Archive for the 'Art' Category

Take Us Anywhere, But Take Us Now

Tuesday, May 15th, 2007

Yo, if this is your first time stopping by you should think about subscribing to my shit. It's the best on the web fo'rils.RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

dsc_9420.jpg
© Greg Wasserstrom
This is the first opportunity I’ve had to write something about my show with Shane Lavalette and Bryan Schutmaat over the weekend. The opening went really well and Shane and Bryan were both here for a few days and we have a great time. If you’re in DC, you have a couple weeks to drop by the Warehouse Gallery, it’s going to be up until the 31st.

Take Us Anywhere, But Take Us Now from Shane Lavalette on Vimeo

Tonights the night!

Saturday, May 12th, 2007

If you have some time, stop by the Warehouse Gallery tonight sometime after 7pm.477582268_be9c33bad7_o.jpg

Good things come in… I dont know what the incrament is.

Tuesday, May 8th, 2007

I’m worried that something really terrible is about to happen to me. Let me briefly recount the events of the past six days (I am leaving out the horrible, crushing weight that is the end of the semester, which has been horrible and crushing, to focus entirely on the positive. and for some reason my bullets arent working but i’m not fucking with it now):

  • Wednesday I was offered a position at Wonkette, which has brought me instant fame and fortune to the tune of an email from a newspaper editor and an additional $200 per month.
  • Given the use of an totally rad moped for the summer months with no essentially no strings attached.
  • Sold 2 prints.
  • Have a job that is interesting, flexible, pays well, and, most importantly, is relevant to my life.
  • Jackass who runs a certain camera store that shall not be named just called me to tell me that, at long, long last, my Hasselblad is ready to be picked up.
  • First gallery show is on track.

So what horrible inevitability awaits me? Was this the karmic counter-weight to how shitty the past couple of years have been? Or is my balance now so completely out of whack that I should expect to be crushed by a falling piano or something like that? What the fuck is going on?

Congratulations Charlotte!

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007


© Greg Wasserstrom

My very good friend Charlotte Kesl is going to have an amazing summer. She just got back from a 4-day interview in New York City for an internship at Todd Eberle’s studio and also with AFG! Congrats, Char!

If you happen to be in town…

Sunday, April 29th, 2007

477185861_7c96853e87_o.jpg

My conversation with Joerg Colberg

Thursday, April 19th, 2007

If you’re reading this, chances are you’re familiar with Joerg Colberg. Anyone interested in photography who spends time on the internet will come across his blog Conscientious, and probably come across it rather quickly. Conscientious is something of a hub on the web for photography related sites and blogs, serving as something like a massive photography index, updated several times every single day of the week. Imagine my surprise when I learned that he’s (also) an astrophysicist.

I asked Joerg some questions and he was very kind to answer them. On Conscientious, only the smallest bits of his personal history and world view trickles out, and I found it fascinating to hear what he had to say about things.

GW: You write arguablely the most read blog about photography on the internet and you’re a talented photographer in your own right. But photography’s not your day job. You’re an astrophysicist, which isn’t exactly something a person can do in their spare time. How did you come to be a scientist and what attracted you to astrophysics? Is your interest in it as strong as your passion for photography? How do you find the time for two different and highly involved pursuits?

JC: I figured it would be easier to get a Ph.D. in astrophysics and then do photography “on the side” than the other way around! But seriously, after high school, I had to think about what I wanted to do, and I ended up studying physics, because I was interested in astronomy. Back then it did sound quite interesting. In the end, I had to get my Ph.D. to be able to work on what had always interested me the most (computer simulations of the Universe). After my Ph.D., I quit for a few years and worked in a couple of more regular jobs. But I found being a programmer so intensely boring that I tried to get back into science. While writing computer programmes isn’t exactly the most interesting thing I can think of, doing it to find out about Nature is just so much nicer than doing it so that someone can sell that extra piece of soap. Money-wise, switching back from a programming job at a software startup to academia isn’t necessarily the smartest choice, of course, but then, to get the obligatory cliche out of the way, money can’t buy you happiness.

Whether my passion for astrophysics and photography is similarly strong I don’t really know - in the end, your day job tends to be very tedious (regardless of what you do). There is a similar passion to do something worthwhile, though, something that has a value that cannot be measured directly. Cosmology has a strong cultural component - you can’t apply that knowledge of the origins of the Universe to selling soap or building bombs.

As for the finding time, that’s not very hard. If you have something that is very dear to you you will always be able to find the time for it. Other people collect stamps or go to Nascar races. I look at photography.

GW: Is there a connection between your work in that field with photography?

JC: No, not at all. I’m a theorist. If I was an observer, then yes, I would be taking photos of the sky. But as a theorist, I make a bunch of supercomputers run my programmes.

GW: When did you become interested in photography? What inspired you to start taking pictures? What inspired you to start blogging about it?

JC: My interest started very late in my life. Back in 1999, I spent a few months in Frankfurt, and I picked up a little camera and started taking photos. I got hooked when I realized I was able to take photos that I actually liked. The blogging is a bit unrelated actually, since initially, it was supposed to be a blog about stuff that interested me. But at some stage, maybe half a year after I had started it, I came across the Duesseldorf School people, and I got very interested in what they were doing. So I added the links to the blog, and since I got more and more drawn to photography, the blog quickly morphed into what it is now.

GW: The themes in your work, specifically the work in the ‘projects’section of your site, are very current relating to our political and social environment. You’re aesthetic is subtle and sophisticated. On your blog, you give equal time and space to photographers of all kinds. Are your interests really that broad or do you feel it’s your duty to connect your readers with work they might be interested in?

JC: Predicting the future is probably the best way to make a complete fool of yourself. So I’m going to refrain from any such predictions. But I think that there currently is a trend emerging, which hopefully will not disappear at some stage. Photographers and people interested in photography are now being able to connect to an extent that was simply not possible before. You have to realize that someone like Alec sharing his thoughts and ideas that freely and directly is something that is new.

It remains to be seen whether this will result in an expansion of the number of people who shape photography history. I do hope that there will be more people and more places that shape photography history, and I think that’s already - albeit very slowly - happening. However, I think the subjectivity, that according to Martin Parr is a big part of photography history, will not disappear. BUT I think the overall field will become wider, and it will be harder for photographers to just get forgotten - making photography archives available online will save a lot of good work from photography oblivion, and hopefully, a lot of underrated or forgotten photographers will be rediscovered (or actually discovered for the first time).

In a sense, reminding people of how subjective the history of photography to some extent isn’t quite fair. People like Steiglitz, Steichen or Szarkowski were active at times when photography had a completely different status. So, yes, one could be unhappy about what they decided to show (and what to ignore), but while being subjective they nevertheless pushed photography forward and made it more widely accepted.

Obsessive Consumption

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

I haven’t always been in love with Kate Bingaman, but man, oh man am I in love with her now.. When I saw the Ultra show at the Jen Bekman Gallery a few months ago, I spent a few minutes soaking up Bingaman’s installation there, a then/now comparison of products at the time of their purchase and where they ended up a few months later. It was interesting but then I moved on. It wasn’t exactly a heavily intellectual piece.

Man. So I don’t even know where to begin with this. I just found her flickr stream and man, that little installation at Jen Bekman isn’t even the tip of the iceberg. That was like… I mean, that’s just a drop in the bucket of the seemingly bottomless reservoir of creativity that is Kate Bingaman. She is drawing her daily purchases now, each drawing is quirky, funny, interesting. They’re incredible. Really amazing. You can spend hours on her flickr. But, there’s more! Much much, more!

The flickr stream led me to her website, obsessiveconsumption.com, which is like her hub. It of course, has her work arhchived and organized for perusal. It also features a blog. And also, years of bank statements redrawn by her distinctive hand, daily drawings, so much stuff.

70701444_2a9bc4f43d.jpg

Her photography on consumption-related themes is engaging as well, and, of course, she has fully stocked store selling her zine (monthly!), buttons, hankies, drawings, I mean everything you could imagine. Really, all I can think to say is that the whole thing is really fucking rad.

Jeff Koons in the New Yorker

Wednesday, April 18th, 2007

Has anyone else gotten to read the profile of Jeff Koons in this week’s New Yorker? I haven’t gotten to read the whole thing yet but seriously, it’s laugh-out-loud funny, and in a good way. I’m embarrassed to say I don’t know that much about Koons. Of course, I’ve seen his work on trips to the country’s various major collections of contemporary art (the basketball in the equilibrium tank is at MoMA right now, I think. I’m pretty sure I saw it there a couple weeks ago). Learning a bit about the artist obviously adds layers and complicates what a layman could presume to be more or less standard postmodern fare, though I’m not sure I would go so far as to agree the thesis of the piece. It begins, “If art is ever delivered from the grip of postmodern irony, a large share of the credit will go to Jeff Koons.” Though, as I said, my frame of reference on this is miniscule and I’m only three pages into the profile. So I may write something more on this later. Or I may let this stand as my definitive view of Koons. Or, who cares.

The article is not available on the New Yorker’s website, but there is a slideshow of all the works discussed in the piece.

The getty is for chumps

Saturday, March 17th, 2007

Kate warned me that you don’t go to the Getty for the art. She said it’s better to go where there’s some event or party going on. I didn’t believe her and yesterday made the trip in her car to the sprawling compound in NW LA, and guess what? That place sucks my nards. Great design, great view, pretty boring art. High on production, low on substance - shocking for Los Angeles. “That’s what all the people who don’t fully understand LA say,” one of the folks I’m staying with, Chad, told me last night while we were drinking near his house in Silverlake. No, I get it. I really do.

Feminst Art

Friday, March 9th, 2007

Regarding the Paleolithic nature of Bush Era America and how it might have come about, Maureen Dowd once wrote, “The Womens’ Movement only lasted a moment, but the backlash has lasted three decades.” Dowd was not writing about art, but her point about feminism is a valid one. Feminism has, outside progressive circles, gotten a bad rap since its heyday in the 1970s, and the social baggage associated with the language of feminism could lead some poor, ignorant soul to diminish the contribution of the feminist artists of the 1970s.

I’m no gender warrior, so lets cast issues of gender, sexuality, equality and rights completely to the side, and still the feminist contribution to contemporary art is practically unparalleled. Reviewer Holland Cotter has zeroed in on the true legacy of the Feminist Art Movement in today’s New York Times. In a review of “Wack! Art and the Feminist Revolution,” a retrospective of the art of this period at MoCA in Los Angeles, Cotter says

Without it identity-based art, crafts-derived art, performance art and much political art would not exist in the form it does, if it existed at all. Much of what we call postmodern art has feminist art at its source.

This relates very directly to a post on the Magnum blog that got me all fired up yesterday, which was National Women’s Day. The post posed this question, which strikes me as being completely without substance or value:

What has been the greatest female contribution to photography?

Photographers spent the first part of this century trying to prove their mettle as artists. In the 70s, the women’s movement came along and redefined art so thoroughly that nobody can ever think about issues of representation, form and content the same way again. So far there is only one comment on that Magnum post, and it’s from me.