment to begin with. At any rate, all either of you seems to be talking about here is Ryan McGinley himself, so if you don’t like McGinley, it might be better to just say so and say that you disagree with Artforum, rather than be sarcastic. It would make you sound more reputable and respectable, and make for something more interesting and worthwhile to read.

Not trying to be confrontational or aggressive. This is coming from someone who appreciates you for information in/on the art world. Just my two cents.

Art Fag City April 17, 2008 at 3:05 am

Sam: I see your point, but even without the bit about Wyeth that comment would have been annoying. That probably doesn’t stop the response from being a little grating (now that you point it out, unfortunately, I see it), but given this, I think the fact that I haven’t seen the show isn’t a very strong point.

Also, “haven’t been blown away” doesn’t mean dislike. Over rated maybe, but I wouldn’t go so far as dislike.

Art Fag City April 16, 2008 at 10:05 pm

Sam: I see your point, but even without the bit about Wyeth that comment would have been annoying. That probably doesn’t stop the response from being a little grating (now that you point it out, unfortunately, I see it), but given this, I think the fact that I haven’t seen the show isn’t a very strong point.

Also, “haven’t been blown away” doesn’t mean dislike. Over rated maybe, but I wouldn’t go so far as dislike.

Paul Pincus April 17, 2008 at 2:06 pm

I really loved this new series of work by Ryan McGinley. “Falling Cornfield” is one of the most beautiful photographs I think I have ever seen. You’re right…Artforum gushed a little…but I think it has to do with the combination of such strong work and Ryan’s innate glamour…seriously.

Now I’m gushing.

Paul Pincus April 17, 2008 at 9:06 am

I really loved this new series of work by Ryan McGinley. “Falling Cornfield” is one of the most beautiful photographs I think I have ever seen. You’re right…Artforum gushed a little…but I think it has to do with the combination of such strong work and Ryan’s innate glamour…seriously.

Now I’m gushing.

Sam April 17, 2008 at 3:30 pm

AFC: I think I read your dislike from the way you were speaking, not from what you were saying. Also, I was merely including your lack of having seen the show as a means of leveling the playing field. But thanks for your response!

All that aside, I think you should definitely see the show. It’s a strong body overall.

Sam April 17, 2008 at 10:30 am

AFC: I think I read your dislike from the way you were speaking, not from what you were saying. Also, I was merely including your lack of having seen the show as a means of leveling the playing field. But thanks for your response!

All that aside, I think you should definitely see the show. It’s a strong body overall.

retortage April 18, 2008 at 5:05 pm

This “work” is beyond meaningless. It’s basically “hot young art kids gone wild.” I can almost hear the screams of “take it off” and the sounds of drugs being snorted all across his fake road trips in search of beauty in depravity. These people are auditioned for and unlike his originals, the photo’s have zero substance. Well, maybe not zero. That would be more like those Morrissey color splash pictures. These have a tiny bit of substance in that they reference his photos when from when looking at them didn’t want to make me throw up in my mouth.

And has anyone even seen a Wyeth painting recently? I thought they were trite, sentimental, american folk garbage, but actually, they’re skillfully made, thoughtful and quite beautiful. I don’t want to say he’s turning over in his grave, but he might be.

retortage April 18, 2008 at 12:05 pm

This “work” is beyond meaningless. It’s basically “hot young art kids gone wild.” I can almost hear the screams of “take it off” and the sounds of drugs being snorted all across his fake road trips in search of beauty in depravity. These people are auditioned for and unlike his originals, the photo’s have zero substance. Well, maybe not zero. That would be more like those Morrissey color splash pictures. These have a tiny bit of substance in that they reference his photos when from when looking at them didn’t want to make me throw up in my mouth.

And has anyone even seen a Wyeth painting recently? I thought they were trite, sentimental, american folk garbage, but actually, they’re skillfully made, thoughtful and quite beautiful. I don’t want to say he’s turning over in his grave, but he might be.

Arundel April 18, 2008 at 11:31 pm

Yes, I do find the gushing praise over McGinley annoying. It very much is based on his persona as a scenester, and not the work.

Which isn’t terrible, except for reminding me of Abercrombie ads minus the sexy people. And the minimal aesthetic quality as photographs- well it seems like snapshots of trust-fund hippies larking about on drugs. It reminds me of what I hated about Darjeeling Express- beautiful scenery in an exotic setting, self-absorbed characters on a road trip. “Like, wow- America beyond the Lower East Side is like, wow- let’s get naked.”

It’s more about the imagined lifestyle of the artist than the photos- famous, carefree, young, hip and successful. But really boring and any aesthetic value in a single photo almost seems like an accident. Just mho.

Arundel April 18, 2008 at 6:31 pm

Yes, I do find the gushing praise over McGinley annoying. It very much is based on his persona as a scenester, and not the work.

Which isn’t terrible, except for reminding me of Abercrombie ads minus the sexy people. And the minimal aesthetic quality as photographs- well it seems like snapshots of trust-fund hippies larking about on drugs. It reminds me of what I hated about Darjeeling Express- beautiful scenery in an exotic setting, self-absorbed characters on a road trip. “Like, wow- America beyond the Lower East Side is like, wow- let’s get naked.”

It’s more about the imagined lifestyle of the artist than the photos- famous, carefree, young, hip and successful. But really boring and any aesthetic value in a single photo almost seems like an accident. Just mho.

Johnny Nella April 19, 2008 at 5:28 pm

I don’t want to say he’s turning over in his grave, but he might be.
retortage // 18 Apr 2008, 12:05 pm

Andrew Wyeth isn’t dead

Johnny Nella April 19, 2008 at 12:28 pm

I don’t want to say he’s turning over in his grave, but he might be.
retortage // 18 Apr 2008, 12:05 pm

Andrew Wyeth isn’t dead

Paul Pincus April 19, 2008 at 8:45 pm

retortage: I think you’ve found your soul mate in Arundel ; )

You once thought of Andrew Wyeth as trite, sentimental, american folk garbage…but you eventually woke up…I sense the same thing will happen for you regarding Ryan.

I’m happy that Johnny Nella set you straight about Mr. Wyeth…who is still happily at work.

ps not all of the Morrissey series were colour spash pictures…some were non-colour splash pictures.

Paul Pincus April 19, 2008 at 3:45 pm

retortage: I think you’ve found your soul mate in Arundel ; )

You once thought of Andrew Wyeth as trite, sentimental, american folk garbage…but you eventually woke up…I sense the same thing will happen for you regarding Ryan.

I’m happy that Johnny Nella set you straight about Mr. Wyeth…who is still happily at work.

ps not all of the Morrissey series were colour spash pictures…some were non-colour splash pictures.

tom moody April 21, 2008 at 3:58 am

A world of playful innocence, where attractive young people frolic naked and unashamed. Brought to you by an artist and his professional team, scouting the country for locations. Just like Disney, except for the naked part.
“Running nude with sneakers” will likely grow more silly with the years, not less.
The precedent is Maxfield Parrish, not Wyeth.

tom moody April 20, 2008 at 10:58 pm

A world of playful innocence, where attractive young people frolic naked and unashamed. Brought to you by an artist and his professional team, scouting the country for locations. Just like Disney, except for the naked part.
“Running nude with sneakers” will likely grow more silly with the years, not less.
The precedent is Maxfield Parrish, not Wyeth.

valerie gisiger May 10, 2008 at 6:10 pm

When I was a child,I hated the Max parrish”Dinky Bird “illustration-it bugged,it seemed precious,as far as I could sense such a quality at that early age-and the one of a chick with her legs spread open,in a truck,just hate it-it is all so unnatural,and really pointless.”MY friends are pretty”fuck you-you fucking hired them –

valerie gisiger May 10, 2008 at 1:10 pm

When I was a child,I hated the Max parrish”Dinky Bird “illustration-it bugged,it seemed precious,as far as I could sense such a quality at that early age-and the one of a chick with her legs spread open,in a truck,just hate it-it is all so unnatural,and really pointless.”MY friends are pretty”fuck you-you fucking hired them –

valerie gisiger May 10, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Maxfield

valerie gisiger May 10, 2008 at 1:11 pm

Maxfield

Rick June 8, 2008 at 7:47 am

I don’t know RM, but admire his work. From this starting point, will someone please tell me the name of the subject in “Running Field”? Nice ass whoever it is 😉

Rick June 8, 2008 at 2:47 am

I don’t know RM, but admire his work. From this starting point, will someone please tell me the name of the subject in “Running Field”? Nice ass whoever it is 😉

Authority on Art October 3, 2010 at 9:29 pm

Photos aren’t art. That’s why they’re so vacuous and boring… unless the person being photographed has an interesting face. Its so easy to take a photo that even vacuous imbeciles can take pictures. And there’s a lot of dough in selling a lot of cameras to a whole lot of vauous imbeciles. Nobody ever went broke flattering all the idiots out there for money. You can’t beat big business at making money off a lot of stupid people. And then, not to be left behind as unhip and out of the loop, the pseudo-intellectual fan boys (critics) will figure out a way to fawn over it and walk out in front of the parade of dopes.

That’s life. The idiots announce they are geniuses at every turn. And the real geniuses are too busy working on their art to make up the political ground.

Now that the great Andrew Wyeth is actually dead, that makes the ratio of mediocrities to towering talents about 40 million to 1.

Authority on Art October 3, 2010 at 5:29 pm

Photos aren’t art. That’s why they’re so vacuous and boring… unless the person being photographed has an interesting face. Its so easy to take a photo that even vacuous imbeciles can take pictures. And there’s a lot of dough in selling a lot of cameras to a whole lot of vauous imbeciles. Nobody ever went broke flattering all the idiots out there for money. You can’t beat big business at making money off a lot of stupid people. And then, not to be left behind as unhip and out of the loop, the pseudo-intellectual fan boys (critics) will figure out a way to fawn over it and walk out in front of the parade of dopes.

That’s life. The idiots announce they are geniuses at every turn. And the real geniuses are too busy working on their art to make up the political ground.

Now that the great Andrew Wyeth is actually dead, that makes the ratio of mediocrities to towering talents about 40 million to 1.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: