Neil Campbell, installation view from the exhibition Faultline. Image via: Marianne Boesky
The documentation of this particular piece isn’t overly representative of the viewing experience at Marianne Boesky — the low level lighting simply isn’t captured here — but I’m posting the picture anyway as a reminder to New Yorkers to catch this show. Seemingly resembling an Ellsworth Kelly, the work exhibits a surprising range of depth and spatial illusion. Normally I’d say more on the subject, but in this case, I think spoilers really will spoil.
{ 22 comments }
this is really very good. worth the effort and the boring but respectable front room
this is really very good. worth the effort and the boring but respectable front room
Better done at Disneyland. Artistes got nuthin on Hollywood.
Better done at Disneyland. Artistes got nuthin on Hollywood.
Donald: Go see the show and then comment on it.
Donald: Go see the show and then comment on it.
Neil Campbell transforms the gallery’s interior with his geometric shapes and patterning. The artist intervenes in the architecture, toying with the experience of the space and addressing questions of viewer perception.
—————-
Okay, let’s grant the above from Boesky’s ‘team’ and your ‘(Campbell’s work) exhibits a surprising range of depth and spatial illusion.’
The burden here becomes a so what. The above exegesis could cover every artist from Judd/Lewitt to Elizabeth Murray, why should Campbell’s work be viewed as any more than chewed gum? What questions of viewer perception, that monochrome shapes have dynamic possible combination that lead to what, Nirvana, convenience stores, Lemon Twist, New Fresh, sartonin release? Again, I’m kinda at a loss here as to why this is not an MFA thesis exhibition of overly simplistic throwbacks to MinimalOpPopHardEdge. If u tell us we are discovering, once again, the floor, the wall, etc., …
Neil Campbell transforms the gallery’s interior with his geometric shapes and patterning. The artist intervenes in the architecture, toying with the experience of the space and addressing questions of viewer perception.
—————-
Okay, let’s grant the above from Boesky’s ‘team’ and your ‘(Campbell’s work) exhibits a surprising range of depth and spatial illusion.’
The burden here becomes a so what. The above exegesis could cover every artist from Judd/Lewitt to Elizabeth Murray, why should Campbell’s work be viewed as any more than chewed gum? What questions of viewer perception, that monochrome shapes have dynamic possible combination that lead to what, Nirvana, convenience stores, Lemon Twist, New Fresh, sartonin release? Again, I’m kinda at a loss here as to why this is not an MFA thesis exhibition of overly simplistic throwbacks to MinimalOpPopHardEdge. If u tell us we are discovering, once again, the floor, the wall, etc., …
The Hill is actualy right, but could have said it in half as many words, and without the William F Buckley thesaurus.
Actually goes back to Elementarism of the 1930s, when lesser artists were trying to use Mondrian and Supremicists as decoration in interior design. Nothing new at all, except combining with Rothkos false spirituality. Low lights to provoke interior obsession. All real religions say to look outward, includng Buddhism, and to be a part of the universe, not retreat into oneself through mysticism. Which is self absorbed love. Not love of life.
And damn, to think I could write that without a dictionary.
Art collegia delenda est
The Hill is actualy right, but could have said it in half as many words, and without the William F Buckley thesaurus.
Actually goes back to Elementarism of the 1930s, when lesser artists were trying to use Mondrian and Supremicists as decoration in interior design. Nothing new at all, except combining with Rothkos false spirituality. Low lights to provoke interior obsession. All real religions say to look outward, includng Buddhism, and to be a part of the universe, not retreat into oneself through mysticism. Which is self absorbed love. Not love of life.
And damn, to think I could write that without a dictionary.
Art collegia delenda est
No offense you two but until you see the show I’m not entertaining this discussion. It’s not the kind of work you can evaluate by jpg – despite appearances to the contrary.
No offense you two but until you see the show I’m not entertaining this discussion. It’s not the kind of work you can evaluate by jpg – despite appearances to the contrary.
OK, I will take your word for it. But I dont care much for things that depend on context and mood lighting. Not real practical, or seems much more than a gimmmick, but will take your word for it. Kinda far from LA, we had lots of that stuff about twenty yeaas ago, light and space art. Mostly special effects and illusion, which movies do so much better, as they have story and movement and layers of meaning, this is just there. Nothing beyond what you see, jsut doesnt get me all worked up. But again, you were there. I wasnt.
OK, I will take your word for it. But I dont care much for things that depend on context and mood lighting. Not real practical, or seems much more than a gimmmick, but will take your word for it. Kinda far from LA, we had lots of that stuff about twenty yeaas ago, light and space art. Mostly special effects and illusion, which movies do so much better, as they have story and movement and layers of meaning, this is just there. Nothing beyond what you see, jsut doesnt get me all worked up. But again, you were there. I wasnt.
Well, that’s kinda why I’m asking you, Paddy. I’m asking you to give me reasons why I should consider this show. This reminds me of so many MFA shows I’ve committee’d.
You know, Winkleman did something on connoisseurship and mentioned Bernard Berenson, who had a great term ‘insignificant competency’. This is what I’m getting here, a show which masterfully reproduces the essence of a geometricized image vs space pas de deux. Is this viable? Now, I’m looking at this from a geometicized tradition playing itself out, think Kubler’s The Shape of Time or how Attic black figure pottery goes on stylistic drift. I’m not seeing any entropic drift characteristic of a healthy tradition. It’s more like a wedding ceremony or funeral, where all the right markers get covered. One could also compare this show to the icy perfection of all the academics after Ingres: Cos, Gerondin, Gros, Bougeroux, Cabanal, et alia. So, convince me I’m seeing anything but a safe serial movement here in the sequence of things. Supply what we are missing. You can at least attempt that. Please?
I’m guessing Palin is a Rove puppet, doing the goofy ups on purpose to seduce the Dummercrats into a false sense of security.
Well, that’s kinda why I’m asking you, Paddy. I’m asking you to give me reasons why I should consider this show. This reminds me of so many MFA shows I’ve committee’d.
You know, Winkleman did something on connoisseurship and mentioned Bernard Berenson, who had a great term ‘insignificant competency’. This is what I’m getting here, a show which masterfully reproduces the essence of a geometricized image vs space pas de deux. Is this viable? Now, I’m looking at this from a geometicized tradition playing itself out, think Kubler’s The Shape of Time or how Attic black figure pottery goes on stylistic drift. I’m not seeing any entropic drift characteristic of a healthy tradition. It’s more like a wedding ceremony or funeral, where all the right markers get covered. One could also compare this show to the icy perfection of all the academics after Ingres: Cos, Gerondin, Gros, Bougeroux, Cabanal, et alia. So, convince me I’m seeing anything but a safe serial movement here in the sequence of things. Supply what we are missing. You can at least attempt that. Please?
I’m guessing Palin is a Rove puppet, doing the goofy ups on purpose to seduce the Dummercrats into a false sense of security.
You’re not seeing anything you haven’t already seen before. It’s the experience that counts for something in this case. There’s a three dimensionality, a texture to this work that not only offers a viewing surprise, but creates the illusion of being something its not. I think that presents a point of opposition to much of the work it looks similar to in reproduction.
You’re not seeing anything you haven’t already seen before. It’s the experience that counts for something in this case. There’s a three dimensionality, a texture to this work that not only offers a viewing surprise, but creates the illusion of being something its not. I think that presents a point of opposition to much of the work it looks similar to in reproduction.
Sorry about the Palin ending on my last entry, that’s from a friend’s e-mail I have no idea how it got there. I live upstate and thanks to your account I might drive down if I can find other reasons/shows. I miss Thai Planet, so that might swing things.
Sorry about the Palin ending on my last entry, that’s from a friend’s e-mail I have no idea how it got there. I live upstate and thanks to your account I might drive down if I can find other reasons/shows. I miss Thai Planet, so that might swing things.
Guys guys guys do you your homework. The man is has been devoted to this work as long as “MinimalOpPopHardEdge” has existed. His work is not for everyone as some prefer to assume. Looking into an artist body of work requires more than a substantial need to judge it by necessity to validate it in history. If you look further into Neil’s work you will find that his interests stem beyond a presumption based on one nights homework. Looking further and a few more nights of homework you’ll find somethings don’t change. Some of the material that MinimalOpPopHardEdge artist make now and then still stem certain principles in pre-renaissance painting.
Guys guys guys do you your homework. The man is has been devoted to this work as long as “MinimalOpPopHardEdge” has existed. His work is not for everyone as some prefer to assume. Looking into an artist body of work requires more than a substantial need to judge it by necessity to validate it in history. If you look further into Neil’s work you will find that his interests stem beyond a presumption based on one nights homework. Looking further and a few more nights of homework you’ll find somethings don’t change. Some of the material that MinimalOpPopHardEdge artist make now and then still stem certain principles in pre-renaissance painting.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }