Podcasts about Barnett Newman

Pietro Conte"Il sublime astratto"Johan & Levi Editorewww.johanandlevi.comL'incomprensione è parte integrante delle relazioni umane, e quando a comunicare sono Erwin Panofsky, il massimo teorico dell'iconologia medievale e rinascimentale, e Barnett Newman, esponente e principale teorico dell'Espressionismo Astratto, il disastro è assicurato. Soprattutto se nessuno è intenzionato a scendere a patti.Una polemica attorno al termine “sublime” dà il la per una riflessione molto più ampia sullo stato dell'arte aniconica. Negli Stati Uniti in particolare questa si è voluta annunciare completamente aliena non solo nei confronti della tradizione figurativa e delle categorie del bello formale e del classicismo di stampo europeo, ma anche rispetto alla stessa arte astratta del Vecchio Continente. L'astrattismo americano aveva come obiettivo principale quello di liberarsi da ogni proporzione e dalla rigidità delle forme e della geometria, senza per questo rinunciare al contenuto, aspetto che critici e teorici come Panofsky faticavano anche solo a immaginare.In questa antologia di saggi, curata da Pietro Conte, emergono le posizioni di sostenitori e detrattori di quella corrente che ha posto come obiettivo la costante ricerca, il tentativo di suscitare un terrore mescolato al piacere, con la perdita di tutte le coordinate e i punti fermi, esprimendo ancora, ma in modo completamente nuovo, il sublime.Pietro ConteInsegna Estetica all'Università Statale di Milano. Le sue ricerche vertono principalmente sui concetti di iperrealismo, illusione e immersività, nonché sulle differenti pratiche di contestazione e superamento delle tradizionali soglie divisorie tra immagini e realtà.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarewww.ilpostodelleparole.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.

This is Part 2 of Mandolyn Wilson Rosen and my review of "Lifeline: Clyfford Still" 2019 directed by Dennis Scholl. It's a juicy art bio tell-all with a crusty curmudgeon as its talented but embittered subject. Don't forget to listen to Part 1 too! Find the film on Amazon ($2.99 SD) or for free on ⁠Kanopy⁠ Find Mandolyn online at: ⁠https://mandolynwilsonrosen.com⁠ and on IG at ⁠@mandolyn_rosen⁠ Artists mentioned: Philip Guston, Barnett Newman, Jackson Pollock, Willem DeKooning, Frank Stella, Donald Judd, Paul Cezanne, Ad Reinhardt, Mark Rothko, Thomas Hart Benton, Art Problems Podcast Thank you, Mandy! Thank you, Listeners! Visit RuthAnn, a new artist-run gallery in Catskill, NY at @ruthanngallery and ruthanngallery.com All music by Soundstripe ---------------------------- Pep Talks on IG: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@peptalksforartists⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Pep Talks website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠peptalksforartists.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Amy, your beloved host, on IG: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@talluts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Amy's website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠amytalluto.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Pep Talks on Art Spiel as written essays: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://tinyurl.com/7k82vd8s⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BuyMeACoffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Donations always appreciated!

Mandolyn Wilson Rosen is back on the podcast! This time, instead of a book we are talking about an artist documentary. The film is called "Lifeline: Clyfford Still" 2019 directed by Dennis Scholl. It's a juicy art bio tell-all with a crusty curmudgeon as its talented but embittered subject. Come along with us as we enter a turbulently Still world. Find the film on Amazon ($2.99 SD) or for free on KanopyFind Mandolyn online at: https://mandolynwilsonrosen.com and on IG at @mandolyn_rosenLinks to the writings we mentioned:Clyfford Still's "An Open Letter to an Art Critic" on Artforumhttps://www.artforum.com/features/an-open-letter-to-an-art-critic-212151/David Levi Strauss for Brooklyn Rail "From Metaphysics to Invective"https://brooklynrail.org/2012/05/art/from-metaphysics-to-invective-art-criticism-as-if-it-still-matters/Seph Rodney for Hyperallergic "Hoping is Not Enough"https://hyperallergic.com/983414/hoping-is-not-enough/Artists mentioned: Matthew Barney, Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, Barnett Newman, Lois Dodd, Julian Schnabel, Mark Bradford, Julie Mehretu, Frank Stella, Ellsworth Kelly, Michelle GrabnerWriters mentioned: Seph Rodney, Paul Valéry, John Ruskin, Guillaume Apollinaire, John Ruskin, David Levi Strauss, Dore Ashton, Jerry Saltz, Ken Johnson, Clement Greenberg, Emily Dickinson's "'Hope' is the thing with feathers" Thank you, Mandy! Thank you, Listeners!Visit RuthAnn, a new artist-run gallery in Catskill, NY at @ruthanngallery and ruthanngallery.comAll music by Soundstripe----------------------------Pep Talks on IG: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@peptalksforartists⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pep Talks website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠peptalksforartists.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Amy, your beloved host, on IG: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@talluts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Amy's website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠amytalluto.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pep Talks on Art Spiel as written essays: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://tinyurl.com/7k82vd8s⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BuyMeACoffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Donations always appreciated!

In der 47. Folge der KUNSTPAUSE sprechen Felix von Boehm und Charlotte Paulus mit Sophie Neuendorf Teba, Vice President bei Artnet AG, über ein Werk ihres Großvaters Georg Karl Pfahler. Das Werk von 1968 mit dem Titel „S-BBSS“ wurde 1982 von den Freunden der Nationalgalerie im Rahmen der Ausstellung "Hommage à Barnett Newman" erworben.

For the 29th episode of "Reading the Art World," host Megan Fox Kelly speaks with Richard Shiff, art historian and author of “Writing after Art,” published by David Zwirner Books. Richard shares how he comes to understand an artist's work in a way that will inspire us to observe and understand artists and their processes more fully.“Writing after Art” is an expansive anthology of Richard Shiff's most influential writings, many of which have shaped the art world's understanding of 20th and 21st century artists. These writings first appeared in exhibition catalogs for institutions including the Centre Georges Pompidou, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, and Tate Modern, and they spotlight modern masters such as Willem de Kooning, Marlene Dumas, Jasper Johns, Donald Judd, Barnett Newman, Pablo Picasso, Bridget Riley and Peter Saul.Richard Shiff is the Effie Marie Cain Regents Chair in Art at The University of Texas at Austin. His interests range broadly across the field of modern and contemporary art. His publications include Barnett Newman: A Catalogue Raisonné (coauthored, 2004), Doubt (2008), Between Sense and de Kooning (2011), Ellsworth Kelly: New York Drawings 1954–1962 (2014), Joel Shapiro: Sculpture and Works on Paper 1969–2019 (2020), and Sensuous Thoughts: Essays on the Work of Donald Judd (2020). He is currently completing a comprehensive study of the art of Jack Whitten.PURCHASE THE BOOK:  David Zwirner BooksSUBSCRIBE, FOLLOW AND HEAR INTERVIEWS:For more information, visit meganfoxkelly.com, hear our past interviews, and subscribe at the bottom of our Of Interest page for new posts.Follow us on Instagram: @meganfoxkelly"Reading the Art World" is a live interview and podcast series with leading art world authors hosted by art advisor Megan Fox Kelly. The conversations explore timely subjects in the world of art, design, architecture, artists and the art market, and are an opportunity to engage further with the minds behind these insightful new publications. Megan Fox Kelly is an art advisor and past President of the Association of Professional Art Advisors who works with collectors, estates and foundations.Music composed by Bob Golden

Episode Notes Barnett Newman Foundation. "Broken Obelisk." Barnett Newman Foundation, https://www.barnettnewman.org/sculpture/broken-obelisk. Museum of Modern Art. "Broken Obelisk, Barnett Newman (United States, 1905–1970)." MoMA, https://www.moma.org/collection/works/81736. Houston Chronicle. "What's the Story Behind Houston's Broken Obelisk?". Houston Chronicle, https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/What-s-the-story-behind-Houston-s-Broken-Obelisk-6116775.php. University of Washington Libraries Digital Collections. "Broken Obelisk, Barnett Newman." University of Washington Libraries Digital Collections, https://digitalcollections.lib.washington.edu/digital/collection/hoover/id/112. "Broken Obelisk by Barnett Newman." Encyclopedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Broken-Obelisk. Find out more at https://three-minute-modernist.pinecast.co

Episode No. 651 features art historian Richard Shiff, curator and art historian Michelle White, and a clip from Kirk Varnedoe's 2003 National Gallery of Art Mellon Lectures.  Serra died last month at age 85. He may be the most honored sculptor of the post-war era. The Museum of Modern Art, New York, which holds the most important institutional collection of his art, has produced Serra retrospectives in 1986 and 2007. The Menil Collection organized a drawings retrospective in 2011; it traveled to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, and to the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Serra's hometown museum. The most extensive survey of Serra's films and videotapes was presented by the Kunstmuseum Basel in 2017. Serra was a guest on Episode No. 18 of this program. Shiff is a professor at the University of Texas at Austin and the director of the Center for the Study of Modernism. He has written or contributed to books on Barnett Newman, Willem de Kooning, Donald Judd, and Serra, including "Forged Steel," which was published by Steidl and David Zwirner Books in 2016. White is a curator at the Menil Collection. With Bernice Rose and Gary Garrels she curated the 2011 Serra drawings retrospective.  Kirk Varnedoe was the chief curator of painting and sculpture at the Museum of Modern Art, New York from 1988 to 2001. He delivered the 2003 Mellon Lectures at the National Gallery of Art on the subject "Pictures of Nothing: Abstract Art Since Pollock." 

Gun violence in the United States—the country with the highest gun ownership per capita—is an entrenched public health issue that impacts Americans across demographics and geographies. According to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, 327 people a day are shot in the US, and 42,654 die from gun violence each year. Since the 1990s, Texas firearm-related homicides rose 66% and suicides involving firearms rose 40%. The Austin American-Statesman stated that Texas topped the list of gun related deaths in 2021, and in 2022 we witnessed the catastrophic mass-shooting in Uvalde leaving 19 children and two teachers dead at an elementary school. In the spirit of Dr. King's commitment to address critically important justice issues and create a more equitable society through engaging in nonviolent tactics, this event provides space to learn more about the public health impacts of gun violence, and to delve into our collective responsibilities to address this critical epidemic. The event will feature keynote speaker David Hogg, Co-Founder of March For Our Lives, followed by a panel of local public health researchers and organizers including Dr. Jeff Temple, Dean of Clinical Research in the School of Behavioral Health Science at UTHealth Houston; Dr. Bindi Naik-Mathuria, Pediatric Trauma Surgeon at UTMB; Karlton Harris, Executive Director of The Forgotten Third; and Kimberly Mata-Rubio, who recently ran for mayor of Uvalde after her daughter was killed in the Robb Elementary School Shooting. The program featured a temporary memorial installation on the Plaza by Sandeigh Kennedy exploring the impacts of gun violence in 2023, contemplative music by DACAMERA Young Artists and poetry by Texas Poet Laureate Lupe Mendez. Local organizations addressed gun violence in Houston and Texas were onsite after the event to share information about how to get involved in gun violence prevention efforts. About the Annual MLK Birthday Observance In 1979, The Rothko Chapel started the annual MLK Birthday Observance to connect the contemporary implications of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy to the ongoing struggle for civil and human rights, captured through artist Barnett Newman's Broken Obelisk. This sculpture, located on the plaza adjacent to the Chapel, is dedicated to Dr. King. Recent presenters have included Civil Rights Freedom Singer Rutha Mae Harris, artist David Banner, columnist Leonard Pitts, Jr., environmental justice leader Dr. Robert Bullard, MacArthur Fellow Dr. Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, the Scott Joplin Chamber Orchestra, and photographer Devin Allen.

S.I. Newhouse Jr. was a titan of the media business in the late 20th Century, presiding over Conde Nast but also owning with his brother Donald Advance Publication's chain of newspapers and other cable television properties and networks. He was one of the preeminent collectors of Post-war and Contemporary art. Through the painter Alexander Liberman, who served as Conde Nast's Editorial Director, he met the abstract expressionist Barnett Newman. Through Newman, he developed an interest in abstract expressionism and color field painting. But Newhouse was also a restless and inquisitive collector open to pursuing new ideas and remaking his collection continually. Alex Rotter, Chairman of Christie's 20/21 art departments, and Max Carter, a Vice Chairman, sat down to talk about Newhouse as a collector and the important works that are being sold this season.

“Anna-Eva Bergman” Voyage vers l'intérieurau Musée d'Art moderne de Parisdu 31 mars au 16 juillet 2023Interview de Hélène Leroy, conservatrice, responsable des collections du MAM et commissaire de l'exposition,par Anne-Frédérique Fer, à Paris, le 30 mars 2023, durée 22'09.© FranceFineArt.https://francefineart.com/2023/03/31/3414_anna-eva-bergman_musee-d-art-moderne-de-paris/Communiqué de presse Commissariat :Hélène Leroy, conservatrice, responsable des collectionsLe Musée d'Art Moderne de Paris présente la première grande rétrospective consacrée à l'artiste norvégienne Anna-Eva Bergman (1909-1987), figure-clé de la peinture de l'après-guerre, artiste libre et visionnaire, dont l'oeuvre plastique, caractérisée par l'emploi de la feuille d'or ou d'argent, est une puissante célébration de la beauté de la nature, des paysages du Nord et de la Méditerranée.Exposée dans le monde entier de son vivant (notamment au Musée d'Art Moderne de Paris en 1977 mais aussi en Italie, Allemagne ou en Norvège), Anna-Eva Bergman reste cependant insuffisamment reconnue en Europe. Son oeuvre au langage pictural singulier, fondé sur un vocabulaire de formes pures, demande aujourd'hui à être reconsidéré plus largement dans le champ de l'histoire de l'art aux côtés du travail d'autres grandes artistes femmes comme Hilma af Klint, Georgia O'Keeffe ou encore Sonia Delaunay qui ont été ses contemporaines. L'exposition Anna-Eva Bergman, Voyage vers l'intérieur apporte un éclairage décisif dans la redécouverte de cette artiste majeure en proposant un panorama de toute sa production. Composée de plus de 200 oeuvres, l'exposition fait suite à la rétrospective consacrée en octobre 2019 par le MAM à Hans Hartung, qui fut aussi l'époux de l'artiste.À cette occasion, le musée présente N°2-1964 Stèle, acquise du vivant de Bergman ainsi que la centaine d'oeuvres provenant du don exceptionnel consenti par la Fondation Hartung- Bergman au MAM en 2017. Cet ensemble est complété par des photographies, dessins et documents d'archives dont de nombreux inédits, provenant des collections de la Fondation à Antibes.Un catalogue édité aux éditions Paris Musées sous la direction d'Hélène Leroy rassemble des essais de spécialistes français et norvégiens. Les auteurs détaillent notamment la richesse des techniques plastiques abordées par Bergman et l'usage très spécifique d'un matériau devenu sa signature : la feuille de métal (or, argent, aluminium, étain, cuivre, plomb, bismuth). Différents essais s'attachent, en outre, à creuser le rapport d'Anna-Eva Bergman au dessin et à la caricature, à l'architecture, son emploi du nombre d'or, ainsi que la réception et l'exposition de son oeuvre après-guerre, sa relation aux grands maîtres du passé et à ses contemporains comme Barnett Newman, Ad Reinhardt ou Mark Rothko.#ExpoBergman Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Gandhi's thoughts on non-violent political action and his programs for social reconstruction have been subjects of scholarly debates, often sharp, for a long. More recently, visual and literary representations of Gandhi that remind people of the meanings of an extraordinarily complex life have also received attention (Ramaswamy 2021). However, little consideration has been given to Gandhi's aesthetic sensibility that informed his moral journey. The general perception of Gandhi is as a man of action with a utilitarian approach even to art and literature. Yet as he expresses at the end of his “autobiography,” he saw his “Experiments with Truth” as a source of rasa (aesthetic delight). His writings reference ethical actions as things of beauty and avenues to reach perfect harmony. His almost obsessive stress on simplicity also had an aesthetic dimension. Art historian Stephanie Chadwick compares Gandhian simplicity-based aesthetics with the minimalist art of American painter Barnett Newman in the early to mid-twentieth century. Chadwick suggests that even though the two men never met in their aesthetics, they share a concern for inclusiveness and equality (Chadwick, 2014). The fascination with Gandhi as a public figure may see ebb and tide in the coming times. What exploration of his writings and exchanges give us a glimpse into is something personal and deeper – an understanding of a moral journey intricately tied to an aesthetic journey. In my presentation, I will discuss how Gandhi's writings reflect a search for the unity of truth, goodness, and beauty. They suggest that moral action was a path to realize that unity in his journey. In Gandhi's view, moral action was in service of the goal of experiencing rasa. Bio Neelima Shukla-Bhatt is a professor of Religion and South Asia Studies at Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA, USA. She obtained her Ph.D. in the Study of Religion from Harvard University in 2003. She is the author of Narasinha Mehta of Gujarat: A Legacy of Bhakti in Songs and Stories (2015) and co-author with Surendra Bhana of A Fire that Blazed in the Ocean: Gandhi and Poems of Satyagraha in South Africa, 1909-1911 (2011). She has published numerous articles in peer-reviewed books and journals focusing mainly on the devotional poetry of medieval India and women's religious expressions. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/pankaj-jain/support

Scott Lynn is a serial entrepreneur and passionate art collector. He is the Founder and CEO of Masterworks.io, a platform making it possible to invest in multimillion-dollar works from artists like Banksy, Kaws, Basquiat, and more. In 2021 the platform reached unicorn status. In 2014, Scott founded Payability, a digital lending provider. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Scott serves on the board of v2 ventures, Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail.

Right now at the Guggenheim Museum in New York City, there's an exhibition of paintings on view that might remind you of the postwar abstractions of painters like Barnett Newman and Agnes Martin, who made a virtue of empty space and muted palettes. The difference is that the paintings at the Guggenheim today are not just meant to be looked at and admired. No, they are meant to be listened to—and that's because the artist, Jennie C. Jones makes art that is as aural as it is visual, building her compositions directly onto acoustic panels, her signature material in order to shape the sound of the rooms in which they are installed. For Jones, this barely perceptible effect is a way of paying deep homage to the black architects of mid-century avant-garde music, such as free jazz pioneers who turned strategic silence into a statement. "Listening" Jones has said, "is a conceptual practice all on its own." . On the occasion of the exhibition, which is called "Dynamics" and acts as a mid-career survey of the artist's unique body of work, Artnet News's features writer Taylor Dafoe met Jones at her studio in Hudson, New York, where they talked about embracing gesture, John Coltrane, and the artist's own upstream path to recognition.

Right now at the Guggenheim Museum in New York City, there's an exhibition of paintings on view that might remind you of the postwar abstractions of painters like Barnett Newman and Agnes Martin, who made a virtue of empty space and muted palettes. The difference is that the paintings at the Guggenheim today are not just meant to be looked at and admired. No, they are meant to be listened to—and that's because the artist, Jennie C. Jones makes art that is as aural as it is visual, building her compositions directly onto acoustic panels, her signature material in order to shape the sound of the rooms in which they are installed. For Jones, this barely perceptible effect is a way of paying deep homage to the black architects of mid-century avant-garde music, such as free jazz pioneers who turned strategic silence into a statement. "Listening" Jones has said, "is a conceptual practice all on its own." . On the occasion of the exhibition, which is called "Dynamics" and acts as a mid-career survey of the artist's unique body of work, Artnet News's features writer Taylor Dafoe met Jones at her studio in Hudson, New York, where they talked about embracing gesture, John Coltrane, and the artist's own upstream path to recognition.

Songs for Justice: A Series Exploring Music in Social Justice Movements 2022 Annual MLK Birthday Celebration in partnership with Community Music Center of Houston In 2022, the Rothko Chapel presents Songs for Justice, a series of concerts and conversations exploring the role that music plays to further social justice movements, addressing today's inequities and injustices. Coinciding with the Chapel's annual observance of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday on January 15, the series opened with a performance of and discussion about music central to the US Civil Rights Movement. The Community Music Center of Houston Scott Joplin Chamber Orchestra conducted by Dr. Anne Lundy shared a selection of music central to Dr. King's transformative leadership and Black Americans' historic and contemporary struggles for equity. Dr. Shana Redmond, scholar of music, race and politics, discussed the broader history surrounding the relationship between music and activism in the U.S., the importance of music in Rev. King's life, and the strategic use of music within the Civil Rights Movement. Buy Shana Redmond's book Anthem: Social Movements and the Sound of Solidarity in the African Diaspora. Listen to Anthem: The Mixtape, compiled by Shana Redmond & The Dreadstar Movement. The Rothko Chapel started the annual MLK Birthday Celebration in 1979 to connect the contemporary implications of Dr. King's legacy to the ongoing struggle for civil and human rights, captured by artist Barnett Newman's Broken Obelisk. This sculpture, located on the plaza adjacent to the Chapel, is dedicated to Dr. King. Learn more about upcoming programs in the Songs for Justice series. About the presenters Community Music Center of Houston (CMCH), formerly the Society for the Preservation of Spirituals, was founded in 1979. In 1983 CMCH formed the Scott Joplin Chamber Orchestra (SJCO), a 40 member predominantly Black community orchestra in response to the lack of opportunity for Black classically trained musicians in the world of symphony orchestras. Today SJCO is the nation's second oldest predominantly Black chamber orchestra actively performing. Dr. Anne Lundy, CMCH Music Director, Conductor, Violinist, Educator and Ethno-musicologist, began her musical studies on the violin. She received a Bachelor of Music Education in 1977 from the University of Texas at Austin, and a Master of Music in Conducting from the University of Houston in 1979. Dr. Lundy received her Doctor of Musical Arts from University of Houston's Moores School of Music in 2015. She has lectured extensively throughout the United States. In addition, Dr. Lundy has published articles on finding and performing music written by African American composers. In 1989, she is the first African American woman to conduct the Houston Symphony at Miller Outdoor Theater in Houston, TX. She founded and currently conducts the CMCH Scott Joplin Chamber Orchestra, the William Grant Still String Quartet, and teaches violin and viola. Shana L. Redmond, Ph.D. (she|her) is a scholar and author of Anthem: Social Movements and the Sound of Solidarity in the African Diaspora (NYU, 2014) and Everything Man: The Form and Function of Paul Robeson (Duke, 2020), which received a 2021 American Book Award. She has written widely for public audiences, including the critical liner essay for the vinyl soundtrack release of Jordan Peele's film, Us (Waxwork Records, 2019). She is President-Elect of the American Studies Association and Professor of English and Comparative Literature and the Center for the Study of Ethnicity & Race at Columbia University.

Cathedra (1952) van Barnett Newman is het favoriete kunstwerk van filmregisseur Shady El-Hamus. Wat raakt hem zo in dat kunstwerk? Ko van ‘t Hek spreekt hem over je leven aan de kunst geven, over je klein voelen op een prettige manier, over één keer per week even langs je favoriete kunstwerk gaan en over de belofte van succes.Barnett Newman, Cathedra, 1952Shady's film Forever Rich op NetflixTwee mooie gesprekken (1 & 2) tussen Shady en theaterregisseur Johan Simons in Vpro MondoVolg Kunsthart

ART INTERVIEW, A L'ATELIER lundi et jeudi à 14h. Le podcast qui dessine la scène picturale française. Julie Gabrielle Chaizemartin pousse la porte des ateliers d'artistes. Loin du bruit de l'art, loin de la semaine de l'art contemporain, quelque part, dans un modeste appartement-atelier proche de la porte de Montreuil. En arrivant près du porche de l'immeuble, je vois la petite silhouette à l'allure déterminée de Yo Marchand. Les yeux aussi noirs que les cheveux, elle me mène dans la pièce carrée et bien éclairée qui lui sert d'atelier ; Il faut dire qu'il y a des toiles un peu partout, bien exposées au mur, retournées sur le sol, de tous les formats, jusque dans la cuisine et dans la chambre; elles habitent avec Yo, profondes abstractions qui vibrent de couleurs aussi intenses que la personnalité de la peintre, qui n'a jamais abandonné les pinceaux et me parle sans langue de bois de la condition d'artiste femme dans les années 1980. A première vue, on pense aux grandes abstractions de Barnett Newman. Comme lui, Yo partage la toile en deux voire trois parties. Mer de bleu et de rouge, de doré et d'argenté, ses toiles ont été exposées et acquises dans les années 70 par le Musée d'Art Moderne de Paris et le Fonds National d'art contemporain. Elle a été représentée par les galeristes Camille Renault et Bernard Davignon, souvent la seule femme au milieu d'hommes qu'elle admire. Elle se souvient. Sa voix grave respire la nostalgie et le combat, toujours vivace. Car Yo continue la route vaille que vaille avec la même inspiration solaire qui accompagne son œuvre. Cette fois, c'est une très belle exposition au Centre d'art contemporain de l'abbaye de Trizay qui a remis en valeur, ces 3 mois d'été, son œuvre lumineuse en dialogue avec les vieilles pierres. Sur le fil de la couleur et du silence, les peintures de Yo Marchand vibrent de nuances subtiles dans ce lieu à la respiration sacrée. Elle me raconte son parcours et le lien intime qu'elle entretient avec la poésie et l'écriture, un goût qu'elle a partagé pendant plus de 15 ans avec sa chère amie Andrée Chedid. A 85 ans, Yo Marchand peint toujours autant, seule dans le silence de son atelier. Elle parle de « l'appel du toucher » en caressant ses toiles. Son œuvre, son geste mérite d'être redécouvert.  Plus d'info : https://sites.google.com/site/yomarchandpeintre/

Scott is the Founder and CEO of Masterworks, a platform for investing in art markets. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Scott serves on the board of v2 ventures (Adparlor, Giant Media, Reachmobi, Amply, and Sellozo), Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail (a non-profit publication in the art industry). In this podcast we discuss: What determines the value of art Importance of gallery representation and marketing How liquidity has evolved in the art market Where the main buyers of art are from How different segments of art market have performed What the expected return of art is How art correlates to other asset classes When art has underperformed Examples of artists whose art has performed well: from Basquiat to Gilliam How investors can get exposure to art Views on NFT Books that influenced Scott: Thinking, Fast and Slow (Kahneman) and Competitive Strategy (Porter)

Masterworks CEO Scott Lynn returns to Invest Like a Boss after appearing on the show for Episode 146 in June 2020. A lot has changed since then and Masterworks has grown tremendously. Scott talks with Derek to give an overview of the market and how the platform has performed since. Then Sam joins in with Derek to discuss investing in art and possible disruptions (Digital art, NFTs, etc) coming to the market. Scott Lynn is the Founder and CEO of Masterworks.io. He Founded Masterworks in 2017 after realizing that art had better risk-adjusted returns than other asset classes, but the only way to invest is if someone has millions of dollars to buy a painting, or tens of millions of dollars to build a portfolio. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Mr. Lynn serves on the board of v2 ventures (Adparlor, Giant Media, Reachmobi, Amply, and Sellozo), Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail (a non-profit publication in the art industry). Listen to ILAB 192 on iTunes here or subscribe on your favorite podcast app. Where we are: Johnny FD – Ukraine / IG @johnnyfdj Sam Marks – Andora/ IG @imsammarks Derek Spartz - Venice Beach / IG @DerekRadio Support Invest Like a Boss: Join our Patreon Discussed: Masterworks Episode 146 Like these investments? Try them with these special ILAB links: ArtofFX – Start with just a $10,000 account (reduced from $25,000) Fundrise – Start with only $1,000 into their REIT funds (non-accredited investors OK) Betterment – Get up to 1 year managed free Wealthfront – Get your first $15,000 managed free PeerStreet – Get a 1% yield bump on your first loan *Johnny and Sam use all of the above services personally. Time Stamps: 06:16 – How has the art market been affected by covid? 08:15 – How much Assets does Masterworks hold, and how many investors? 09:15 – What's the average amount that investors invest in? 10:01 – How many paintings does an investor hold? 10:56 – How has the market changed for you now you have become the biggest buyer in the world? 12:28 – Are there any living artists that are increasing in value that your research team believe may outperform the deceased artists? 16:51 – Have artists been affected by “Cancel Culture”? 19:09 – Where are the art pieces stored? 20:05 – What type of insurance do you hold on these paintings? 20:46 – What is blue chip art? 21:19 – Has there been talk of investing in blue-chip art as something similar to an index fund? 22:30 – Are they certain artists you can highly expect to consistently rise in value? 25:27 – How has art been a better performing asset than the S&P 500? 30:13 – How does the secondary market work? 31:28 – Do you see any day traders getting involved trying to get into the market? 32:27 – What type of fees does Masterworks take on each piece of art? 32:51 – How does the NFT's compare to the physical art market?  35:13 – Can you explain how copyrights work as it relates to the physical painting and the digital copies? 38:37 – Patreon Question: How many pieces of art have Masterworks purchased and what have been the returns to date? 40:00 – Patreon Question: What's the minimum amount to invest in Masterworks? 42:17 – Patreon Question: Do you have to be an accredited investor? 43:07 – Patreon Question: Do you have to be a US citizen to invest? 44:22 – What would you invest in personally and why? 46:44 – Sam and Derek review    If you enjoyed this episode, do us a favor and share it! Also if you haven't already, please take a minute to leave us a 5-star review on iTunes and claim your bonus here!  Copyright 2021. All rights reserved. Read our disclaimer here.

Abstract Expressionism is a complex art movement from the mid 19th century that requires a fair amount of cognitive dissonance to embrace. Whether you find this movement intriguing or confusing, listen as Klaire Lockheart describes this Modernist art style. She'll also reveal why it makes her salty. Artists and Artwork: Ad Reinhardt, Jackson Pollock (Number 17A, Mural), Mark Rothko (Untitled [Violet, Black, Orange, Yellow on White and Red]), Hilma af Klint, Olga Rozanova (Non-Objective Composition. Color Painting), Barnett Newman, Alma Woodsey Thomas (Orion, A Fantastic Sunset), and Lee Kranser (The Seasons, The Eye of the First Circle) Additional Topics: Sublime, Clement Greenberg, Harold Rosenberg, Congress for Cultural Freedom, Action Painters, and Color Field Painting klairelockheart.com instagram.com/klairelockheart facebook.com/klairealockheart

In today's episode, I welcome Christopher John Garcia! Chris has had an amazing career journey as a museum curator and historian for the Computer History Museum, as well as podcaster and painter, and he talks about everything from AI-generated art to his podcast that discusses pieces of artwork in under three minutes. (Fun fact: the cover image for this episode is of one of Chris' original pieces of artwork!)   Get in touch with Christopher John Garcia: https://www.facebook.com/JohnnyEponymous | https://www.instagram.com/johnnyeponymous/ Support Artfully Told: www.paypal.me/elevateart Artfully Told links: www.facebook.com/artfullytold | www.artfullytold.podbean.com | elevateartskc@gmail.com Get a free audiobook through Audible!  http://www.audibletrial.com/ArtfullyTold Schedule your own interview as a featured guest with Artfully Told! https://calendly.com/artfullytold/podcast-interview   Episode 52 - Christopher John Garcia Lindsey Dinneen: Hello, and welcome to Artfully Told, where we share true stories about meaningful encounters with art. [00:00:06] Krista: I think artists help people have different perspectives on every aspect of life. [00:00:12]Roman:  All I can do is put my part in to the world. [00:00:15] Elizabeth: It doesn't have to be perfect the first time. It doesn't have to be perfect ever really. I mean, as long as you, and you're enjoying doing it and you're trying your best, that can be good enough. [00:00:23] Elna: Art is something that you can experience with your senses and that you just experiences as so beautiful.  [00:00:31]Lindsey Dinneen:  Hello, and welcome back to another episode of Artfully Told. I'm your host Lindsey, and I am delighted to have as my guest today, Christopher John Garcia, who is a curator, historian, and podcaster, and I'm just so excited to chat with him all about art and all the different ways that he has engaged with art and that he's currently still doing. And so thank you so much for being here, Chris. I really, really appreciate it. [00:01:00] Christopher John Garcia: Yeah, thanks so much for having me always glad to chat. [00:01:03] Lindsey Dinneen: Of course. If it's about art, I'm in. [00:01:05]Christopher John Garcia: Yeah, absolutely. [00:01:07] Lindsey Dinneen: Yes. Well again, thanks for being here. And I would just love if you would share maybe a little bit about your background, how you got involved in your various art forms, and maybe a little of where you are today, too. [00:01:21] Christopher John Garcia: Cool. Well, it's started long, long ago. 1999. I became a curator at the Computer History Museum and my focus was on computer graphics, music and art with an emphasis on early computer art. So 1950s through about 1980. And by going into that, you know, I had a little bit of an art history background. I minored in it in college and I've always been an art nerd. And I ended up starting a couple of podcasts that were actually centered around early computer art. One was called " Engineers and Enthusiasts," which is on a hiatus as soon as I can find all my files. But the second one is a "Three-Minute Modernist," which is, I take a single artwork usually, and I break it down in three minutes as sort of a, an emotional impact statement is what I do in three minutes, which can be a lot harder for big pieces than little you'd be surprised. But yeah, and so all of that. Then for some reason, I ended up staying home a lot in 2020, and I decided, you know, maybe I should become a painter. And so I, you know, I had never painted before. And so I decided, well fine. And I started doing a lot of my own paintings, which are semi-abstract expressionists works. What I usually do is I just squeeze paint directly onto paper, put another piece on top of it and then peel them apart. And then I'll do this with several sheets. So it's sort of a combination printing, painting methodology. But yeah, so it's, I'm your basic all around art nerd. [00:02:51] Lindsey Dinneen: I love it. Okay. Well, I am so excited to hear more about all of the different things, but especially the podcast. I'm so intrigued by that concept. I love it. What a challenge too, so kudos to you. But yeah. Okay. So breaking down artwork and sort of talking about it and having the constraint of three minutes, first of all, where did that idea come from? And then I guess second of all, how hard is that? [00:03:16]Christopher John Garcia: Well, the idea actually came from a Doctor Who podcast. There is a Doctor Who podcast called "Two-Minute Time Lord." And it is it takes a Doctor Who episode or a topic surrounding Dr. Who and does a two minute episode. That's basically what you would say around the water cooler. And I figured, you know what? If it's good enough for the goose, it's good enough to be stolen by the gander. And I decided to take that concept and apply it to art because one, art has sort of discreet chunks. And I was seeing a lot of works that were-- I wouldn't say small-- but they were works that you could sort of come up with at least a nugget that you could expand on in for a couple of minutes without problem. [00:04:03] And I learned that by looking at a discreet portion, it gave you one, a chance to really sort of look across the board. You could look at one piece from various areas, but two, it allowed you to go really fast. And so my proof of concept was a good five episodes before I released anything and realized, yeah, this will work. And then I realized that if I kept it to just modern and contemporary art, it would allow me to single out one area instead of going all the way around the world, having to deal with all the things, 'cause once you get into the more realist stuff and the movement and the genre works, you kind of get, you have to go longer. But with the contemporary stuff, you could more deal with the impact of the work on particularly, in this case, me and how it emotionally triggered sensations and feelings and take it sort of a little bit out of a, sort of a more academic realm and into a realm of art appreciation that I really love. Things like, you know, Sister Wendy, for example,  used to be a favorite of mine, but there's not really one of those for contemporary arts, so much that deals directly with individual pieces. And, you know, I figured it'd be a great place to go. And I realized that "art podcast" is a crowded field. And I said, me too. [00:05:28]Lindsey Dinneen:   Indeed. Well, good for you. And again, I love that concept and I just think that's so cool. So, okay. So in dealing with modern and contemporary art, are you-- just out of curiosity-- are you going to galleries and being inspired by something particular or are you finding things on the internet or how is your process of deciding which art to kind of feature and unpack? [00:05:54] Christopher John Garcia: Well, I have a very complex algorithm to do that. Random. Basically, yeah, I go to a lot of museums. In particular, I go to SF MOMA, the Anderson collection at Stanford, the Cantor Art Museum when I can get there to moment itself. And I also have a massive collection of photographs because I'm that guy at a museum who takes a picture of everything. So it's really based largely on what I encounter typically at museums. I do some web stuff. In particular, I'm starting to do more stuff with Instagram artists who I meet typically through Clubhouse who are working. And I find pieces that really resonate with something I speak of a lot. Like the next issue I'm doing is about a work that very much reminds me of two of my favorite artists, Lichtenstein and then Sam Francis, and it looks like what happened if they were to work together. [00:06:46]But yeah, it's all over the place.  One of our recent episodes was about the work of Sol LeWitt that they turned into an app. I think it was by The Met, but it might've been a sort of an associated group that was how Sol LeWitt and his work-- and it's this very contained app that actually gives you a lot of different views into how Sol LeWitt goes. So it's a little bit across the board. I do some video art, a little bit of music, but I tend towards sound art and soundscape type stuff. And sort of looking at how they are still, it's all about the effect of you more emotionally, but also there's sort of what I call the emotional intellect, which is a thought that you have that isn't necessarily logical or reasonable, but it is a thought that provokes that same sort of region. [00:07:42]Lindsey Dinneen: Cool. Very cool. Well, and you know, random is good too. I like complex algorithm. That was entertaining. So, okay. So yeah, that sounds like a really interesting way to go about it in terms of, you know, it's, it's also just like, well, what is speaking to me right now? And then, so I'm curious, in your process for these episodes, I know you've talked about maybe unpacking it sort of on an emotional level in what it evokes, but are you also going into the history? Are you looking into the context behind it from the artist's point of view or mostly just sticking with your own personal interpretation? [00:08:20]Christopher John Garcia: You kind of have to do both. And you know, for example, if I talk about "Guernica" by Picasso, you kind of have to say the Spanish Civil War happened. But you don't necessarily have to go into specifically Picasso's long history in Cubism, his blue period, but you kind of have to make nods toward them . But what's really fascinating in a work like-- "Guernica" is a great example, and an episode I haven't done-- is when you pull out an aspect that has an emotional impact on you and for me, it's that, that wailing mother with her hands up and that sort of disjointed head that emotional impact also triggers an idea that, "Oh, well, this actually very much speaks to Picasso's Cubist period, this very much has this sort of the blue period emotional impact that he carried through the early part of his career." So it sort of naturally flows out of that, that you do deal with some of the, the history and the technique aspect. I don't deal deeply with technique most of the time, largely because art technique is still a little bit mysterious to me, but I really do try. You know, art has, if I decided to go in all art history nerd, like I often do with my wife, sadly it would be a six hour podcast. [00:09:44]Lindsey Dinneen: So then in knowing yourself, you know what you need to limit yourself to. I like it. Yeah. I like it. Okay, cool. Well, okay. So your career is very cool and very unique, and I'm just curious, how do you sort of fall into an-- obviously you didn't fall into it-- but fall into a job like that because, I mean, what, what was your background that enabled you to then become this, this curator of a museum? That's just really interesting. [00:10:14] Christopher John Garcia: Yeah. Funny, you should ask. I was a floor worker, I basically a docent and tour guide and someone who told you to stop touching objects at the old Computer Museum in Boston. And it was slowly falling apart and getting ready to close. It would eventually be bought out by the Museum of Science. And I grew up in the Bay Area and I was out in Boston at that museum, but they had an affiliate in California. So when I went home for Christmas, one year I decided to visit and they said, "Yeah, we've got this job opening." And I said, "I will apply for this job because Boston is cold." And I ended up getting the job. Literally I fell into it because no one else wanted the job. It was $12.50 an hour. And no one else wanted that in Silicon Valley at that point except for me. [00:11:05]And yeah, for 20 years that's what I did and what was great is that I was largely in charge of my own research interests. And that was fascinating. When you give the freedom to a curator to go and investigate what truly interests them and what they think is missing in the museum, what you gain is an incredible amount of insight and a lot of extra labor from the person who's actually doing the research. And it turned out that a lot of the stuff that I was doing was not only stuff that we didn't know previously, but we didn't see how it connected to the bigger world. And it was just a great job. 20 years. I got laid off in 2019, sadly. Hashtag #learntofundraise. But the real, the real fascinating thing about, you know, lucking into this gig, like I had my art history background, but really it was the fact that I knew how to give a really good tour, ended up getting me the job and, you know, I held onto it because it's just a thing that I really understood. And I think I really grew up with the museum itself. [00:12:13] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Cool. How incredible. And I love that you were given that autonomy and freedom to explore the things that interested you and then get to just learn and grow. That's really cool. I think that's awesome. And so what was the most surprising thing maybe that you learned along that journey? [00:12:36]Christopher John Garcia: So it, it's both surprising-- and then when I think about it, not at all surprising-- I got to go and meet a artist by the name of Harold Cohen. . Initially I knew him, his sort of work from the sixties and very early seventies as an abstract painter, sort of along the lines of if Hawking was working completely... David Hockney, not Hawking. Hawking is the scientist. Hockney was working completely abstract. Very, very great color palette, amazing line, but he got very interested in artificial intelligence and developed a system called Aaron, the AARON Paint System, which he developed for almost 40 years. And I got to spend a couple of days with him. [00:13:28] And what was so surprising was he was talking about when he got into AI, it wasn't that-- the art community naturally sort of rejected the work because it wasn't clear who was the artist? Was it Harold Cohen or was it AARON, the Paint System that he developed. And it wasn't that 'cause that I understood, but it was that when you program a system to create art, it is naturally going to attempt to create art in the mode of its creator. Because the creator understands art in that way. So all AARON is a set of rules, but when you define a set of rules, you're going to define it with your own biases already installed. And it's fascinating to see that. [00:14:23] And I managed to also connect with another computer music pioneer, who also does visual arts with his programs, guy by the name of David Cope. And he recognized that. And what he did to avoid that was he made it possible to input external work by, in his case for music mini files, from, you know, Shostakovitch, Scott Joplin, Bach, and so he removed himself from the set of rules. The rules were defined by the input, and it was so interesting that I never thought in a million years that just setting a set of rules into a computer program would actually have that much effect. And then when I thought about it, it was like, "Yeah, of course that's how you would do it." And then I realized, wait, there's a way to do it where it's not actually your rules. It's someone else's. I just love that. [00:15:15] Lindsey Dinneen: Yes. Oh my goodness. That is so cool. I didn't even know that those technologies existed. So that's really fascinating to me that that's even a thing. How cool! [00:15:27] Christopher John Garcia: Well, what's incredible about that is right now, we are in an absolute Renaissance of AI art. And it's scary because it is very, very quickly being monetized. We saw some of the first works done almost. All the major AI art is being done in Europe right now. In particular there's our groups in Amsterdam, in a couple different places in France, England. And what's amazing is that now they're starting to go to auctions and fetching high sums, but this isn't where we're going to see AI art. We're going to see AI art in hotel lobbies, hotel rooms, any place where large-scale art creation is necessary. And right now, almost all that work is outsourced typically to China or small artists who are willing to work for relatively cheap for reproduction. In this case, it's highly possible that AI will be creating all the art we encounter in public corporate spaces, and that's a very big change and will have a very big impact on not only the art market, but the art market that no one thinks about: the commercial art market for commercial properties. [00:16:36] Lindsey Dinneen: Hm. So do you think that that's a good thing or is it not necessarily inherently good or bad? It just is different. [00:16:45]Christopher John Garcia: Yeah. That's... I go back and forth and it depends on how much I like computer programmers at the moment. I think it is a good thing in that we are developing systems that are able to get art out more quickly. And I think it's a bad thing of course, because it is going to put some artists out of work, but by having the work that can get out more quickly, it is going to drive the art market in general broader. And that's going to allow more artists to actually get work, to get commissions. Now, how, how that drives against one another, it's hard to tell. And new technologies and art are changing everything. And so it's a really, we're on kind of a knife's edge and we could fall either direction. We could either end up with a market that is an, a, an output that is AI driven. We have very little, as of yet, AI generated art that has made it into the museum space. And when you really look at the history of art, it's the stuff that gets into the museum space that ends up being the most significant. We're still seeing a massive influx of artists working today who are being displayed in museums. So I think the human is still going to be the more significant player in what art means and becomes, but I think AI is going to be a major part of what sells and that, you know, who knows which direction that'll go. [00:18:27] Lindsey Dinneen: Sure. Yeah. Cool. Yeah. It's going to be really interesting to follow that journey then and see what does end up happening and how does it twist and weave through different avenues and yeah, that's going to be really different. Like, I'm, I'm just wrapping my head around it right now, thinking about it, because again, I didn't know these technologies existed, so I'm like, huh?  Okay. So, you know, you mentioned that you started taking that painting. What kind of artwork do you tend to lean towards with your own? Is it more abstract? Is it more realistic? What do you like? [00:19:05] Christopher John Garcia: Oh, it's a hundred percent abstract just because I don't have the skills to actually do representational. But one of the things on my Instagram is that I'll post an image where it's literally, I squoze three tubes of paint onto a piece of paper. I covered it with a little glue and I put another piece of paper on top of it and I scan it later, usually after it dries, but when it doesn't dry, my wife gets mad. And people will start to recognize that, "Oh, that's obviously a picture of X, Y, and Z." And one of the other things I do on the side is I publish zines and I had squished a whole bunch of acrylic paint that I just tossed onto a piece of paper and I peeled it off, but I had let it dry a little bit before I squished it. So it made this sort of feathery looking look and it looks exactly like the cryptid known as Moth Man. [00:19:56] And at that point I realized that something there's something in the sort of the chance operations space, that where even if you're not actively trying to create representational image, representational image will come forth. And so that picture of Moth Man, as I call it now, is a picture of Moth Man, even though I wasn't painting Moth Man. I wasn't painting anything. I was just putting paint on paper and that really, for me, raises some interesting questions as well. If I didn't mean to paint Moth Man, did I paint Moth Man? And the answer for me to that is, of course I'm painted Moth Man. What, are you crazy? Although I could get into the whole thing of that. Maybe Moth Man is some sort of entity that was working through me to make sure I painted a painting of him. But that might be a bridge too far, even for me. [00:20:45] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, sure. Of course. Well, that's cool. Oh my goodness. Okay. And so is that something that you anticipate you'll continue doing even sort of after things hopefully return to normal? [00:21:00]Christopher John Garcia: Yeah, I think what's really fascinating is that once I realized I loved the act of painting, I realized even more that I loved the material of painting. And I, I think painting can be a process that is laborious, that is tedious, that is mind numbing. It can also be one that is brief, that is freeing, that is inexact. And for me, it's definitely the latter, but the things that I love about it is just looking at how things react with one another. Like if I put oils and acrylics and inks on the same page and put a little Elmer's glue on top of it, and then put another page on top of it, the way it feels under the hand. Like that's a sensation that I can't think of repeating. And it's one that doesn't take long. It's just a couple of minutes even. And there's that sensation that's an irreplaceable thing. It's the aspect of the artists that I don't know if I ever really understood until I started painting myself, is that there are sensations to this that don't exist many other places. That the actual act of making marks on paper, on a canvas, whatever has a feeling. And when you find a feeling that is pleasurable or relieving or funky, you know, you're going to want to keep going back to that. So I don't see myself stopping painting. Probably painting a little less, but definitely it's something I'll keep doing that. And I have an Instagram to fill, so yes. [00:22:51] Lindsey Dinneen: Fair enough. Well, excellent. Well, I'm just curious. I know you've gotten to meet some pretty cool artists yourself-- and obviously your experiences as a curator and as a podcaster have probably lent themselves to some really memorable moments-- but I wonder if there's anything that kind of really stands out to you as an encounter with art that was like just something to remember to kind of file back there and return to every once in awhile. [00:23:17]Christopher John Garcia: Oh yeah. Bunch. I mean my first time I ever met an artist artist-- well, the first time I ever encountered an artist, this I should actually point out-- was Andy Warhol. And I didn't get to meet him, but I sat right behind him at Madison Square Garden at a WWF wrestling show. [00:23:38] Lindsey Dinneen: Wow. [00:23:39] Christopher John Garcia: And he was always in the front row and always taking pictures with his little camera. But little seven year old me, I couldn't talk to them because even I knew who he was and I was seven, but I got to know Robert Rauschenberg a little bit because he would visit our college and he was a fascinating human in many ways. But what I learned when I went to a big exhibit of his at SF MOMA was that his interests were so broad because he was so interesting and wanted to make the world as interested in things as he was. And it was like one of the best things. Again, this is something that people may not realize, every pop artist loves wrestling. I do not know why this is true, but everyone I've met-- Rauschenberg, Warhol, didn't meet him, but still-- Lichtenstein, Marisol, all of them love wrestling. And what Robert Rauschenberg said that one time when we were-- 'cause you'd stopped by class, then a lot of us would go out drinking afterwards-- he said "You know, you have to be careful how you are positioning your art, whether or not it is referencing the zeitgeists or referencing some niche topics that only two people in the gallery will get." And it's, you know, if you do a painting of whole Cogan, everyone will get it. It's a zeitgeist. But if you're talking about Pak Song and Dusty Rhodes, you're talking about niche. [00:25:09] And at that point, one, this was obviously made for me, even though he didn't know it. But two, he was really saying something that I bought into because you know, oh, this idea that there is a universality, but there's also a place for niche, which I love. But he was a really fun guy. I didn't see him after probably '97, but really had a good time with him. And I was very lucky. Another guy who's known more for music, but is actually a wonderful visual artist, is Mark Mothersbaugh of Divo. And I got to interview him, do an oral history with him. He has a fascinating eye for the world. And every day he writes one postcard size image he creates and he has thousands of them and they're beautiful. But then he was also doing this a very simple thing where he took classic, often Victorian, sometimes early 20th century photographs and uses Photoshop to place a mirror image of it. So it gives you that sort of awkward exactly symmetrical look. [00:26:14] But yeah, those have been two of my favorite. I've been lucky that I've gotten to meet a lot of really fun artists through the museum. You know, there were a lot of folks who didn't feel like early computer was being talked about enough and we're very happy to have anyone who would be interested in this stuff. But always, you know, artists like everyone, there are good ones who are wanting to talk to you all day long. And there are others who don't. You sort of learned which is which. [00:26:44]Lindsey Dinneen: For sure, for sure. Well, yeah. And, you know, just, it's so funny 'cause obviously everyone has different personalities and I would second that some artists are a little more approachable than others, but you know, that is okay. Well, I'm sure that some of our listeners are going to be super interested in your work, both as a podcaster and as a painter. And I'm wondering if there are ways for us to, of course, A) listen to your podcast and then B) check out some of your artwork. [00:27:14] Christopher John Garcia: Oh, there absolutely are. I have my podcast on the internet,  just look for "Three-Minute Modernist" and you will find it all over the place. And then you can find my artwork and pictures of my kids, also things I cook, on Instagram at Johnny Eponymous, J O H N N Y E P O N Y MOU S. I'm also the same thing on Twitter, the same thing on Facebook, the same thing on pretty much everything. Since Friendster, I've been Johnny Eponymous. But yeah, and I'm, yeah, I'm all over the place. It's hard to miss me. [00:27:48] Lindsey Dinneen: Perfect. Awesome. Well, first of all, thank you just so much again for being here and sharing your stories. And I'm just so fascinated learning about how technology and art intersect, and that's just so cool that you shared that very unique perspective. So I definitely appreciate that. I do have three questions that I always like to ask my guests, if you're okay with that. [00:28:10]Christopher John Garcia: Whew... [00:28:10]Lindsey Dinneen: I know. [00:28:11] Christopher John Garcia: I'm ready. [00:28:12] Lindsey Dinneen: It's pressure. [00:28:12] Christopher John Garcia: I'm ready. [00:28:13] Lindsey Dinneen: Okay. First of all, how do you personally define art or what is art to you? [00:28:20]Christopher John Garcia: Art is that thing you do that is mostly useless, but ultimately important. [00:28:27]Lindsey Dinneen: Okay. Care to elaborate, or are we just going to leave that be? [00:28:32]Christopher John Garcia: I'll elaborate slightly. It is the shape of the tool, not the use of the tool, I think is the way I, I wrote it in a paper once when I was trying to be smart. It's really about something that brings you an emotional experience of some sort that isn't just because of what it does, but what it is. And so, you know, we have paintings around the house 'cause my wife's mother's a actual painter who paints actual paintings. And every time I see one of them, it makes me feel hungry and it's because there's all sorts of food in it. But, you know, I consider that to be art because it draws an emotion out of me. [00:29:15] Lindsey Dinneen: Sure, sure. Perfect. Okay. [00:29:18] Christopher John Garcia: It's also a good painting of food. [00:29:20] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh, there you go. Perfect. Oh yeah. Well, that's a, that's a very unique answer and I like it. Okay. So, secondly, what do you think is the most important role of an artist? [00:29:32]Christopher John Garcia: To make art. I mean, really, that's what it comes down to, I think. Wanting an artist to be a philosopher, a spokesman, any of that? Really not as important as the fact that they just create the work. [00:29:49]Lindsey Dinneen: Sure. And then finally, I'll define my terms a little bit in this last question, but do you think that art should be inclusive or exclusive? And by inclusive, I'm referring to an artist who puts their work out there and shares a little bit of context behind that, whether it's program notes or the inspiration or a title. Just something to give the viewer an idea of what went into the creation. Versus exclusive referring to an artist who does put their work out there, but doesn't provide the context and therefore leaves it entirely up to the viewer to interpret it at will. [00:30:25]Christopher John Garcia: I'm going to throw you a curve ball and say there is no such thing as an inclusive artist. [00:30:31] Lindsey Dinneen: Okay. Ooh. Tell me more. [00:30:33]Christopher John Garcia: Everything an artist does is meant to be interpreted, is meant to be placed into a context. So that would be now exclusive. Nevermind. But yeah, they, every purpose choice you make is giving you more of a clue. If an artist says, "This is not titled," it doesn't mean he is just-- I don't care what you call it-- it's, he's making a choice. He doesn't want to give you the direction, but there is a direction and, you know, I've, I always think of-- I think it was Barnett Newman who once said I paint a zip. I put a line down a canvas. To me, that's a line. To someone else that could be a streetlight. And we're both right. [00:31:25]Lindsey Dinneen:  Yeah. [00:31:26] Christopher John Garcia: And I think that, you know, I think everything an artist does has the reason that it's done to bring about some thought, even if that thing that they do isn't giving you any background, but is giving you the lack of background. That seems strange, but in my brain it works. [00:31:48]Lindsey Dinneen: Well, I really, that is the most unique answer I've received for that question. So I like that. That is a really interesting point. So thank you for sharing that perspective because I really that's going to make me think about that even more. So thank you for that. [00:32:05]Christopher John Garcia: I do what I can. [00:32:06] Lindsey Dinneen: I know. I appreciate it. Well, thank you just so very much for being here today, Chris, I really appreciate your time and you sharing your background and what you're up to. And I'm so excited about your podcast. And I encourage all of our listeners to also check out Chris's podcast and subscribe and all that good stuff, because obviously he brings a cool, unique perspective and it's three minutes. So, like the perfect way to just start your day. So thank you again, Chris. And I just want to commend you for everything that you're doing and sharing art with the world. I really think that that's important and kudos to you. [00:32:49]Christopher John Garcia: Well, thank you much. It's been so much fun. [00:32:51] Lindsey Dinneen: Good. Yeah. Well, and thank you to everyone who's listened to this episode and if you're feeling as inspired as I am right now, I would love if you would share this with a friend or two, and we will catch you next time. [00:33:04] If you have a story to share with us, we would love that so much. And I hope your day has been Artfully Told.

Here are links for more information on The Rothko Chapel and for the film trailer on The Rothko Chapel.To view rewards available for supporting the podcast, please visit Warfare's Patreon page.

Today, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is celebrated for his 'dream' of a just America, but by the end of his career King was calling for a "radical reconstruction" of the United States. What compelled the transformation of King's ideas and what do they tell us about our society today? For the 2021 Annual MLK Birthday Celebration, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor engaged these questions in hopes of unlocking the ideas and strategies necessary to enact effective and lasting change in the United States. A Q&A session followed the lecture, moderated by Brandon Mack, community activist and lead organizer for Black Lives Matter: Houston. The Chapel started this important annual gathering in 1979 to connect the contemporary implications of Dr. King’s legacy to the ongoing struggle for civil and human rights, captured through artist Barnett Newman’s Broken Obelisk. This sculpture, located on the plaza adjacent to the Chapel, is dedicated to Dr. King. About the Presenter Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor is an Assistant Professor in the Department of African-American Studies at Princeton University. She is author of Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry Undermined Black Homeownership, published in 2019 by the University of North Carolina Press, longlisted for a National Book Award for nonfiction and a 2020 finalist for the Pulitzer in History. Taylor’s book From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation, won the Lannan Cultural Freedom Award for an Especially Notable Book in 2016. She is also editor of How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective, which won the Lambda Literary Award for LGBTQ nonfiction in 2018. Taylor is a columnist for The New Yorker. About the Moderator Brandon Mack is a community activist and sociologist dedicated to issues related to the intersections of race, gender, and sexual orientation. He is a lead organizer with Black Lives Matter: Houston, Co-Chapter Director of New Leaders Council - Houston, Screening Committee and Education and Advocacy Chair of the Houston GLBT Political Caucus, and Research Coordinator for the Mayor’s LGBTQ+ Advisory Board. Mack is currently a Ph.D. student in the Higher Education Leadership & Policy Studies at University of Houston.

Über das Verhältnis von Kunst und Sprache lässt sich viel sagen. Unsere zweite Folge zu dem Thema beschäftigt sich mit der Vielfalt ästhetischer Ausdrucksmöglichkeiten: gesprochene Sprache, Bildsprache, Körpersprache… Wir widmen uns dem Expressionismus in Malerei und Lyrik und den automatischen Schreibtechniken der Surrealist*innen. Außerdem stellen wir das Projekt Sprache durch Kunst vor, das Kunstvermittlung mit Sprachförderung verbindet.

“Ni cygne ni lune” OEuvres tchèques 1950-2014 de la collection Claude et Henri de Saint Pierreau Centre Pompidou, Parisdu 7 octobre 2020 au 1er février 2021HOME  |  AGENDA CULTUREL  |  “NI CYGNE NI LUNE” OEUVRES TCHÈQUES 1950-2014, AU CENTRE POMPIDOU, PARIS, DU 7 OCTOBRE 2020 AU 1ER FÉVRIER 2021 “Ni cygne ni lune” OEuvres tchèques 1950-2014, au Centre Pompidou, Paris, du 7 octobre 2020 au 1er février 2021Partage“Ni cygne ni lune” OEuvres tchèques 1950-2014 de la collection Claude et Henri de Saint Pierreau Centre Pompidou, Parisdu 7 octobre 2020 au 1er février 2021Centre PompidouPODCAST – Interview de Karolina Ziebinska-Lewandowska, conservatrice au Musée national d'art moderne – Cabinet de la photographie, et commissaire de l'exposition,par Anne-Frédérique Fer, à Paris, le 7 octobre 2020, durée 14'14, © FranceFineArt.© Anne-Frédérique Fer,visite de l'exposition avec Karolina Ziebinska-Lewandowska, le 7 octobre 2020.Eva Fuková (1927-2015),Procházka v Quogue (Promenade à Quoque),1973. épreuve gélatino-argentique. Centre Pompidou, MNAM – CCI. ©Centre Pompidou,MNAM-CCI/Audrey Laurans/Dist. RMN-CP. ©Droits réservés.Václav Boštík (1913-2005),Fissonnement en bleu II,1973. huile sur toile 81,5 x 100,5 cm. Coll. Claude et Henri de Saint Pierre. ©Droits réservés.Jiří Kolář (1914-2002),Illustration pour le livre de Bohumil Hrabal « Automat svet »,édition allemenade, 1966 collage. 45 x 32,5 cm. Coll. Claude et Henri de Saint Pierre. © Jiří Kolář.Běla Kolářová (1923–2010),Variace II (Variation II),1962. épreuve gélatino-argentique 27,2 x 22,8 cm. Coll. Claude et Henri de Saint Pierre. ©Droits réservés.Extrait du communiqué de presse :Commissaire :Karolina Ziebinska-Lewandowska, conservatrice au Musée national d'art moderne, Cabinet de la photographieassistée de :Julie Jones, attachée de conservation au Musée national d'art moderne, Cabinet de la photographieCéline Makragic, attachée de collection au Musée national d'art moderne.Située au coeur des collections du Musée national d'art moderne, la salle Focus met à l'honneur depuis 2015 des artistes modernes et contemporains de toutes disciplines, à partir d'oeuvres marquantes entrées dans les collections sous forme de dons récents.Après Barnett Newman, Chen Zhen, Hubert Damisch, Jos Houweling et tout récemment Yuan Jai, le Centre Pompidou présente la donation d'Henri et Claude de Saint Pierre, une quarantaine d'oeuvres offertes au Musée, complétée de quelques autres issues de leur collection. Constitué de près de soixante-dix oeuvres, cet ensemble permet de dévoiler un fragment encore mal connu de la scène artistique tchèque. Les œuvres des photographes du groupe du nouveau documentaire DOFO, les images de murs par Emila Medková et celles de la réalité « pauvre » par Alois Nožička et Čestmir KraÅLtký, les natures mortes paisibles de Jan Svoboda, le réalisme poétique de Bohuslav Reynek, l'art brut de Jan Křížek, les recherches abstraites de Bela Kolářová ou les actions subversives de l'artiste Fluxus Milan Knížák, attestent la richesse et la diversité de l'art en Tchécoslovaquie communiste. Majoritairement photographique, l'exposition introduit également quelques magnifiques exemples de l'abstraction picturale des années 1960 et 1970 avec des toiles de Josef Sima, Vaclav Boštík ou des pastels de Karel Malich.Présentant les oeuvres d'une vingtaine d'artistes, l'exposition « Ni cygne ni lune » offre ainsi un regard à la fois différent et complémentaire sur l'avant-garde européenne la plus connue.Dans l'histoire de l'abstraction européenne de l'après-guerre, il semble que l'ombre du Rideau de fer soit encore trop présente : la révision des canons de l'abstraction d'Europe occidentale n'a pas encore eu lieu. Il n'est donc pas étonnant que Karel Malich, Vaclav Boštík, Emila Medková, Bela Kolářová ou Čestmir KraÅLtký, grands noms de l'histoire de l'art en République Tchèque, restent ailleurs, relativement inconnus. Après 1945, l'abstraction tchécoslovaque, nourrie de l'expérience du surréalisme, donne naissance à une version particulière de l'informel qui commence avec des expositions indépendantes telles « Konfrontace » vers 1960 ; cette abstraction est aussi empreinte de l'héritage du constructivisme, comme en témoignent les oeuvres de Zdenek Sykora, Milan Grygar ou de Stanislav Kolibal. Au sein des groupes d'artistes engagés dissidents, comme dans les expositions, peinture et photographie se côtoient. Si la frontière politique a certes limité les échanges artistiques, ces oeuvres font partie intégrante de l'histoire européenne.Avec le don d'une quarantaine d'oeuvres de la collection de Claude et Henri de Saint Pierre, réalisé en 2019, les collections du Musée national d'art moderne comblent en partie cette lacune. Le couple découvre l'art tchèque d'après-guerre dans les années 1990, période pendant laquelle Henri de Saint Pierre se déplace régulièrement en tant que conseiller dans les usines et fonderies de la République tchèque. Une scène artistique riche, mais restée locale, devient une terre d'exploration qui, sous l'égide de Claude de Saint Pierre, mène à la constitution d'une collection privée unique, conservée à Paris. Voir Acast.com/privacy pour les informations sur la vie privée et l'opt-out.

Versione audio: Nel 1943, Edward Alden Jewell, critico d’arte del «New York Times», scrisse un articolo in cui espresse il suo “turbamento” di fronte ai quadri di alcuni esponenti della nuova avanguardia pittorica americana, tra cui Adolph Gottlieb e Mark Rothko. I due artisti gli risposero, assieme a Barnett Newman, enunciando i cinque principi estetici […] L'articolo Mark Rothko: aneliti di infinito proviene da Arte Svelata.

This episode, "The Many Deaths of a Painting" was produced by 99% Invisible. More episodes at 99percentinvisible.org.

Scott Lynn is the Founder and CEO of Masterworks, the first company to allow investors to buy shares representing ownership of great masterpieces by artists like Warhol, Monet, and Banksy. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Scott serves on the board of v2 ventures (Adparlor, Giant Media, Reachmobi, Amply, and Sellozo), Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail (a non-profit publication in the art industry). In this episode, Scott is discussing art as an investment class and compares it to other regular investments and how the regular person can get involved. After listening, you will better understand Art as an asset class and information on the company Masterworks! Where we are: Johnny FD – Sri Lanka / IG @johnnyfdk Sam Marks – North Carolina / IG @imsammarks Sponsor: Support Invest Like a Boss: Join our Patreon Discussed: Masterworks Like these investments? Try them with these special ILAB links: ArtofFX – Start with just a $10,000 account (reduced from $25,000) Fundrise – Start with only $1,000 into their REIT funds (non-accredited investors OK) Betterment – Get up to 1 year managed free Wealthfront – Get your first $15,000 managed free PeerStreet – Get a 1% yield bump on your first loan *Johnny and Sam use all of the above services personally. Time Stamps: 08:24 – Are you passionate about art as a collector or have you primarily looked at it as an investor? 10:59 – Do you see a flood of money going into art presently? 13:07 – “last year approximate 6.8 Billion in art sold” - Scott Lynn 15:10 – When you buy a “Blue Chip” piece, where are they held or displayed? 16:04 – What makes a piece of art “Blue Chip”? 17:13 – “You do see a correlation between an artist passing away and prices going up, but it's not because the artist passes away, its because the artist is no longer producing work” - Scott Lynn 20:10 – How does the whole buying and procurement process happen? 24:18 – What’s the average price of a piece on Masterworks? 26:53 – What’s the typical length of time that your money is invested in these paintings? 28:56 – Q&A from ILAB community 35:07 - Derek’s Recap If you enjoyed this episode, do us a favor and share it! Also if you haven’t already, please take a minute to leave us a 5-star review on iTunes and claim your bonus here! Copyright 2020. All rights reserved. Read our disclaimer here.

Scott Lynn is the Founder and CEO of Masterworks, the first company to allow investors to buy shares representing ownership of great masterpieces by artists like Warhol, Monet, and Banksy. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Scott serves on the board of v2 ventures (Adparlor, Giant Media, Reachmobi, Amply, and Sellozo), Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail (a non-profit publication in the art industry).

Art collector and Masterworks founder Scott Lynn joins me to give me my first taste into the super-opaque art market which I a) am too broke to afford anything in and b) know absolutely jack shit about. We talk about Banksy, pricing art, where art gets its value, how art is authenticated and why art can be a hedge against the widening inequality gap. Scott Lynn is the Founder and CEO of Masterworks, the first company to allow investors to buy shares representing ownership of great masterpieces by artists like Warhol, Monet, and Banksy. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Scott serves on the board of v2 ventures (Adparlor, Giant Media, Reachmobi, Amply, and Sellozo), Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail (a non-profit publication in the art industry). You can check out Scott's company, Masterworks, at this link. The QTR Podcast is a completely, 100% listener supported podcast that is always going to be free. YouTube does not let me monetize my videos on the site and the podcast is full time work which will never have ads in the middle of it. If you enjoy the content, please support the QTR Podcast in any or all of the following ways:   A small recurring donation via: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/QTRResearch One time donations can also be sent via:Bitcoin: 3G25NvNbGZsaDfoxTBzRFticKa4LDUeBpkVenmo: @chrisinphiladelphiaPaypal: https://www.paypal.me/qtrresearch You can join my e-mail list here and visit my website at www.quoththeravenresearch.com for all of my content. QTR MERCH is also now available here. You can also follow me on YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. THANK YOU TO ALL OF MY KIND PATRONS. Please show love to those who support the QTR Podcast:    Biggest Patron Donors    JM Bullion - where QTR buys gold & silver - Twitter: @JMBullion The Trader's Path - no BS trading service - Twitter: @PLHStock RumorHound.ai - free 14 day trial - Twitter: @RumorHound Sang Lucci Trading - the 3LT playbook - also, the SL Master Course  Corvus Gold - http://www.corvusgold.com Investors Underground - day trading community - Twitter: @investorslive  Ken R  Chris Bede - Twitter: @cbede  Nicholas Parks Matthew Zimmer J Mintzmyer - Twitter: @mintzmyer Russ Valenti - Twitter: @russellvalenti  Creighton Titus Longest Running Supporters   Max Mulvihill - Since 2/2018  Kyle Thomas - Since 4/2018  Chris Bede - Since 5/2018  Dariusz Kordonski - Since 5/2018  Chris Gerrard - Since 5/2018    All podcast content is subject to this disclaimer.    Chris is not an investment adviser. Listeners should always speak to their personal financial advisers.  

Episode Notes Elements of Barnett Newman, Sean Scully, and much much more!!! Find out more at https://three-minute-modernist.pinecast.co

Redan under sin tid på konstfack för tjugo år sedan kallades Björn Kjelltoft ”Sveriges meste popkonstnär”. Han har kissat i Marcel Duchamps toalett på Moderna Museet, ställt ut Ullrika Hydman-Valliens motiv på petflaskor vilket ledde till en beef som sedan utmynnade i vänskap. I fjol fock han Stockholms stads kulturpris och har även tecknat Cyrils kommande bokomslag. Det blir ett intressant samtal om allt detta och den samtida konsten och konstkritikens raison d'etre. De diskuterar också moderna konstnärer som Rothko, Pollock och Barnett Newman och vikten av tanke bakom konstverket … Lyssna, stötta, dela!SWISH 123 535 48 57 See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

If a painting exists as a cultural provocation and receives a cultural provocation, is the provocateur guilty? Barnett Newman found out first hand.

You are really going to enjoy this deep dive into profound questions with Canadian Artist MAGDOLENE DYKSTRA. Her work with clay prompts the viewer to consider profound questions of ecology, elementals, growth, decay, the climate and art. I really love her Artist Statement that helps to describe the sheer profundity of her project . . .A desire to understand my place in the universe drives my work. Using sculpture and installation, my work meditates on the unfathomable multiplicity of humanity. My compositions are inspired by microbiology, finding lineage in the Romantic artists of the 19th century who used their paintings to evoke the sublime by reminding the viewer of their diminutive status in relation to grand landscapes. In contrast to macro landscapes, I site the sublime in microbial terrain. In a time of environmental endangerment, my aesthetic of cellular accumulation references the vast numbers of the human race, swarming beyond what is sustainable. I compose my work using primarily unfired clay, imparting these roiling masses with precarity to reflect on the fragility of our collective existence. Whatt is the role of the individual within the horde?My sculpted paintings merge my interest in the foreign terrain of microbiology with an examination of what Barnett Newman called the “abstract sublime”. These works reference Abstract Expressionism’s use of immense scale to evoke feelings of transcendence. Within my work, each individual is absurdly insignificant except for its interconnectedness to everything around them. Gathered en masse, these lifeforms overwhelm the structure upon which they grow. Drawing on the ephemeral works of land artist Richard Long, my Interventions contextualize the microbial forms in the landscape. Despite the accumulating number of cells in each Intervention, they cannot withstand the elements, ultimately returning to the earth.Just as prehistoric artists recorded their presence using pigments of the earth, I use clay to explore my relationship to the earth and the universe. Sculpture, installation, and drawing allow me to make the unseen tangible. Using clay connects me to rituals and cultures throughout human history. This primordial material bears the memory of the earliest artists, all the way back to the cave of Le Tuc d’Audoubert in France, where a bull and cow sculpted in raw clay have lain for about 15,000 years. I am one of many makers throughout human history who uses this material to explore my link to the rest of the universe. Instead of relying on the ability of fired clay to withstand time, I use raw clay in order to embrace ephemerality. Impermanence enhances preciousness. The things that don’t last demand more careful attention.

My guest in this episode is Scott Lynn. Scott has been an active collector of contemporary art for more than fifteen years and has built an internationally-recognized collection of Abstract Expressionism that has included works by Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, Willem de Kooning, and more. In addition to Masterworks, Scott serves on the board of v2 ventures(Adparlor, Giant Media, Reachmobi, Amply, and Sellozo), Payability, and the Brooklyn Rail (a non-profit publication in the art industry). I have only 2 community announcements, join us on Facebook, go to Facebook and type in, "Cashflow Ninja Community" everything about our movement is shared there, our investment group, webinars, tools, information, and all other cool stuff and if we have impacted your life in any way, please send us a testimonial recorded with your smartphone to info@cashflowninja.com. I have only 2 community announcements, join us on Facebook, go to Facebook and type in, "Cashflow Ninja Community" everything about our movement is shared there, our investment group, webinars, tools, information, and all other cool stuff and if we have impacted your life in any way, please send us a testimonial recorded with your smartphone to info@cashflowninja.com. Interview Links: Masterworks If you have enjoyed our podcast, please share with friends and family Please Subscribe, Rate, and Review on Itunes so more people can find us! Support Our Sponsors Producers Wealth, create, protect & multiply your wealth in ANY Economy. Asym Capital, achieve asymmetric returns through recession-resistant real estate.   The Real Asset Investor, alternative cash flow investments.   Goldsilver, buy physical gold & silver to hold as wealth insurance.   Cashflow Gold & Silver, learn how to create income streams from your Gold & Silver Investments.   Property Profits, how to buy & profit from prime real estate.   Audible, download any audiobook for FREE when you try Audible for 30 days.   Thanks so much for joining me again. Have some feedback you’d like to share? Leave a note in the comment section below! If you enjoyed this episode, please share it using the social media buttons you see at the bottom of the post!   Also, please leave an honest review for the Cashflow Ninja Podcast on iTunes. Ratings and reviews are extremely helpful and greatly appreciated! They do matter in the rankings of the show, and I read each and every one of them.   And finally, don’t forget to subscribe to the show on iTunes to get automatic updates, please follow me on twitter @mclaubscher and Instagram, @thecashflowninja.   Until next time! Live a life of passion and purpose on YOUR terms,   M.C. Laubscher

“¿Quien le teme al rojo, amarillo y azul?” es una serie de pinturas del artista estadounidense Barnett Newman. Las pinturas de esta serie hacen parte de la variante de “Color Field Painting” dentro del movimiento de expresionismo abstracto.“ El Color Field se encuentra caracterizado, principalmente, por amplios campos de color liso y sólido, extendidos o teñidos en el lienzo, creando áreas de superficie uniforme y un plano liso de imagen. En este estilo de pintura el color es liberado del contexto objetivo y se convierte en el sujeto en si mismo.“ El titulo de esta obra, establecido como una pregunta o como un desafio, reforzo la antipatía del publico frente a esta pintura controversial. Expuesta en el museo de arte Stedelijk en Amsterdam, la pintura sufrió un ataque a cuchillo en 1986 a manos de un apasionado del arte más tradicional, quien se sintió ofendido por la aparente monotonía y sencillez pictórica de la obra.Se dice que la pintura sufrió un segundo da;o mortal en su restauración. Debido a la extensa y homogénea superficie roja, restaurar la obra fue un verdadero desafío. Muchos criticos resaltaron la perdida de detalles sutiles y más tarde se acusó al restaurador de arruinar la obra “para siempre” por el uso pintura para pared y un tosco rodillo. El ejercicio de juntar ambos tipos de arte, el de la musica y la pintura, es más bien común en estos estilos. El minimalismo con su practica de resaltar características formarles sobre cualquier forma o representación. Esta historia ,retomada del podcast 99% Invisible de Roman Mars, me genera intriga en el impulso destructivo a raíz de la pregunta de Newman, que viene de la obra de teatro Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Que a su vez viene de la canción de una película animada de disney, Who’s afraid of the Big Bad Wolf? Los agresores de esta pintura afirmaron que su ataque era una respuesta a esta pregunta y con su respuesta estaban completando la obra maestra.En esta ocasión el criterio de selección fueron piezas de larga duración, y estas serán reproducidas en su totalidad. Piezas de desarrollo lento y constante. Por esta razón el programa durará cerca de dos horas y escucharemos 5 piezas de lo que podríamos enmarcar dentro de la música de pedal o como es más comúnmente llamada, música drone. Playlist:ELEH - Death is Eternal BlissPhil Niblock - Didgeridoos and Don'tsRhodri Davies - Occam I (Pour Harpe) de Eliane RadigueBirchville Cat Motel - Beautiful Speck TriumphRutger Zuydervelt - Sneeuwstorm

Straaljagers en trekkers, pollen en Carré, Weesp en Halifax, verwarrende 18-jarige inbellers, Barnett Newman, museumteksten en het homomonument, en een huis vol woorden: verhuizen is hier het devies. Ongevraagd vertoon van kennis wordt als denkfout aangerekend.

De tentoonstelling is een fascinerende ontdekkingsreis: hoe een eeuwenoude joodse geheimleer, met ‘oerkennis’ over de schepping van hemel en aarde, zo wijdverspreid is geraakt in het westerse denken en de kunsten. In deze podcast legt conservator Mirjam Knotter een aantal kabbalistische ideeën uit en wat de invloed daarvan is geweest op bijvoorbeeld David Bowie, Barnett Newman en Anselm Kiefer. Daarna vertelt Chantal Suissa-Runne hoe zij de kabbala in haar eigen leven in de praktijk brengt.

Spanning six decades, Robert Murray: Sculpture includes photographs of nearly two hundred works, seen in galleries, museums, and private collections, at public outdoor exhibitions, in his studios, and in the workshops of his fabricators. Jonathan D. Lippincott’s introduction and interview with Murray cover the sculptor’s process of working with fabricators and foundries, issues of public art and the siting of sculpture, Murray’s early years, his close friendship with Barnett Newman and relationships with other artists, his lifelong interest in flying, and more, insightfully illuminating both the work and the life of his remarkable sculptor. Jonathan D. Lippincott is the author of Large Scale: Fabricating Sculpture in the 1960s and 1970s. Design manager at Farrar, Straus and Giroux, he also works independently as art director and designer on illustrated books about architecture, landscape, and fine art. He has written about art for The Paris Review Daily, On-Verge, and Tether: A Journal of Art, Literature, and Culture, and curated shows including the eightieth-anniversary exhibition for American Abstract Artists. He lives in New York City.

Spanning six decades, Robert Murray: Sculpture includes photographs of nearly two hundred works, seen in galleries, museums, and private collections, at public outdoor exhibitions, in his studios, and in the workshops of his fabricators. Jonathan D. Lippincott’s introduction and interview with Murray cover the sculptor’s process of working with fabricators and foundries, issues of public art and the siting of sculpture, Murray’s early years, his close friendship with Barnett Newman and relationships with other artists, his lifelong interest in flying, and more, insightfully illuminating both the work and the life of his remarkable sculptor. Jonathan D. Lippincott is the author of Large Scale: Fabricating Sculpture in the 1960s and 1970s. Design manager at Farrar, Straus and Giroux, he also works independently as art director and designer on illustrated books about architecture, landscape, and fine art. He has written about art for The Paris Review Daily, On-Verge, and Tether: A Journal of Art, Literature, and Culture, and curated shows including the eightieth-anniversary exhibition for American Abstract Artists. He lives in New York City. The post Robert Murray Sculpture – Ep 49 with Jonathan Lippincott appeared first on Read Learn Live Podcast.

On this month’s podcast we discuss the role of science in fine art.  Specifically, what can science tell us about a work of art’s origin and authenticity?  Can science help us discover fakes and forgeries undetected by traditional connoisseur style observation?  We are joined by the famous art scientist Jamie Martin to discuss these issues, recount famous forgery scandals, and delve into his techniques and practices. Resources: http://orionanalytical.com/media/ http://www.sothebys.com/en/news-video/blogs/all-blogs/sotheby-s-at-large/2016/12/scientist-art-world-james-martin.html https://www.wired.com/2016/12/how-to-detect-art-forgery/ https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-the-8-most-prolific-forgers-in-art-history-that-we-know-of https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/10/wolfgang-beltracchi-helene-art-scam https://news.artnet.com/market/forger-wolfgang-beltracchi-exhibition-296551 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/arts/design/ken-perenyi-art-forger-now-sells-his-work-as-copies.html Episode Transcription:  Steve Schindler:  Hi. I'm Steve Schindler. Katie Wilson-Milne:  I'm Katie Wilson-Milne. Steve Schindler:  Welcome to the Art Law podcast, a monthly podcast exploring the places where art intersects with and interferes with the law. Katie Wilson-Milne:  And vice versa.  The Art Law Podcast is sponsored by the Law firm of Schindler Cohen & Hochman LLP, a premier litigation and art law boutique in New York City. On this episode of the podcast we will be discussing the role of science and fine art. Specifically what can science tell us about the work of arts origin and authenticity? Can science help us discover fakes and forgeries that would be undetected by more traditional connoisseur-style observation? Steve Schindler:  We’re here today with Jamie Martin, Senior Vice President and Director of Scientific Research at Sotheby’s auction house, a title that really doesn’t do Jamie justice. Jamie is an artist, art conservator and forensic scientist. In 2000, he founded a company called Orion Analytical that became the preeminent materials analysis and consulting firm, specializing in the scientific analysis of art and cultural property. Working at the intersection of art and science, Jamie has revealed multimillion dollar forgeries in the art market, taught at The Getty Conservation Institute and the FBI, and conducted more than 1800 scientific investigations for museums, galleries, insurance companies, and private collectors around the world. Katie and I have both worked closely with Jamie and it is a genuine pleasure to welcome him to the podcast. Welcome to the podcast Jamie. Jamie Martin:  Hi! Katie Wilson-Milne:  Yes, thanks for being here Jamie. So what can science tell us about art? Jamie Martin:  The way I like to phrase it is, is that science helps art tell its own story. Science can reveal the structure of the work, its composition and its condition. Steve Schindler:  How Jamie would you say that science intersects with questions about authenticity and fraud? Jamie Martin:  Well, in about 2009, the College Art Association codified guidelines and standards for authentications and attributions. Steve Schindler:  What is the College Art Association? Jamie Martin:  I'm not a member, but my understanding is that it’s a national association of art historians principally in colleges but also working privately or working in museums as well. Steve Schindler:  Okay, so they came out with some guidelines? Jamie Martin:  They did and in codifying guidelines they identified three essential elements involved in the authentication attribution process. The first oldest most important and never to be replaced is stylistic connoisseurship, which is examination with learned eye of the scholar. The scholar is the person or the entity that attributes and actually authenticates work of art. The second essential element is the provenance of the work or the documented history from the time it left the artist studio to present day. And usually that’s fractured or incomplete in some way. The third essential element which has been part of these kinds of studies for at least a 100 years, but was codified in this document, is scientific or technical examination. And the role of science and technical examination in authentication and attribution studies is twofold, one is to test the claimed attributes of the attribution of the work and also test the claimed attributes of the provenance. In other words to see if the physical substance of the work is consistent with its attribution and provenance, the other principle aim of science and technology is to provide investigative leads, so to better understand the object – essentially to let the object tell its story about where it was, when it was, what it was. And those leads can help art historians and researchers better place the object in time, in some cases in a particular artist studio. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So what is the analysis of the work actually look like in terms of what you’re doing, maybe walk us through a typical examination of a painting? Jamie Martin:  So generally speaking from start to finish, every exam would start with visual inspection of the work in bright white light, the same way that a connoisseur would examine the work.  They want to see the composition, or the design. They want to see the color, the opacity, essentially the facture of the work, the way the work is constructed. They’ll then move the light to the side, which is called raking light, and that reveals information about the texture of the work. And often identifies the presence of restoration or alteration, because in an authentication study a scientist doesn’t want to inadvertently identify restoration as original, find a problem and reach a wrong conclusion.  Scientist and conservators then use ultraviolet light which, when I was a teenager these were lights on the ceiling of my room that illuminated Led Zeppelin posters. Steve Schindler:  I had the same posters and the same lights – by the way. Jamie Martin:  Alright. So we use the same lights now to illuminate works of art and materials have inherent fluorescence which allows us to see the distribution of different materials and often the distribution of restoration and alteration. We then use infrared light. We can't see infrared light as humans, but we can use cameras to detect it and record it and create an image. And with that we can often better see restoration, but more importantly we can see through the paint. We can see through some materials to see what lays beneath, so artist underdrawings. We can see inscriptions that have been obliterated or erased. And all of those are noninvasive techniques that basically tell us about the object as a whole. We then take the object and we put the object under what’s called a stereo binocular microscope – a microscope that gives us a three dimensional color image of the work and magnifications up to about 90 times – and with this we can look at the fine detail of the work.  We can begin to understand its structure and its condition.  We create a mental inventory of the number of different materials. We account for the presence of restoration. And this process helps guide the subsequent analyses that we do. The best most reliable way to analyze the work from a statistical point of view is to take the work of art, put it in a blender, destroy it, mix it up into a powder, take a pinch and analyze it.  We obviously can't do that. So we have to select visually representative areas of our work and conduct our analyses on that. We have a range of noninvasive techniques that we can use. Not taking a physical sample, actually not touching the work of art, we can identify the elemental composition, so the elements like sodium or lead or mercury, we can identify where they are in the work. In the case of Remington sculpture, that can help determine whether the work was cast before Remington died or if it was cast after the artist died. And if after, whether it was authorized or unauthorized.  If it’s a work of art like a painting or a painting on paper or a drawing, we can map the elemental composition of the work. So we can look for elements that stand out. Given the attribution, let’s say an artist who’s painting in 1800, if we find concentrations of elements associated with original material that is part of the object and those elements only became part of paints after 1800, then that raises red flags about the work. And then we can use other techniques to identify what those materials are. In variably however in most cases we need to take a sample and we need to analyze the sample so that we understand the full composition of the material to give you an idea of the kind of sample, the sample size that we need are typical sample sizes range from about 1/1000th of a millimeter to about 40/1000ths of a millimeter, which is about the width of a human hair. Katie Wilson-Milne:  How do you even collect a sample that small? Jamie Martin:  It’s good question. You collect it using the same microscope that you use to find the sample location, so using a microscope that’s analogous to a surgical microscope, same kind of microscope a neurosurgeon would use. And we actually use neurosurgeon tools. I use a scalpel. And I’ll use the scalpel to remove such a tiny piece of material, I can only see it with a microscope, but that one little tiny microscopic specimen can be used for one or two or five or ten separate analyses depending on what the questions are. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Jamie I think one question we shouldn’t let go by for too long is how are you qualified to do this work, right. I mean the way you described the analysis of the art, presupposes a certain amount of knowledge when you look at the piece under the light initially and you’re sort of doing the visual analysis. How do you know how to do that? Jamie Martin:  Well, conservation scientists have different backgrounds, some are PhDs who have advanced degrees in chemistry or engineering. Others come from the conservation ranks. And that’s the route I took. My background is a little different. It’s a bit unique in the field, when I was 13 my father gave me a microscope, a chemistry set and sent me to art school. And so from a very young age I was taught how to mix different powdered pigments together to make paint. And how to stretch canvases much the same way it was done in old master days in workshops. And at the same time I was blowing little things up in my bedroom with my chemistry set and beginning to explore the world with a microscope which sits on the desk I have now. After high school I attended a traditional art school in Baltimore. And we were taught to emulate the techniques of the old masters and one thing I became very proficient at doing was doing copies in museums where I could create works in some cases that were indistinguishable from the originals. I did a copy of William Merritt Chase of the Baltimore Museum of Art. And as I was walking out with it one day, the director of the museum asked me if I was taking it back to storage.  And I sort of laughed. Steve Schindler:  You were in training either to be a conservation professional or a forger – Jamie Martin:  Well that – that’s very interesting when I applied to the conservation graduate programs which included Winterthur, the admissions committee raised questions and flagged me, because my art portfolio was so strong and my ability to copy was so good. They were concerned if they trained me as a conservator and a scientist that I would be a master forger. It turns out and I didn’t know at that time, I'm a bit of a master detective at catching forgers.  So I got a graduate degree in art conservation at the University of Delaware, then I went on to postgraduate work at University of Cambridge. Then I set about creating the first two fee-for-service conservation analytical labs in the United States, one in a museum and one privately and they were both setup to provide basic conservation science services to conservators and museums that didn’t have scientists. So what equips me to take samples and what equips me to interpret the data and reach reliable, accurate conclusions is having taken about 15,000 samples and having conducted about 13,000 FTI or analyses.  It’s just a lot of experience, the good luck, good fortune of working with really good scientists over the years who were able to teach me the tools of the trade. And then being surrounded by excellent people in museums and the conservation field and interestingly also in the art law field. Steve Schindler:  So let’s talk about your detective skills, because one of the ways that we met was in connection with a case involving fakes and forgeries. How prevalent are fakes and forgeries in your view in the art market? Jamie Martin:  Well, we really don’t know.  We read in newspapers and magazines from time to time that it’s been estimated that 50% of works are fake or 80% of works are fake, but if you dig a bit deeper into those articles it’s often someone trying to make the claim to attract business and create a fear that everything is sold in the market place is potentially a fake. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Yeah, I feel like I've read articles, “half the works on every museum all are fake, you just don’t know it.” Jamie Martin:  Yeah, we just don’t know, there’s been no study done. There’s no data to look to. What we know publically is probably a small fraction of the art forgery case isn't fakes that are in circulation or from cases like the Beltracchi case or the Knoedler case or the Rudy Kurniawan case that dealt with wine, there are lot of investigations being done behind the scenes by law enforcement that we’ll probably never know about. And a lot of investigations I did were done under confidentiality agreements that I can't discuss. Someday I hope the FBI will get on to it, burst the forgery ring and make people whole. I would say that forgeries can be a significant problem, depending on what is being forged or faked and where it’s being sold. So generally a ring of forgers has a target market in sight. They more or less know the market that they want to create the works for and sell the works for. There is some evidence to suggest that forgeries pertaining to a particular artist spike up after a big exhibition on the artist or after publication of the catalogue raisonné, because there’s a lot of technical information and a lot of visual information that a forger can take and create a pastiche – using some of the materials that are disclosed in the publication. It’s one of the reasons why scientists like I, scientist in museums often don’t disclose everything we find, but withhold some important information, so that we don’t give away all the secrets of detection or we don’t disclose publically all of the stupid mistakes that forgers are making. We like them to continue to make those stupid mistakes. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So can you tell our audience briefly about the Beltracchi case? Jamie Martin:  Yeah, so Wolfgang Beltracchi and his wife devised a really sinister scheme to create a large group of fake works that reportedly created in Europe, say between 1910 and 1930. And they would use publications that sided exhibitions of works by known artist that didn’t give illustrations, didn’t give sizes.  They gave the artist name, the date, and the title of the work. And that was the basis of the provenance for the work. They could create a work, point back to that publication and say, “Oh, here’s the work.” What was particularly clever was that they created the false provenance of the so-called “Jagers collection” and Jagers happened to be Beltracchi’s wife Helene’s maiden name. And what Beltracchi did was to create framed posters of his fakes, he put them in a room. He had period furniture. Katie Wilson-Milne:  I love this part. Jamie Martin:  And his wife dressed up as her grandmother and posed with the works.  Beltracchi used an old box style camera that would make the image a little blurry. He printed the photographs on deckled paper, which would have been period, photocopied them. And then you can imagine when Helene would take the painting and present the perspective owner with the photograph of the painting photographed with her grandmother, people would say, “Oh my God, the family resemblance!  You look so much like your grandmother.” And as this often the case with fakes and forgeries it doesn’t take much to nudge someone to the point of accepting what is false as true. They didn’t look deeper.  That was enough for them to believe the story that Beltracchi assembled. Steve Schindler:  It always seems in these cases that the purchasers and fakes so much want to believe.  Whether it’s in the Rudy Kurniawan case that you just eluded to before – passionate collectors of wine want to believe that they’re getting these rare vintages so much that they overlook obvious clues.  In other cases, they buy works where the signatures are misspelled, as we’ll get to, so part of it just seems to be tremendous excitement and passion on the part of the purchasers. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Well and there’s no incentive for anyone in that chain to want something to be fake, right? The buyer wants it to be worth what they paid for it. They want it to be by the artists they think it’s from. So who in that chain wants to disrupt that? Jamie Martin:  Well, in a very clever way of introducing the fakes is to introduce the fakes that art fairs or dealers where there’s a real time pressure to purchase.  So for example in an art fair, a fake might be exhibited, and you might get two people in the span of two or three days looking at the work, basically competing for who’s going to purchase the work. There really isn't the time to step back to examine the claimed attributes, so the work is attributed to artist X in year Y. I think I’d like to step back, look at some books published on the artist perhaps the catalogue raisonné and see if this work really fits. And then I want to look at the provenance. And I want to find out if there was actually a Jagers collection. And if not, those are going to raise red flags for me. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So how did he get caught? Jamie Martin:  Beltracchi got caught, because the Doerner Institute in Munich, Germany was given a painting by the police to examine and they found two things working with an art historian who probably was the first person to break the case. He noted that the fake labels that were applied to the back of many of the works were of a gallery that didn’t exist at the time the works were purportedly dated. So the gallery label dates were mismatched. The Doerner Institute then examined the painting and they found that the painting contained historically inaccurate materials. So pigments that weren’t introduced and used at paints at the age of that particular work of art.  And that’s enough to conclude that the work couldn’t have been – could not have been constructed at that time, and that raised huge flags. At that point I understand that police began to assemble lists of works that were likely Beltracchi fakes. I became involved through looking at a number of works for private collectors and auction houses and was commissioned actually by 60 Minutes to examine a fake Beltracchi work in the style of Ernst, so I could explain to Bob Simon how Beltracchi created the work, but more importantly how Beltracchi got caught. Now Beltracchi was very careful about his materials. He would purchase old canvases that would have been used in the same period, so if you tried to date the canvas, it would be appropriate. And he tried to select paints that contained pigments that would be used at that time. So he would go to the store and he would look for Winsor and Newton paint and he would turn it around and look at the label. And it would say Zinc White. And that was the limit of Beltracchi’s knowledge of paint manufacturers. Now because paint manufacturer from time to time hired me to reverse engineer their competitors’ products to tell them what they were using to make paint, I was aware that manufactures often topped off or added materials to paints. And in this case the manufacturer added a little bit of a very opaque pigment called Titanium White to the Zinc White. And they used modern synthetic organic pigment called Phthalocyanine Blue that they used to top off or make the blue paint that Beltracchi used more intense. And those two materials were very easy to detect. And they proved that that those works were not authentic. Beltracchi himself I think was quoted saying, “Ah yeah, the Titanium White.” Katie Wilson-Milne:  We should probably interject, Steve, to explain the legal background that it’s obviously not illegal to copy something that’s in the public domain, if you say it’s a copy and you tell people that you painted it and it’s not by the original artist. What is illegal is fraud and pretending that a work authored by you is by another person and leading a buyer, inducing a buyer to buy that work based on that fact. Jamie Martin:  Correct. Steve Schindler:  And so one question, Jamie, is – you mentioned before that you, one of the things you search for are these anomalies and you’re able to determine whether a work could have been created at the time that it was purported to be created, but do you actually authenticate works? Jamie Martin:  No, rarely will scientific or technical examination unilaterally attribute or authenticate a work. And -- Steve Schindler:  Why is that? Jamie Martin:  Well, because there isn't a chemical or material fingerprint that would allow you to individualize a work to one and only one artist at a particular time. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So science can't tell you something is authentic, but it can tell you something is fake? Jamie Martin:  It can tell you that something is fake.  From time to time, you can form a conclusive, reliable, durable opinion that a work is fake based on science. It can also buttress an attribution more provenance, but it will never substitute for the absence of or a defect in provenance or stylistic connoisseurship. Steve Schindler:  Do you think in the area of stylistic connoisseurship which, is often criticized as being sometimes objective, insular, elitist, whatever you will – whether there is a place for science or an opportunity for science to replace the work of the connoisseur and I'm thinking particularly about advances in artificial intelligence the type of technology that makes an Apple iPhone work, the facial recognition. Do you sense that there is a place for that kind of technology in making attributions or authentications? Jamie Martin:  For probably about 10 years there’s been an emphasis in the computer science and physics disciplines to use image processing, computer analysis and things like fractal analysis, sparse coding analysis to essentially replace what – in some cases is viewed as the subjective eye of the kind of connoisseur – with the more “objective eye” of the computer looking at a photograph. There’s been some interesting and promising research done which I believe can enhance the work of authenticating or dating works, that is, clearly showing that something is inconsistent with the work of an artist. Or in the case of Dürer drawings – comparing Dürer drawings to see how closely the strokes and the pressure applied to the implement and the basic composition is.  However I haven’t seen any technology at this point that is able to accurately attribute works absent the human input of a scholar, of a conservator, of a scientist. I think it’ll probably happen in my life time.  It’ll hopefully happen before I retire. Katie Wilson-Milne:  You describe a very complimentary process, but there has been some suggestion that there’s a tension between a traditional connoisseur – a PhD in art history, works at a museum – and scientific analysis that, I don’t know, there’s a perceived fear that science is replacing that scholarly expertise.  Is that something you come in contact with or you also perceive? Jamie Martin:  Well, so there are a universe of conversations probably that are going on and they’re informed by different experiences and backgrounds and opportunities. I haven’t experienced that tension myself, before or since coming the Sotheby's, but I come from an old school conservation science background where I'm one of three players. I view it as a three legged stool. And that first most important leg of this stool is the curator, is the catalogue raisonné author, is the independent expert. The second leg is the provenance leg, and I'm the third leg.  My job is there just to steady the stool. Steve Schindler:  You’re telling yourself short Jamie but – Katie Wilson-Milne:  You’re creating a stool, but yes we take your points. Steve Schindler:  Yeah, one of the things that also dawns on me because we – we have experienced the problem in what we do of authenticators being reluctant now to authenticate work for reasons that we’re all well aware of: they get sued. They get sued by people who view themselves as possessing authentic works and they disagree with authenticators’ opinions. Katie Wilson-Milne:  What would be the basis for a lawsuit on those grounds? Steve Schindler:  Well, we’ve seen a lot of different theories, most of which had been rejected. It could be a theory of negligence, there have been reasons as wild as antitrust theories that have been set out. And the interesting thing is most of the lawsuits against authenticators end up either being settled or dismissed favorably towards the authenticators, but they have to spend an awful lot of money defending themselves, which is why they – in many cases, foundations and authenticating boards have stopped authenticating, and experts who are not paid a great deal of money typically to give opinions and find themselves tremendously at risk and we’ve been working in the art law community trying to remedy that legislatively at least in New York, but it does dawn on me that machines can't get sued probably, not yet. And so if there was a room for science to provide a clear or more objective authentication, it might alleviate some of the burdens on the whole process, I don’t know if you have any reactions to that. Jamie Martin:  I do I guess, I think the Knoedler case was probably a textbook case of where an expert in good faith working first for the Knoedler gallery and its director in providing reliable, accurate opinions on the attribution of authenticity of works and then subsequently working for a number of people who purchased works from the gallery – again in good faith providing accurate, reliable durable data and conclusions got caught up not in a lawsuit but in a flurry of subpoenas. Katie Wilson-Milne:  This expert is you, Jamie. Jamie Martin:  This expert is me. And I had never heard of a third-party expert having to retain legal council to produce documents and to represent the expert in court to answer allegations of obstruction of proper discovery and handling of evidence before. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So even the scientist can get caught up in these legal issues. Jamie Martin:  And it had a chilling effect during the Knoedler case.  Before Knoedler, I could pick up the phone and call someone of the National Gallery and ask if I could come in and look through the research files on a particular case. Once the subpoenas went out and Knoedler, which included the director of the National Gallery – I would call the National Gallery and I was told by my colleagues, “We’ve been instructed by the legal counsel not to answer the phone when you call.”  Now since Knoedler, that’s gotten better but the chilling effect in Knoedler was that you could be caught up in this and your life could be turned inside out. And other scientists who you know could say horrible things about you that had no basis in fact. And that was just the way the system worked. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Let’s talk about the famous Knoedler case which, you were involved in it, we were also peripherally. Steve Schindler:  Full disclosure – I guess at this point, since Jamie brought it up. We were representing Jamie and that’s how we were – fortunate enough to meet him and to be sitting here with him today. Katie Wilson-Milne:  There were many, many lawyers involved in the Knoedler case. All right, so the Knoedler Gallery was the oldest and one of the most respected art galleries in New York City and the United States. It had been a business for 165 years in a beautiful town house on the Upper East Side. And in 2011, at the end of 2011, it abruptly shut down declaring bankruptcy. In the background of this declaration of bankruptcy in going out of business was a brewing scandal over the sale of about 40 works of art that Knoedler sold and had alleged work created by who’s who of modern masters: Jackson Pollock, Lee Krasner, Motherwell, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, William De Kooning, and others. There was one other dealer, Julian Weissman, who had sold 23 similar works of art. But we’ll focus on the Knoedler aspect of this. These works were said to have brought in up to $80 million in profits for the dealers and following the galleries, closing this started to come out. There were rapid succession of lawsuits that were filed by collectors, alleging that these works were fake. And not to give away the end of the story they were fake. The provenance of these works had been sketchy. The works had all been brought to Knoedler by a Long Island art dealer, her name was Glafira Rosales who claimed to have obtained these works – never before seen on the market – from the children of a European Jewish collector, who wanted to remain anonymous for a variety of tantalizing reasons which people can look up in the newspaper. This collector had supposedly bought these works through a dealer and friend of these artist directly from the artist studios in the ‘60s – the ‘50s and the ‘60s. So that’s why the works had never been seen on the market before. The story changed slightly over time and no documentation was ever provided by Rosales substantially in these origins, but that was the story that gallery retold to the buyers of these pieces and then later when they were brought in to these lawsuits. So Knoedler and its President, a woman named Ann Freedman did maintain that the works were genuine through the beginning of many of these lawsuits, notwithstanding the fact that Jamie demonstrated that many of them, conclusively were not genuine. But in August 2013 in a parallel criminal investigation at the U.S. attorney’s office was involved in, Rosales was indicted and the FBI raided a house in Queens, where a very talented Chinese immigrant artist had been creating all these works. He had been creating these De Kooning’s and Motherwell’s and Rothko’s and the evidence was right there. Steve Schindler:  He had an amazing repertoire. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Yeah it was incredible and it – and when law enforcement got at the house the doors were open, someone told me that or I read somewhere that a cereal bowl was half full and this artist had just fled.  Nothing had been really taken or disturbed, so it was pretty conclusive, after this Knoedler and Ann Freedman changed their story. They admitted the works were fake. And then they argued that they had also been defrauded, that they had no way of knowing that the words would have been fake. So there were series of civil litigations, most of them have settled, no criminal charges were ever brought against the gallery or Ann Freedman.  Glafira Rosales was indicted. She pled guilty. Steve Schindler:  She pled guilty and was given a very lenient sentence, which was house arrest, I believe, and some restitution. Katie Wilson-Milne: Yeah and the Chinese artist is no longer in the United States and that’s all we know. So Jamie tell us how you were involved in the Knoedler case? Jamie Martin:  Well, I was first hired by Ann Freedman and Knoedler Gallery to look at two purported Robert Motherwell paintings. And what became clear early on is that the works were created over old paintings, part of which had been removed with an electric orbital sander which was not a practice that Motherwell used. So that was one clue.  Another clue was that the works had a series of white grounds that were materials that Motherwell was not using in the 1950s. One painting was signed and dated ‘53, the other was dated ‘56 is I recall. So I was finding materials that Motherwell wasn’t using till late ‘60s and I was finding pigments that weren’t introduced in paints until the ‘70s. So that work concluded and some years later I was asked to examine Jackson Pollock painting that was purchased for around $17 million. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Also by the gallery or as – Jamie Martin:  Yeah, it was sold by the gallery as a work by Jackson Pollock and within just a few days I was finding acrylic paint and I was finding pigments that weren’t being used and artist paints until the 1980s and 1990s. I issued a report, the attorney gave it to Knoedler, and Knoedler closed the next day. Katie Wilson-Milne:  And so you were hired by a collector, a buyer to do that analysis? Jamie Martin:  Yeah. I then became involved in a series of other works including a purported Mark Rothko painting and that painting was a fake based on a number of features, the principle one being that the Chinese forger used a white ground underneath the paint. Mark Rothko never used white grounds in the 1950s. Katie Wilson-Milne:  What are white grounds? Jamie Martin:  A ground would be like a primer, it would be like a base coat that was applied to the canvas. In the 1950s Rothko was using a transparent colored ground and in this case it was an opaque white ground and it was a white ground that you could see at the edges, if you’re new to look for it. So that was a tip off on that work and they were whole selection of other works that I examined. For collectors, also for the U.S. attorney’s office and FBI, and to put it in a nutshell, what I was finding in this group of more than 20 works was a pattern of reuse of old paintings to make new paintings, so that the backs of the paintings looked appropriately old. Katie Wilson-Milne:  This is a common technique right?  Beltracchi was doing this too. Jamie Martin:  Very common technique. Take something that’s old and recycle it and on the front paint something that’s new and make it look old. So that was another thing I was finding – that material was being applied to the front of the works to make it look artificially old. I was also finding co-occurrence of the same material. So many of these works painted by more than five artists over a period that spanned about three decades from the late ‘40s to the early ‘60s contained the same white grounds.  I mean, the same white paints. Katie Wilson-Milne:  By different artists. Steve Schindler:  So this was a case where you were fortunate to be able to have tested a number of works by the same forger and even though each work in itself had anomalies that led you to conclude that they were fakes, when you looked at them collectively and it was overwhelming? Jamie Martin:  Exactly, so it was pointing to a common source for all of the paintings and that work continued. I was asked to examine the materials that were ceased from the Chinese forger’s garage which was an interesting process to go through for about six months. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So you were working with the FBI for then. Jamie Martin:  I was.  I was working for the FBI and U.S. attorney’s office on the case as well. So I was able to look at the evidence that they ceased. I was able to examine practice paintings that the forger had created to try to achieve something that look convincing. Katie Wilson-Milne:  You described several anomalies, what was the real smoking gun for you in the Knoedler case? Jamie Martin:  Well, it was a different smoking gun for different works, I mean we – we knew for example that Jackson Pollock died in 1956, so when I'm finding polymers and when I'm finding pigments that were first discovered and patented and first used in paints decades after his death, the only explanation would be time travel – which I'm not a big fan of, so these were obviously fraudulent works. There were also features that contradicted the provenance. One thing that was mentioned in the provenance was that the works were collected over a period of a few years. And they were stored for decades and they were stored in a “hermetically sealed room,” which implies a room that had stable conditions – clean, archival – and many of the works showed paint transfers. They showed accumulation of debris and grime, which was just inconsistent with the story. And that’s one of the features we look at. We not only look at the composition of the work that we’re studying, but we look at the provenance.  We look at the story to see if we see evidence of that or evidence that speaks against it. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Am I remembering correctly that you found a fleece fiber in one of the paintings? Jamie Martin:  Oh, that was a different painting. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Oh okay, I love that. Steve Schindler:  That was a different case, but that’s also one of my favorite stories. Why don’t you share that with us? Jamie Martin:  This is a work that was signed and it was dated 1932 and the work was fairly large. As I recall, it was about 24” by 36” or 32” by 48” and as usual, I went through all the first steps with the work: technical imaging, stereo microscope exam.  I made an inventory of all the materials used to create the work, from the canvas to the primer to all the different paints in the pallet. I analyzed all these materials, and I found that the binders and the pigments were consistent with paints that could have been used in 1932.  And that’s the point at which a lot of scientists or labs would stop and they would write a report. Katie Wilson-Milne:  It looks good. Jamie Martin:  It looks fine, we find nothing to speak against it.  That wasn’t my style, that wasn’t my practice, in part, because it’s informed by a forensic approach. So at that point whenever I engaged in a study and I find a result like that I start over. And I look at every square millimeter of the painting under the stereo microscope and I look for what’s called adventitious material, material that doesn’t belong there. Something that wasn’t part of the paint, something that the artist didn’t intend to include in the painting and I got – I started the bottom and by the time I got to the top two thirds of the painting, I found a fiber in the paint. And I knew it dried in the paint because two ends stuck out and the center was deeply embedded in dried paint. And I took a very small sample of that fiber and analyzed it and I found polypropylene. Polypropylene fiber was first discovered and introduced in 1958. So on the basis of finding one fiber I was able to conclude that there was no way that that work was painted in 1932. I had to spread out, I had to be sure that all the paint was integral across the surface.  Fast forward to 2015, there’s a book published in Paris called The Forger. And it’s a story of a young man who meets a master forger who teaches the young man all the tricks of the trade and the last trick of the trade is: when you’re creating a fake you should always wear a cotton or linen smock, because if one synthetic fiber falls from your clothing and becomes embedded in the painting a good scientist will find it and declare the work a fake. That’s been part of a lecture I've given that was on the Columbia Art Law School website for eight years. And I suspect the person writing the book has internet connection. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Yeah, I do just want to say before we get off Knoedler that it would be hard to overestimate how significant this scandal was for the art world. I mean the art world is a very secretive place deals happen privately, there was not a lot of paperwork and the fact that this scandal was going on and being covered up so well for – well over a decade and that 10s of millions of dollars were being made off the sale of these fake works was really disturbing and even art world people who certainly don’t follow legal claims and cases know about this case, because of the amount of money and the number of forgeries, but also because of the significance of the Knoedler gallery to New York, it really pioneered the art gallery world and it had been at the forefront of the art gallery world in the United States for really long time. So if a buyer went to Knoedler they felt like, “well, if there’s anywhere I can go and I can trust what they’re going to tell me, it’s the Knoedler gallery.” And that really upended people sense of safety I think in the art market. Steve Schindler:  Right, and that was also reinforced by the judge who was hearing these cases in one of his decisions, because the Knoedler gallery and Ann Freedman, one of their defenses was well these sophisticated buyers should have known better, should have done their own due diligence and one of the things that judge said was, “but they were buying these works from Knoedler. They were buying them from one of the most respected galleries in New York.” Katie Wilson-Milne:  Which is the due diligence. Steve Schindler:   Right. Well actually, and one of the things – as long as we were talking about Knoedler still – that always interested me was how Ann Freedman used the fear of authenticators to speak out in her favor and we had represented a couple of these individuals who invariably recalled over to a gallery with a crowd of people shown a fake work and who looked at it and either didn’t say anything or said, “oh that’s nice” or something along those lines. And then afterwards she claimed that they had authenticated these works. And the way that they had authenticated them was to not shout out in a crowded room, “I think this is a fake!” Katie Wilson-Milne:  They stood in front of the work. Steve Schindler:  And they didn’t say anything. So – and of course they would never do that, they were not asked to do that, but even in the most ideal conditions most of these types of experts would have been afraid to speak out like that for fear of being sued and dragged further into this kind of case in the way that Jamie mentioned that he was. Katie Wilson-Milne:  And another significant aspect of Knoedler, and one of the reasons we are so thrilled to be talking to you, Jamie, is that it was one of the first times I think for a lot of people that they understood how science could interact with claims of fakes and forgeries and it was in such a public way that I think the scientific analysis of art hadn’t been widely discussed or understood before. I don’t know if you could talk a little bit about how important scientific analysis was to the outcome of the Knoedler scandal in general but also if you’ve seen the importance of scientific analysis or people’s perceived – how they perceive the importance of scientific analysis increase after Knoedler? Jamie Martin:  Well, I think what you have seen after Knoedler is an increase in the number of investor backed art analysis labs who are offering services to art investors and to some degree of art collectors. So, it was clear from Knoedler, because Knoedler was so widely publicized and covered over such a long period of time. And that the science really did factor quite importantly in the determinations that people recognized that science can be a very effective and necessary tool to assess those claimed attributes. Katie Wilson-Milne:  I will just say that, I perceive the scientific analysis of Knoedler being one of the most important aspects of the proof that was used in those cases and that without the science there were such competing opinions from so called connoisseurs that it was difficult for a non-expert audience like the judge or if there had been a jury to make sense of those kinds of claims, but when there’s the scientific report it sort of – it changed the game in the case. Jamie Martin:  Yeah, I testified in the De Sole case in January 2016, and what I heard after the trial was that the jury really did rely on the scientific information – the presentation of the findings in such a straight forward, visually accessible way – allowed them to understand the weight of the scientific evidence against the works, much in the same way that the testimony about the financial analysis and accounting did to. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Right. The De Sole case, just for our audience, was one of the biggest Knoedler cases that went to trial and then ultimately settled. Steve Schindler:  So, Jamie, if we were assembling the all-time Hall of Fame of forgers, who do you think would be on the top of the list? Who is the best all-time forger in whatever categories you want to rate them? Jamie Martin:  Let’s say, so this would be modern times, this would be since Van Meegeren  because fabulous forgeries were going on in Greek and Roman time and every time since. And Thomas Hoving talks a lot about that in his book. Van Meegeren was an incredible forger who exploited what he knew conservation scientists could and could not do. He knew that we could identify pigments. He knew that we had trouble identifying the binder, the liquid or glue that you mix with pigments to make paint. So he was very careful in his selection of pigments.  In order to make his paintings dry quickly he threw in a synthetic polymer called Bakelite, which, after he created the work, he would put it an oven and heat it for some hours or days and it would be rock hard, as if the paint had aged naturally over three or 400 years. He was later found out.  He was accused of collaborating with the Nazis, and the court instructed him that if he really was a master forger, he should paint a fake Vermeer in the court room. Katie Wilson-Milne:  So he was forging Vermeers? Jamie Martin:  He was forging Vermeers, and he sold a work to Goebbels, and he was in a lot of hot water over that. Steve Schindler:  Wasn’t that also one of his defenses and the collaboration allegation, that, “Well I wasn’t collaborating, I sold him a fake, I sold the Nazis fake art, not real art.” Jamie Martin:  Yeah. It was worth a try, it was a little flimsy. The thing is is that forgers have access to the same technical literature that I do. So conservation scientists like us, we publish the results of our findings, of analyses of documented artists, and if a forger wants to go and read our findings and try to replicate the same materials, theoretically they can do that. And there is a lot of evidence that forgers do look at technical literature. The best forgers I've seen – well, the worst forger I've seen, is a man named William Toy and he was creating fake paintings in Louisiana. His downfall was his love of cats. Katie Wilson-Milne:  That’s a classic downfall! Jamie Martin:  He had 20 or 30 cats in his home, and I did the project for the FBI, and they gave me memory sticks from cameras that showed cats all over his house, including cats on the table where he made his fakes. And in every one of the fake works I examined for the FBI I found cat hair embedded. So he was not a careful forger, but the forgers – Steve Schindler:  There were lot of lessons in that story. Jamie Martin:  Yes. Steve Schindler:  Some involved cats. Jamie Martin:  Yeah, don’t paint around cats and don’t wear polar flees when you’re creating an old master. The better forgers, the forgers that really had the painting skill, the kind of skill that I learned when I was painting, would have to be Beltracchi and then one other forger who’s name I refuse to speak publically, because he is absolutely unrepentant about his work.  But he’s probably the most technically gifted painter-forger I've ever seen. Katie Wilson-Milne:  And never caught. Jamie Martin:  No, caught. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Well, he was caught but not punished. Jamie Martin:  I caught him many times, but he was never indicted and he was never brought to account. Katie Wilson-Milne:  We’ll post links to some of these references. Steve Schindler:  We’ve also seen him bragging about his accomplishments and it’s frustrating. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Yeah he speaks often in public in New York about his great skills. Steve Schindler:  We could do this probably for another hour, but we know you have places to go and every good thing has to come to an end, but thank you so much for joining us on our podcast. Jamie Martin:  You’re welcome, it’s always a pleasure. Katie Wilson-Milne:  Until next time I'm Katie Wilson Milne. Steve Schindler:  And I'm Steve Schindler bringing you the Art Law Podcast. A podcast exploring the places where art intersects with and interferes with the law. Katie Wilson-Milne:  And vice versa. Produced by Jackie Santos

Rebecca and Ross continue their discussion on teaching. This episode focuses more on workshops, and the intense and highly focused personal interaction that takes place during a workshop. Ross and Rebecca clash over minimalism. During the discussion they shockingly confuse the work of one color field minimalist with another. The piece Ross was thinking of was "Red, Yellow, Blue II" by Ellsworth Kelly which can be seen at the Milwaukee Art Museum (http://collection.mam.org/details.php?id=8007), and not "Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue IV" by Barnett Newman. It hangs at the Berlin Nationalgalerie and sadly, Ross has never seen it in person. ** The Messy Bulletin Board! ** James Scherbarth: James Edward Scherbarth will be at Peninsula School of Art in beautiful Door County, WI this June. Jim will be offering an introduction to Abstract Painting with Oil & Cold Wax Medium utilizing his Process-Purpose-Passion approach to meaningful abstract painting. The class is June 11 – 14, 2018. Complete details and registration are available through both Jim's website: www.jamesedwardscherbarth.com and the school's website : www.peninsulaschoolofart.org see their workshop page. Janice Mason Steeves: Learn the principles of cold wax medium in a workshop with renowned Canadian artist Janice Mason Steeves. Translating her mastery of technique, composition, and design into an accessible format, Mason Steeves helps students nurture and develop their own creative voice. She also accepts students for her online art mentoring program which offers honest, constructive, one-on-one feedback to help students and professional artists alike move their work forward. Learn more at http://janicemasonsteeves.com Ross Ticknor: Many of you have commented that you love Ross' voice. If you would like to hear more of his buttery smooth vocalizations, check out one of the audiobooks he has narrated. They are available on Amazaon, Audible, and iTunes. His favorite is "Headhunters From Outerspace" by Brett McCormick, a mind bending interdimensional sci-fi adventure set in Alvarado, Texas. Find it here: https://www.amazon.com/Headhunters-from-Outer-Space/dp/B06WWFTF86/ref=tmmaudswatch0?encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=&dpID=51i4R-WHwEL&preST=SX342QL70_&dpSrc=detail

Deze zomer zenden wij in de tijd het spoor terug een serie uit van onze Belgische collega’s van Radio Klara. Vandaag het zevende deel van de reeks programma’s gemaakt door Sara Debroey over Beeldenstormen. In 1986 werd het pronkstuk van het Stedelijk Museum met een mes aan flarden gereten door een abstracte- kunst-hater.

In honor of the life and work of the Rev. Dr. King, our Annual Celebration began with a ceremony on the plaza to welcome the return of the Broken Obelisk by Barnett Newman after a year away for conservation. The event included words by Rev. Dr. Marcus Cosby, Wheeler Baptist Church Senior Pastor; Harris County Precinct One Commissioner Rodney Ellis; Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee; Gary Tinterow, Director of the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston; a capella performances by Edwina Hubbard; and original poems performed by Jackson Neal, 2016 Meta-four Houston Youth Poetry Slam team member, and Fareena Arefeen, City of Houston's second Youth Poet Laureate, an initiative led by Writers in the Schools, the City of Houston, and the Houston Public Library.

In 1986 werd in het Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam het monumentale doek ‘Who’s afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue?’ van de Amerikaanse schilder Barnett Newman met een mes aan flarden gereten door een abstracte- kunst-hater. Met kunstenaar Barbara Visser en kunsthistoricus Sven Lütticken.

Back after a 6 week break, we touch on my recent trip to Ottawa and Montréal. The Kiki Smith / Tony Smith exhibit at the National gallery was a great exercise in trying to find similarities. What blew me away was a painting by Degas "Woman with an umbrella."  By the way, I made a mistake about a painter I really liked, I said his name was Monkhouse but it was in actual fact the work of Kent Monkman that I enjoyed so much.  Mark talked about how when you're starting out, you might not like some forms of artwork but when you mature a bit your tastes start changing.  I totally agree. We talked about Barnett Newman's Voice of Fire. My family got really passionate about talking about it.  Mark loved it and it really inspired him to paint. We totally invite you to experience that painting for yourself. It might surprise you! Oh, check out my new website www.isamichaud.com if you're interested. Let us know how we're doing on "That's not Art."

Dan Ramirez been exhibiting Nationally and Internationally for over 35 years. A major influence in his work during his formative years was the Minimalist movement of the late 50's and 60's and a love for the art of Barnett Newman. Over time, his paintings developed into a synthesis of Geometric Abstraction coupled with the visual aesthetic of Minimalism. Dan tends to see his work as a form of Minimalist/Romantic/Baroque. Dan is in the collections of numerous major museums including the Art Institute of Chicago, The National Museum of Mexican Art, The Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago, MOCRA, St. Louis, The Daum Museum of Contemporary Art, and Fundacion Llorens Artigas in Spain. There are numerous books and publications featuring his work and he is currently represented in Chicago by Zolla Liberman Gallery.

In the 1940’s and 50’s, New York was becoming a centre of art. But the art world in New York was surprisingly small. Professor Michael Corris gives you a tour.

Transcript -- In the 1940’s and 50’s, New York was becoming a centre of art. But the art world in New York was surprisingly small. Professor Michael Corris gives you a tour.

Bringing the New York art-scene of the 1950’s and 60’s to life: Professor Michael Corris and artist Lawrence Weiner in conversation.

Transcript -- Bringing the New York art-scene of the 1950’s and 60’s to life: Professor Michael Corris and artist Lawrence Weiner in conversation.

Since when did tipping become a mandatory thing? Join Nestor Rodriguez, Simon Kaufman and Rich Corbin as they kick it live with a discussion on obligatory tipping and taxing on top of tipping!!! Why is Guantanamo Bay still open??? A CIA operative gets arrested for impersonating a stupid American in Russia! Find out where some of our tax dollars go! An Italian Millionaire (name wasn't disclosed) paid a whopping 43.8 million dollars for two big blue panels by Barnett Newman. A NYC Ghetto Bronx Tour Co. is being forced to close shop because it offends residents of the South Bronx! NYC is becoming more and more Pussified!!! And finally Part 1 of my hour long interview with pioneering NYC Graffitti Artist John “Crash” Matos

Transcript -- Bringing the New York art-scene of the 1950’s and 60’s to life: Professor Michael Corris and artist Lawrence Weiner in conversation.

Bringing the New York art-scene of the 1950’s and 60’s to life: Professor Michael Corris and artist Lawrence Weiner in conversation.

Transcript -- In the 1940’s and 50’s, New York was becoming a centre of art. But the art world in New York was surprisingly small. Professor Michael Corris gives you a tour.

In the 1940’s and 50’s, New York was becoming a centre of art. But the art world in New York was surprisingly small. Professor Michael Corris gives you a tour.

In the 1940’s and 50’s, New York was becoming a centre of art. But the art world in New York was surprisingly small. Professor Michael Corris gives you a tour.

Transcript -- Bringing the New York art-scene of the 1950’s and 60’s to life: Professor Michael Corris and artist Lawrence Weiner in conversation.

Transcript -- In the 1940’s and 50’s, New York was becoming a centre of art. But the art world in New York was surprisingly small. Professor Michael Corris gives you a tour.

Bringing the New York art-scene of the 1950’s and 60’s to life: Professor Michael Corris and artist Lawrence Weiner in conversation.

Kunsthaus Graz explores parallels between Warhol, Wool, and Newman and presents work that confirms the influence of American abstract expressionism on pop art.

zwischen zwei toden / between two deaths | Werkvorstellung 12.05. – 19.08.2007, ZKM | Medienmuseum. Mit dem Monumentalgemälde "The other way" (2007) spielt der Künstler auf Barnett Newmans »rote Gemälde« an. Während diese explizit in der Absicht gemalt wurden, von historischem Ballast befreite Werke zu schaffen, bezieht Furnas sich auf die biblische Erzählung der Überquerung des Roten Meeres. Gleichzeitig erweckt die großflächige Verwendung roter Farbe Assoziationen zu Blut, Gefahr und Tod und evoziert damit ein Bild des »Endes von Allem«. /// 12 May – 19 August 2007, at the ZKM | Media Museum. With the monumental painting "The other way" (2007), the artist playfully eludes to Barnett Newman’s Red Painting. Whereas the latter work was painted with the explicit intention of creating works free from the ballast of history, Furnas, by contrast, refers to the biblical narrative of the crossing of the Red Sea. At the same time, the extensive use of red color prompts associations with blood, danger and death, thus evoking a picture of the »End of All Things«.

"Una exposición de Mark Rothko (1903-1970) abrirá el 23 de septiembre la temporada artística de la Fundación Juan March para el curso 1987-88. Por primera vez podrá contemplarse en España una antológica de este artista norteamericano, de origen ruso, uno de los primeros que trasladaron el centro de gravedad del arte europeo de París a Nueva York. Un total de 54 obras, óleos en su mayoria, realizados a lo largo de cuarenta años de trabajo, incluye esta Exposición Rothko, formada con fondos procedentes de museos y coleccionistas de Estados Unidos y Europa. La Exposición, que proviene de la Tate Gallery de Londres, permanecerá abierta en Madrid, en la Fundación Juan March, hasta el 3 de enero del año próximo, presentándose a continuación en el Museo Ludwig de Colonia. Cinco lienzos de Mark Rothko pudieron verse en 1977 en la Fundación Juan March, dentro de la colectiva «Arte USA». Mark Rothko, perteneciente a la denominada Escuela de Nueva York, que agrupaba a expresionistas abstractos norteamericanos como Jackson Pollock, Franz Kline, Barnett Newman, De Kooning, etc., es conocido por sus grandes Iienzos, divididos en dos o tres secciones de colores vivos y de bordes difusos, que el prefería ver colgados en recintos pequeños para lograr una mayor intimidad de comunicación. Rothko hizo del color la sustancia de su arte y el vehículo «para expresar la tragedia, el extasis, el destino»."Más información de este acto