photo: Rob McKeever, courtesy Gagosian Gallery
In my latest column at The L Magazine I don’t write about Dan Colen that much. Here’s an excerpt:
The art world’s most boring story this month is about how everyone hates Dan Colen. How his show at Gagosian sucks (it does); how his story is one of excess (both personal and professional: how he’s a reformed drug addict and his work is expensive); and how everyone begrudges having to talk about him because we all know the work isn’t worth it.
I’m not going to spend much time writing about Colen myself for precisely this reason. Colen’s ability to generate press has more to do with his reputation as a badass than artistic merit. You’ll reap no rewards for seeing this show. Let me spare readers the trouble of walking over to Chelsea: A giant brick wall, the first object viewers see, was inspired by a photograph of star Michael Jordan in front of a brick wall. It’s just a brick wall, and even if Colen had come up with a better explanation it would still only be a brick wall. Then there’s the line of motorcycles, which Colen toppled like dominos just before the show opened. Like every other work here, the bike pile is simply a gratuitous display of wealth. Add to this two skateboard ramps turned upside down to make an archway and a bunch of large abstract paintings, some made out of confetti, others out of gum, and all this work has going for it is that it’s big.
To read the full piece click here.
{ 14 comments }
Actually, something of note that so far no one across the board has gotten or even begun to mention, (and I strongly doubt the artist has either), that there is NO greater insult to bikers than to have their bikes knocked over. I kind of wonder what the reaction would be from the individual bike owners whose rides (i.e., personal property) are “reproduced” here to scale right down to their customizations if they were aware of this project taking place right across the island.
Ol’s
Actually, something of note that so far no one across the board has gotten or even begun to mention, (and I strongly doubt the artist has either), that there is NO greater insult to bikers than to have their bikes knocked over. I kind of wonder what the reaction would be from the individual bike owners whose rides (i.e., personal property) are “reproduced” here to scale right down to their customizations if they were aware of this project taking place right across the island.
Ol’s
I am going to second Oly’s comment. the guy is a huge prick for that alone. I’m not wasting spit on the art
I am going to second Oly’s comment. the guy is a huge prick for that alone. I’m not wasting spit on the art
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E88HEuwInno
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E88HEuwInno
@SS <–(ha!): LOL! Analogy: Dan Colen's kicked-over-bikes are to Pee-wee's Big Adventure as Urs Fischer's tongue-through-the-wall is to Porky's…
@SS <–(ha!): LOL! Analogy: Dan Colen's kicked-over-bikes are to Pee-wee's Big Adventure as Urs Fischer's tongue-through-the-wall is to Porky's…
I haven’t seen the show in person yet but I don’t understand the disdain across the board for it. Paddy, I know, this is the last thing you want to talk about but aren’t there plenty of expensive “brick walls”, and large scaled work out there? Why look specifically to this guy? Isn’t there a heavy percentage of work, especially in Chelsea, that embodies a gratuitous display of wealth? From what I’ve read the show sold out. People consumed the display with their wealth. It seems like a means to end for a artist/business relationship.By no means am I defending the works merit, I just want to understand the universal hatred for it.
I haven’t seen the show in person yet but I don’t understand the disdain across the board for it. Paddy, I know, this is the last thing you want to talk about but aren’t there plenty of expensive “brick walls”, and large scaled work out there? Why look specifically to this guy? Isn’t there a heavy percentage of work, especially in Chelsea, that embodies a gratuitous display of wealth? From what I’ve read the show sold out. People consumed the display with their wealth. It seems like a means to end for a artist/business relationship.By no means am I defending the works merit, I just want to understand the universal hatred for it.
I think the issue is connected to class. Yes, there is other bad work like this, but the impression one has of drug addicts — even former ones — is that they don’t/didn’t work very hard to get where they are. In this culture, crossing class lines for any other reason than talent and work is not acceptable. The unspoken hostility here isn’t about the art at all, but showing us that success in the form of wealth and social climbing are not at all connected the merit of one’s creative output. But we already knew that.
I think the issue is connected to class. Yes, there is other bad work like this, but the impression one has of drug addicts — even former ones — is that they don’t/didn’t work very hard to get where they are. In this culture, crossing class lines for any other reason than talent and work is not acceptable. The unspoken hostility here isn’t about the art at all, but showing us that success in the form of wealth and social climbing are not at all connected the merit of one’s creative output. But we already knew that.
To second the comment above, I think ultimately the “work” became a stand-in for a lot of things. It’s not just the work itself, its the fact that the show celebrates a culmination of vacuousness that has marked a generation. The conservatism of the work is obviously in contrast with the image that has been cultivated of the “downtown” artist – a person very skilled at fittiing in with the idea of what artists should look like in a fashion magazine. This show ultimately proves that looks aren’t everything, and that looks matter for the *work*, not the person making it. It’s also in a way, a portrait of what NY has become – a cleaned-up, made-up disneyland version of rebellion devoid of any semblance of some kind of vulnerability.
Any show that takes place in Gagosian will get attention, but in a way, “Gagosian”, the enterprise, is also an artist with a really strong voice. It speaks loudly of *expensive*, *expensive art*, *trophy*, and so forth, but the voice is subdued if surrounded by actual good art. When that doesn’t happen, the experience begins to smell “fake”.
To second the comment above, I think ultimately the “work” became a stand-in for a lot of things. It’s not just the work itself, its the fact that the show celebrates a culmination of vacuousness that has marked a generation. The conservatism of the work is obviously in contrast with the image that has been cultivated of the “downtown” artist – a person very skilled at fittiing in with the idea of what artists should look like in a fashion magazine. This show ultimately proves that looks aren’t everything, and that looks matter for the *work*, not the person making it. It’s also in a way, a portrait of what NY has become – a cleaned-up, made-up disneyland version of rebellion devoid of any semblance of some kind of vulnerability.
Any show that takes place in Gagosian will get attention, but in a way, “Gagosian”, the enterprise, is also an artist with a really strong voice. It speaks loudly of *expensive*, *expensive art*, *trophy*, and so forth, but the voice is subdued if surrounded by actual good art. When that doesn’t happen, the experience begins to smell “fake”.
Comments on this entry are closed.