The Dynamics of the DC Art Scene

The Art Dealers Association of Greater Washington, in partnership with The Kreeger Museum, are putting together a panel discussion on how Art Dealers, Collectors, Curators and Museum Directors interact to support the visual arts in the DC area.

The Kreeger Museum,
2401 Foxhall Road NW
Washington, DC 20007

Thursday, February 24, 2011
6:30pm - 9 pm

Tickets: $20 / The Kreeger Museum Members: $15
Includes a cheese and wine reception.

Preceding the panel discussion, guests will have an opportunity to view In Unison: 20 Washington, DC Artists, the culmination of a project initiated by artist Sam Gilliam, consisting of monoprints by 20 artists from the DC community, who typically work in different styles and mediums.

For reservations, call 202-338-3552.

Panelists include:
- Juliette Bethea, Collector
- Dr. Johnnetta Cole, Director, National Museum of African Art
- Judy A. Greenberg, Director, The Kreeger Museum
- Gisela Huberman, Collector (and proud owner of my work)
- Jack Rasmussen, Director and Curator, American University Museum at the Katzen Arts Center
- and moderator Bill Dunlap, Artist and Art Critic and TV talking head, and one of the 100 in my book about DC artists.

Considering the focus of the panel, am I the only one who finds it odd that missing from the panel are any art dealers?

Congrats!


Congratulations to the District of Columbia Arts Center, which will be celebrating its 20th anniversary with an evening of dance, poetry, performance art, sound installation and live music in Georgetown's gorgeous Halcyon House.

Born in 1989 with the mission of providing the “missing link” between emerging artists and the broader community, DCAC has maintained its place in DC as an organization that operates with the needs of artists in mind, rather than focusing on commercial demands. DCAC also recognizes the need to support ongoing projects, including our Curatorial Initiative, which nurtures upcoming curators and enriches audience engagement with our exhibits, and SPARKPLUG, a collective of local artists and curators who exhibit at DCAC each year.

In 1987, a group of artists, arts advocates and administrators came together to address their frustration with DC’s cultural climate. In order to bring local artists closer to the community, arts advocates Aaron Levine, Alice Denney, and Herb White, with the support of councilman William Lightfoot, established a center where local artists would become more visible to the community and receive the support that was largely unavailable. DCAC’s founding board includes artists Jack Rasmussen, Lynn McCary, Sam Gilliam, Greg Hannan, Kathy Keler, Rockne Krebs, Evangeline Montgomery, June Shadoan, and Paula Schumann, critic and curator Annie Gawlak, and arts activist Eden Rafshoon.

The gala will take place on May 29, 2009, from 6:30 to 10:30pm. The happenings get underway at 6:30 with cocktails and light fare in the gardens and ballroom of the Halcyon House Mansion. There will also be a special VIP reception from 6:30 to 7:30 for the founders, our board of directors, the invitation committee and special level donors. At 8:00, the Studio opens for dancing to the sultry and swining Jenn and the Tonics along with desserts and more cocktails. Throughout the evening there will be performances, exhibited art, video projectors, sound installation, dance and more.

Artists featured at the event include performance artists Katherine Cornelius and Quique Aviles, poets Silvana Straw and Buck Downs, Alberto Gaitán with sound installation and visual artists Gretchen Schemmerhorn, Jefferson Pinder, Jose Ruiz and David Hartwell.

Details here.

The place to be tonight is AU!

The website archive for the Jefferson Place Gallery has been launched: JeffersonPlaceGallery.com

The site is in the early stages of archiving the 18-year history of the Jefferson Place, with a timeline of activities, artist biographies, images of artworks, images of exhibition-related ephemera, press clipping summaries, and a blog to expand upon the history of the gallery.


About the Jefferson PlaceFounded by several American University professors, and one of their students, Alice Denney, the Jefferson Place was the first gallery in DC to exclusively support the area’s avant garde artists. It was also the place where many of the early Washington Color School artists—Gene Davis, Thomas Downing, Howard Mehring, and Kenneth Noland—first exhibited their signature masterworks in DC.

In the first few years of its existence other galleries copied their model. Duncan Phillips and David Kreeger purchased from the gallery for their collections; Vincent Melzac would donate his purchases to several museums. And the influence of the gallery had potentially greater reach: Abe Fortas, John Brademus and Sid Yates were among the gallery visitors. The former helped Johnson acquire the Hirshhorn collection; the latter two helped establish the National Endowment for the Arts. 

Gallery founders William Calfee, Robert Gates, and Helene Herzbrun—along with early members like Hilda Shapiro Thorpe—would remain with the gallery long after it transitioned from cooperative to commercial gallery under Nesta Dorrance, the gallery’s second director. As the Jefferson Place evolved, it would go on to represent artists like Benjamin Abramowitz, William Christenberry, Tim Corkery, Willem de Looper, Sam Gilliam, John Gossage, Shelia Isham, J.L. Knight, Rockne Krebs, Blaine Larson, V.V. Rankine, Eric Rudd, Yuri Schwebler, Roy Slade, Elliott Thompson, and many others.

The website functions as a companion to the second project: an exhibition curated by DMV artist and art critic John Anderson, "Making a Scene: Jefferson Place," the latest exhibition in the American University Museum's Alper Initiative for Washington Art. The exhibition and catalog essay examines the first six years of the gallery: from its founding in 1957, through 1962, after the gallery had transitioned between directors Alice Denney and Nesta Dorrance. True to its title, the exhibition outlines the scene the gallery was attempting to cultivate in support of local contemporary artists.

Website Developmentjeffersonplacegallery.com is a collaboration between John Anderson and Day Eight, a DC-area arts non-profit—founded by Robert Bettmann—that helps produce and publish creative projects: including the Arts Writing Fellowship, and the D.C. Poetry Project. The site was developed by BRINK media, and supported by the DC Commission for the Arts and Humanities, and the American University Museum.

Museum Events
A reception for the exhibition—which includes the website—will be September 9, 6-9 pm, at the American University Museum. A salon-style event, Free Parking, will be held at the museum on Thursday, October 12, from 5:30-7:00.

When facts get in the way

There are so many disturbing issues with Kriston Capps snarky report on my 100 Washington Artists book that I don't know where to start other than by thanking the CP for giving this book, which is yet to be published, some advance publicity. As Warhol once said, "publicity, even bad publicity is better than no publicity." You can read that article here.

If you follow the DMV art scene, then you know that Capps' past includes some journalistic issues, and so when he expressed interest in doing a piece for the CP, I was fully prepared for the worst. I knew in advance that the piece would try to find the negative angle to the story, the "what's my angle?" the "what's in it for Campello?." This is because unfortunately the formation of some people is so ethically flawed, that they suspect all those around them as being like them.

That I'm doing these series of books because I think it would be good for the DC art scene must be a lie. There's got to be something wrong here; if not they can try to make something up or selectively highlight some issues while ignoring the ones which damage the focus that they're trying to achieve: a negative portrayal.

The first hint is the title: The C List: Will Lenny Campello’s 100 Washington Artists Serve Its Subjects or Its Author? The seed has been planted for "there's something smelly here."

By paragraph four he's already referring to my "ethical tics." The second negative seed has been planted.

Later he lists artists with whom I've had/have a commercial relationship and used to show at the Fraser Gallery, in the process he gets one name wrong but drops an end of sentence that implies that many others in the 100 list are artists that we represented at Fraser. This is a spectacular stretch of his imagination, but designed to leave the impression that I've stacked the list with Fraser Gallery artists. Technically, as of today, there are three artists out of the 100 that are represented by the Fraser Gallery today.

But what is even more shoddy journalism is that Capps knew well that I had put some ethical safety valves in the book to cover the ethical angle of artists with whom I've had or have a commercial relationship. The key one is that every artist in the book who is represented by a gallery or dealer is referred back to that gallery or dealer. In the case of artists associated with me, every single contact points back to another dealer who represents that artist. Not a single artist in this book is associated in the book with me. In fact, if any "business" is to be derived from this book, I am sending the business to everyone but me. Capps knows this, but conveniently avoids discussing that. The reason is simple: it demolishes his implied undercurrent about my ethical transgressions in having artists in the book that I'm associated with.

Then he errs and makes up a quote that I never said in the context that he puts it in the article. The "I have zero commercial relationship with them" quote was in the context of zero commercial relationship with the Fraser Gallery and the artists that they represent or represented when I was a co-owner. I then qualified that by listing for Kriston the artists that I do currently have a commercial relationship with, but instead of Capps writing: "I have zero commercial relationship with them, except for..." he starts a new paragraph with: "That’s not wholly true" and details facts that I told him about my current dealer relationships and my online art dealer enterprise (Alida Anderson Art Projects, which I've discussed here many times), but he writes it as if he "discovered" this and has caught me in a lie.

He then writes that "Through Alida Anderson Art Projects, he has taken work by Janis and Tate to a number of art fairs." It was me who told him about the art fairs, but I also told him that the last time that I took those guys to an art fair under Alida Anderson Art Projects was in 2008 and explained my current business relationships with them and others. This of course, is never mentioned. It would destroy his argument.

He does shoot himself in the foot by later acknowledging that I did tell him that I have current commercial interests in some artists. So the issue here is a quote which put out of place, as he does, serves a purpose best suited to sickening Republican political blogs that publish out-of-context video scenes or some of the garbage-spewing misinformation talking heads of MSNBC. Whereas those extreme right and extreme left wingers are rabid junkyard dogs for their extreme political dogmas, and their goal is to divide us, I am not sure what the goal of this Capps article is, other than to try to make something that I hope will be good for the DC art scene into a smelly conspiracy for me to gain... what?

He strangles the truth once more when he refers to the artists that I write about and "admire" in this blog. He writes: "As much can be ascertained from his blog, D.C. Art News, where he has written for years about artists he admires (and represents)."

What's the condemnation you ask?

That all artists that I write about and admire are only those that I represent. That is of course, completely wrong, and in fact probably numerically the opposite of the truth. But don't let facts get in the way... even though people like Amy Lin and many others, of whom I have gushed about in the past in my blog (get it, my blog) are represented by other galleries and have never been represented by me. But that little poison pill is now also a seed dropped in the article: "In Campello's blog he only gushes about artists that he represents." A damned lie.

See what the undercurrent here is?

Words count and are chosen for a purpose. Capps writes that "Not every Washington-based artist jumped at the opportunity. Artists Jim Sanborn and Sam Gilliam refused to participate." When we discussed this, I told him that Gilliam and Sanborn had "declined" to be in the book, and explained the reasons given to me as to why they didn't want to be in the book - both have private commercial flavors of other issues - but Capps instead uses the word "refused" with the implication offering a harsher reason for them not being in the book.

He then takes a swipe at the publisher, picking some weird titles from a selection of 100s of art books that this respected publisher has offered in the 50-plus years that they've been publishing art books. You see? everyone gets a little dose of negativity here.

At the end he almost closes with: "For this unflagging fanboy of Capital City artists, the fight for visibility trumps profit, or interests, or ethics." Even the snarky choice of words (I'm now a "fanboy") are picked to diminish and reduce and put me into "my place" - how dare this crab try to take 100 crabs out of the basket?

As a man I am nobody's "boy" of anything, and in fact I find this adjective not only offensive and insulting, but also insensitive in this era when we're so well aware of the sins of the past. Because he has failed to find the facts to back up a flawed and dishonest argument questioning my ethics, he attempts to reduce me at the end to a "boy."

And in the end what comes out is a snarky, dishonest, pick-out-of-context art scribe best suited for political blog poison-writing than someone with a pulpit to write about the Washington, DC art scene for anyone, much less the same paper which let him go earlier for whatever reasons.

And I'm much more of an ethical man, not boy, than he'll ever be.

And now that I'm finished with volume one, time to start volume two.

The Mother-Daughter Duo Who Amassed an Incredible Trove of African American Art

The two Clayton women shared a home and an appetite for collecting, spending nearly 50 years buying works by Black artists from auctions, galleries, and thrift shops.

Read the article in Artsy here. 

The collection includes work by Charles White, Augusta Savage, the DMV's own Sam Gilliam, Laura Wheeler Waring, my former UW professor Jacob Lawrence, Romare Bearden, and Barbara Chase-Riboud.

Sunday Funnies (ahem) Stamps


I know I'm gonna get killed for this, but here I discussed when I detected possible pornography in the American stamp issue of Sunday Funnies, and here I broke out one of the first two possibly sexualized panels (yay!) in our sexy nation's stamps history.

But as Tery Gilliam predicted in his groundbreaking film Brazil, all of you are too chicken to come forward (other than the dozen plus emails I've received... offline) to "see" the Onanist issue here.

Wait till tomorrow for me to tell you what Odie The Onanist is doing.

Come to this free lecture tomorrow!

Lecture: Art with a Twist, Sunday, October 13, 2019, 2 pm
Montpelier Arts Center, 9652 Muirkirk Road, Laurel, MD 20708

Join me as I take a fun walk through art history that culminates in contemporary art where I will discuss the work of some area artists (DMV, Baltimore, etc.). Lecture is free and open to the public. Please call Montpelier Arts Center at 301-377-7800 to register.

Earlier on I challenged my FB peeps to nominate an area artist for me to discuss at the lecture - some of the ones already on my list: Sam Gilliam, Tim Tate, Tim Vermeulen, Rik Freeman, Mark Jenkins, Shanthi Chandra-Sekar, Joey Manlapaz, Percy Martin, Sharon Moody, Judith Peck, Schroeder Cherry, and others...

Joey Manlapaz

Schroeder Cherry

Rik Freeman

The Constant Artist at AU

Paul Feinberg’s photographs and interviews, or “word portraits,” have enlivened magazine articles, books, and exhibitions both locally and nationally for decades. He has been particularly obsessed with interviewing and photographing artists in our own community. This AU Katzen Arts Center exhibition features early and late works of art by nine Washington artists, together with Feinberg's photographs of the artists early and late in their careers.

Artists in the exhibition include Lisa Montag Brotman, Manon Cleary, Rebecca Davenport, Clark V. Fox, Sam Gilliam, Tom Green, Fred Folsom, Margarida Kendall, and Joe White. Five of those artists are in the 100 Artists of Washington, DC book.

Opening reception:  6:00 pm – 9:00 pm, Saturday, June 9 - Show is June 9–August 12, 2012.

Gallery talk:  4:00 PM– 5:00 PM, Saturday, July 7

Juno

For the man who thinks that Terry Gilliam's Brazil is one of the top ten films ever made, it is quite a surprise to reveal that I think that Juno is one of the best movies that I have seen in the last decade.

Starring Ellen Page, rapidly becoming one of the best young actresses on the planet, and who was the terrifying star of 2005's Hard Candy -- the movie most likely to make men cross their legs.

Seriously, Hard Candy was a brutal and intelligent movie, and there are scenes in the film where the character played by Page causes men to squirm and the audible rustle from legs being crossed throughout the theatre becomes a weird sensurround to the smartest revenge movie in ages.

But this is a review of Juno and not Hard Candy.

Get back on track Campello!

Juno is witty, funny, sarcastic, sometimes a little scary and definately has that magical cult ingredient like Napoleon Dynamite did.

Page plays the sarcastic, snappy and very pregnant Juno, a 16 year old kid with a razor-sharp mind and a huge belly. The movie is the story of how she deals with her pregnancy and it is full of surprises, turns and bends and very good acting on the part of Page and the supporting cast, especially by J.K. Simmons, who plays her dad.

The movie grows as it develops, and before Juno's snappy comebacks and one liners become tiresome, she suddenly becomes a scared little girl before our eyes and just as fast turns into a strong decision maker.

I liked this movie a lot and Page is a sure bet for the Oscar for best actress; go see Juno.

Corcoran Curator Leaving

(Via RE) - Dr. Jonathan Binstock, whose thesis work in Philly was about DC artist Sam Gilliam, will be leaving his post as the Curator for Contemporary Art at the Corcoran in Washington, DC in order to join the corporate world at the Art Advisory Service at Citi (nee Citibank), where he will work as a senior vice president.

For almost 30 years, Citi has helped some of the Citigroup's customers find and collect art (since it's investment and banks and Samolians... I guess for investment goals) and a whole lot of other art services.

Their website implies "access" as a mean to penetrate the inside and outs of collecting artwork for fun and profit.

As a sideline, I advise and then buy artwork for two collectors, and have a $20,000 monthly budget to buy artwork for those two folks. This is not as easy as one would have imagined, and actually quite an arduous (but still fun) process.

What Citi does is a billion times harder, because they are somewhat promising investors a payoff and payback and return on their purchase price on artwork.

Jonathan Binstock is a sharp, hardworking and savvy dude, and DC and the Corcoran will miss him, but he's got a tough job in front of him, and I wish him the best of luck.

It will be fun to see if Jonathan pushes any DC artists. This will be somewhat difficult, as I suspect that this level of collecting seldom concerns itself with discovering artists who have not yet made it to the ranks of the secondary art market (only about 5-6 DC area artists (as far as I know) have done so... of those only 2-3 are alive.

Top picks for the Affordable Art Fair NYC

The Affordable Art Fair New York opened last Wednesday in Chelsea and runs through the weekend.

This popular art fair, versions of which run in multiple American and international cities, is clearly (based on my observations over many years) one of the key venues to acquire reasonably-priced art, both by new collectors as well as seasoned collectors looking for new talent.

I will also admit that this is one of my favorite art fairs on the planet: cool, trendy, well-organized, and superbly run.

As most seasoned art critics, artists, gallerists and art symbiots know, when you walk through art fairs over a period of years, in diverse cities and settings, often trends and connecting lines appear that are clearly obvious to the most casual observer.

The trend here this year seems to be an over abundance of pop art derivatives from artists all over the planet. There are also many artists, in all sorts of media and substrates, whom are rather effectively channeling the epic artists of the Washington Color School. There is stripe art everywhere, in every shape and form and drip factor!

There are also multiple flat brushes channeling Carmen Herrera minimalist style, which remained ignored though most of her life until the Brits "discovered" her work a few years ago, and suddenly the octogenarian became darling of the New York art scene (she's currently at The Whitney).

Warhol look-alikes are also all over the place, but this Warholian footprint is visible in every single art fair on the planet, from the most exclusive to the lowliest ABMB satellite fair.

Overall though, the fair remains a cornucopia of really good talent at very good prices, and AAFNYC continues to earn its reputation as a solid, good art fair for both emerging artists and emerging galleries. And it is also a place where we also always see some of the top blue chip galleries in the world showcase their new talent.

Here are some pieces that caught my eye:

Michele Mikesell ("Enmascarado" is depicted above) shows with DECORAZON, which has galleries in both London and New York. I was immediately attracted to her work, which reminded me a little of the DMV's Matt Sesow or the early work of Alabama's Michael Banks. Mikesell's wet sanding process delivers a beautifully crafted oil painting whose images are intelligent, disturbing and hypnotizing.

London Contemporary Art, obviously based in London, is showcasing the work of Michael Lukasiewicz, a very talented painter who could teach a lesson or two to the Washington Color School channellers about how a contemporary painter can stand on the shoulders of giants from the past and deliver something related, but fresh and new. Look at the way in his "Breathless" (acrylic and gesso on canvas) uses a little of Sam Gilliam's draped paintings color to offer a radical new approach to the use of color.

"Queen", depicted above, is from a series of gorgeous photographs by Dagmar Van Weeghel, represented by Amsterdam's The Public House of Art gallery. The power, presence and scale (very large photo) make an unforgettable impact from the very beginning. At the risk of revealing my childhood heroes, Conan The Barbarian is not too far from this powerful woman, and in some universe she might be his queen.

I also liked Marek Zya's sculptures with Carmel, Indiana gallery Evan Lurie, and the mixed media pieces by Ruben Ireland with NYC's CURIOOS gallery.

The fair is at the Met Pavilion in Chelsea and runs through Sunday.

Steven Cushner Interviewed by George Hemphill

Steven Cushner Interviewed by George Hemphill, December 2012

GH How is it that you came to irregularly shaped paintings, or why did you abandon traditional rectilinear canvases?

SC If I think about how I came to challenge the traditional format of painting, I think there were a number of threads that at some point came together. As a kid, I spent a lot of time in the contemporary collection of the Cleveland Museum of Art, and three pieces in the collection really got to me. One was a Ben Nicholson geometric relief, one was a small wood construction by Jean Arp, and the third was a Claes Oldenburg soft drum set. I also began to look at the other pop artists, particularly early Tom Wesselman pieces, which combined real objects and collage, along with painted images. At the time, I did my own versions, multiple canvasses creating unusual shapes, three-dimensional objects resting on them, things like that. By the time I got to RISD in 1972, it was accepted truth that painting was dead. Most of our conversation was around the question of what painting could be if it wasn't what painting had been - flat, square or rectangular, a picture of something. Since this kind of painting no longer existed, we didn't learn how to paint, we learned how to think about painting, to think about painting as color, as shape, as object. We also thought it was our responsibility to create a new painting (ego). This was certainly in the air - you had Frank Stella, Elizabeth Murray, the whole Pattern and Decoration thing, and here in DC you had Sam Gilliam, who I had the opportunity to study with in graduate school. I started tentatively - building my own frames, decorating the frames, and framing with fake fur - things like that. At some point, I began cutting up my canvasses, collaging them back together, thinking about the canvas as an object, working from the inside out (not unlike Stella’s early Black paintings). This seemed like a new way to think about painting, not relying on the size and shape as a given, a field to work in.

GH Following the shaped paintings of 1991 to 1993 you returned to the traditional rectilinear stretched canvas. Why? 

SC At a certain point, I realized I wasn't going to redefine painting, I just wanted to be a painter, and I wanted to be a good painter (not an artist, not a revolutionary, just a PAINTER). I also realized that there were many kinds of painting that I hadn't addressed, or had ignored, or was ignorant of, and I needed the space to try them, and I needed the format, the tradition, and history of PAINTING (not art, photography, installation, sculpture, ideas - just the history of painting) to work from, to work against, to bounce off of.

GH Would you ever return to working in an unusual format?

SC I can't really see changing the shape of a painting now. At the time, the decision seemed to be not a choice, but a necessity - there was a need and an urgency to work that way. If I were to make that move now, it feels like it would come from a different place, and a false place - a contrived move, a choice, perhaps for novelty, but novelty is not as compelling as urgency.

If I returned to shaped canvasses I wouldn't paint them the same now, but I would certainly reinvestigate the ideas and motivations that generated them, and I am constantly revisiting these ideas and patterns and gestures and places. I think what is different for me now is that I am no longer thinking too much about the bigger art world and how my paintings deal with, react to, accept or reject it, and I am no longer at all interested in or attempting intentionally to make work that is subversive, aggressive, in your face. Those thoughts came out of youthful, teenage somewhat immature (in a good way) attitudes. My paintings may still be aggressive or not easy at times, but probably as a result of still trying to surprise myself.

GH Do you consider your work to be pure abstraction or is there a subject?

SC I'm not sure what is meant by pure abstraction - these definitions get tricky. I would say these paintings are not non-objective (as we would describe classic Mondrian or most of Frank Stella's paintings: paintings referring to no thing). They are most definitely abstract - abstracted from many things - the gesture the body makes, curves and arcs; repetition (of shape, line and movement, and things I love to do again and again and again, not just in painting but in daily activity); and abstracted from things I see or feel in the natural world (the flow of water, the pattern of waves in the ocean).

GH Walter Hopps once suggested that the most significant American contribution to art may be the various refinements of abstract painting and that there may be an end to American abstraction. Might you be the last abstract painter?

SC I love this question about being the last abstract painter - I remember reading Philip Guston on this. He said Pollock wanted to be the last painter, and that he (Guston) wanted to be the first - I think by this he meant to go back to the beginning and start again, which is pretty much what he did. Probably in 1991, I thought that perhaps I could be the last abstract painter (ego talking), now I am much more interested in the beginning of abstraction - how did we get to it, and am constantly curious about those artists that had to figure it out - Matisse, Kandinsky, Mondrian, Stuart Davis. Clement Greenberg would also probably believe that there could be a last abstract painter (he was in for a surprise). And since I hope and think that my painting keeps developing, I hope there is no LAST anything. 

GH It has been over 20 years since you created the work being exhibited in the Hemphill show in 2013. Twenty years later do you think viewers will see the work differently? 

SC It’s an interesting question. Is it possible to not think of them as from the past, because we know they are of the past (1991 - 1993)? Does this change our response? Maybe if I can answer the questions for myself  - how do I see them? Are they alive for me? Would I do the same paintings now? They are very much alive for me and I react to them the way I react to most of my successful paintings  - did I do that?  I know that a painting is finished when I no longer see it, it no longer bothers me or calls out  " hey, this part isn't right, this area is unresolved." Until the painting is finished, it is constantly tapping you on the shoulder or biting at your ankles, asking to be paid attention to. So, when a painting is finished, it kind of disappears, and when you see it again, it seems surprisingly alive.

GH How has the art world changed in those twenty years? 

SC We all know how the market has changed, and this is not of much interest to me obviously. But artists have also changed. The whole idea of a painting being the result of an activity seems to have vanished, and I don't mean the idea of activity like Sol LeWitt. Maybe it is this idea that defines my generation of painters, or my neighborhood.

GH For you it’s the activity of painting not the painting itself?

SC I am thinking about how this has played out in literature. David Foster Wallace talks about Pynchon and the plotless novel, multiple possible non-endings, non-narrative structure, the reader completing the narrative, a non entertainment (Foster’s term). What followed is novels like The Marriage Plot by Jeffrey Eugenides, a novel about not being able to write a novel based on a marriage plot, or On Beauty by Zadie Smith, about the non resolution and opposing schools of thought about beauty and aesthetics put into an entertainment. I think this is perhaps the kind of painting I am after - one that recognizes that it is about painting but still a painting that has to fulfill all of the functions of painting - entertain the eye, spark the imagination of the viewer, and get into the ring with the entire history of painting.

GH Outside of the art world what has been the strongest influence on your work?

SC I have always said that I am much more influenced by my friends than by the larger art world. It happens that most of my friends are painters, but they are friends first. I have learned from all of them to go to work every day, because you never know what may be a good day in the studio, and you better be there just in case. I have learned to look at, pay attention to, and experience as much as possible. And I have learned to have an open attitude, to not predict or assume, and to take what comes along. Of course, these are great painting lessons, but they work pretty well for everything else too.

© 2012 HEMPHILL Fine Arts

Washingtonian on art galleries

"Why DC Needs Art Galleries" is the title of this excellent article in DMV area glossy Washingtonian. The article is by Ian Bourland, who is assistant professor of contemporary art history at Georgetown University and an art critic for a range of international publications.

The past year was a good one for DC’s contemporary-art-gallery scene. It saw the opening of three new spaces. Ryan Dattilo, an attorney and collector from New York, launched the pop-up De Novo Gallery in Union Market, while Todd Von Ammon, a well-known dealer who previously worked at New York’s Team Gallery, debuted Von Ammon Co. in Cady’s Alley. And in October, a collective of mid-career Washington artists opened a sprawling studio complex/exhibition space in Northeast DC, named Stable—which fits nicely with both the structure’s equine history and the group’s aim to provide a reliable node for creators.

Bourland does an excellent job of updating the current gallery around the District (not the DMV). He goes back a little too far in history (for my taste) to recount the halcyon days of the DC gallery scene:

Decades ago, before the economic turnaround transformed Washington, it seemed as though the city might be an emerging art capital. The Corcoran School of Art & Design was thriving, and DC boasted the hard-edged abstraction of the Washington Color School, anchored by now-canonical figures Morris Louis and Sam Gilliam.

I note this because... technically the zenith of the DMV gallery art scene (no pun intended with Zenith Gallery, which coincidentally represents my work) was more around the late 90s to mid 2000s, when the number of art galleries of all flavors: independently owned commercial art galleries (such as Conner, Fraser, eklektikos, Marsha Mateyka, Irvine, Davidson, Anton, Robert Brown, Heineman-Myers, Alex, Baumgartner, Alla Rogers, Veerhoff, Neptune, Aaron, Numark, G Fine Art, Hemphill, Addison-Ripley, Littleton, Parish, and others, as well as the highly survivable artists' cooperatives (Touchstone, Studio, Multiple Exposures, etc.), and the non-profits (MOCA, DC Arts Center, etc.), and all the university galleries plus all the embassy and embassy-associated galleries (Mexican Cultural Institute, Goethe, etc.).

Back in those closer to the present and true halcyon days of the DMV art scene, the number of galleries in the DMV art scene exploded, as galleries colonized areas such as Dupont Circle, Georgetown, Bethesda, Alexandria, etc. At one point there were eight galleries in Georgetown's Canal Square alone!

What happened? It's a well-known neighborhood revitalization model: when rents are cheap, galleries and restaurants and other small businesses move in. Then the neighborhood becomes a visit point for the illuminati, and soon the area's attractiveness begins to improve, as do real estate prices.  Within a couple of decades, the franchise stores begin to move in, and a decade later the galleries and small businesses are gone, unable to afford the new rent realities. Bourland is familiar with this model as he writes:

...this is the now-familiar story of gentrification as it has played out all over the country. Artists flock to areas with low rents—say, Brooklyn’s Williamsburg neighborhood or San Francisco’s Mission District—and spearhead a dramatic transformation. Starbucks and Citibank follow, along with rising costs that push artists and experimental spaces farther to the periphery.

What else happened and what is still happening (and I've been bitching about for decades)? The DMV media completely ignores and treats with immense apathy the DMV art scene. I used to complain in the 90s about the press coverage of the local art scene. Little did I realize back then that we were at that zenith in art coverage, when the WaPo had not only a weekly Galleries column which covered the DMV art galleries, but a separate column dedicated solely to area museums plus a weekly column (then written by Michael O'Sullivan) titled Arts Beat, which covered the DMV's art scene. Add to that the weekly gallery review by the Washington Times authored by Joanna Shaw-Eagle, and the Art in America or Art News coverage by Joe Shannon and others... And the multiple freebie neighborhood newspapers which regulalrly covered their area's art galleries: The Georgetowner, the various Gazette newspapers (owned then by the WaPo), Pitch Magazine, Dimensions magazine, etc.

WETA had Around Town on a weekly basis, and the then emerging local cable stations (MHZ TV for one) had regular visual art show coverage.

Bottom line: we were at that zenith as well.

Then the emergence of the art fair model provided the final kick in the balls to the brick and mortar galleries as they discovered that they could move more art, expose more artists to collectors, and even to museums via the good art fairs in one art fair than in ten years in the DMV.  A few, like Fraser and others, valiantly tried to do both for a few years, but eventually most of them closed their physical doors and went virtual all the way.

A shout out to Washingtonian for this article, and a repeat of a question that by my email count I've now asked (and sometimes received answers from apologetic editors) I've asked Washingtonian for decades: Why doesn't Washingtonian have an art review column in each issue?

And one last point: When you cross the street in many places in the DC "box" on the map, now you're either in MD or VA - that's why we call it the DMV (an acronym that I invented by the way)... when pieces are written about the city's art scene, by default it is about the DMV art scene and includes Bethesda, Alexandria, Rockville, Mt. Rainier, etc. In fact there are more artists' studios in Rockville or Alexandria or Mt. Rainier, than in all of DC!

By the way, I've asked those questions multiple times to all other DMV area monthly glossies... and there are a few.

Update: John Anderson has a great opinion here.