Read and weep some more

He's Britain's most talked-about young artist. His paintings fetch hefty sums and there's a long waiting list for his eagerly anticipated new works.

It has all happened so quickly — he's still getting used to the spotlight — and Kieron Williamson fidgets a little when he's asked to share his thoughts on art.

"Cows are the easiest thing to paint," said Kieron, who has just turned 8. "You don't have to worry about doing so much detail."

Read it here.

Jessica's Finalist No. 6: Chloe Watson

Great choice! Check it out here.

VARA in action

The news release from artist David Ascalon reads:

"When artist David Ascalon's towering Holocaust memorial, just blocks from the Pennsylvania state capitol, was dedicated in 1994, he could not have imagined that a dozen years later, his name would be stripped away from the sculpture's base. Nor could Ascalon have envisioned that his most cherished creation - one which he designed to honor the millions who perished at the hands of the Nazis - would have been mutilated through drastic modification at the whim of a bunch of Harrisburg bureaucrats. But that is precisely what happened.

Ascalon, however, was unwilling to permit this violation of his moral rights to go unchecked. Through his attorney, Jason B. Schaeffer of Cherry Hill, New Jersey, he has filed suit under Congress' Visual Artists' Rights Act of 1990 (VARA) - a law enacted to protect against such destruction - in Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Through this action, Ascalon seeks to compel restoration of this important public artwork to its original design."

Here are some before and after pictures, including ones that show the artist's signature completely ground away. A copy of the complaint is here.

I don't know who the artist was, or even the name of the piece was, but does anyone remember that huge piece of shiny, fluttery, metal public art that used to be above the Bethesda Metro stop for years? The thing was massive; then, all of a sudden it was gone!

I wonder if that artist, whoever she or he may be, even knows that his work is no longer there.

The perils of public art... I guess.

Opportunity for Artists

Deadline: September 6, 2010

CoolClimate Art Contest. The purpose of the contest is to engage the creative community on behalf of producing an iconic image that addresses the impact of climate change and spurs participation in the climate change debate. The contest is being judged by notable art experts and celebrities such as Philippe Cousteau, Van Jones, Jackson Browne, Chevy Chase, Agnes Gund, David Ross, and Carrie Mae Weems. Winners will be voted on by the public on Huffington Post. Submissions are due September 6 and can be posted online here.

Hot Foot

I rarely hang my own work in my house, but I have a recent version of Superman Flying Naked temporarily hanging in my house while the art piece that goes there is on loan for an exhibition. The other day I noted that the way the sun was striking the glass made it look as if the Man of Steel had incandescent feet.

Tax Free Bennies

In addition to her $877,000 compensation package, Ellen V. Futter, president of the American Museum of Natural History, lives rent free in a $5 million East Side apartment that the museum bought when she came aboard.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art houses its director, Thomas P. Campbell, in a $4 million co-op that it owns across Fifth Avenue from the museum.

The director of the Museum of Modern Art, Glenn D. Lowry, may have the best deal of all. In addition to the $2 million in salary and benefits he earned last year, he lives in a $6 million condo in the tower atop the museum.

Read the NYT story here.

Cudlin Goes Yard

Sometimes it seems like the only way for D.C. artists to get a little respect is to leave town. Take Dan Steinhilber, an artist who lives and works in the District, and is represented locally by G Fine Art. In his Style section piece this past Sunday, WaPo chief art critic Blake Gopnik praises Steinhilber, noting that his art has “earned him solos from Baltimore to Houston and group shows from Toronto to Siena. This summer, they’ve also earned him a residency at Socrates Sculpture Park, on the waterfront in Queens.”

Yes, Steinhilber has spent the summer making art in New York. He’s been asking passers-by in Queens to lay down in a large sand box and move their arms and legs back and forth, creating what can only be described as sand angels—which the artist then casts in concrete.

But Gopnik doesn’t mention one important detail: This New York residency is actually a D.C.-funded project.

Read how Jeffry Cudlin tells you what the Washington Post should have told you last week. Read it here.

Congrats


Congrats to our own Rosetta DeBerardinis, whose "Erotic Contemplation" is now part of the permanent collection at PNC Bank's regional headquarters.

Letter to City Paper

The current issue of the Washington City Paper has my letter to the editor responding to Kriston Capps deceptive article published in the previous issue. The letter reads:

The errors and journalist lack of integrity of “The C List: Will Lenny Campello’s 100 Washington Artists Serve Its Subjects or Its Author,” are too many to list in this letter; I will concentrate on the three major ones. To start, Capps lies when he writes that in my blog (DC Art News) I have been “writing for years about artists that he admires (and represents).” A simple check of my blog posts will reveal that 95% of those artists have never been represented by me.

Capps then quotes me out of context when he writes that I said “I have zero commercial relationship with them.” He follows that quote by writing “Not wholly true.” I know of no other meaning of “not wholly true” other than “it’s a lie.” What an ethical journalist would have written is: “But I have zero commercial relationship with them,” Campello says referring to the Fraser Gallery and their artists.” I never lied to Capps, and revealed to him all my artists relationships. I am insulted and embarrassed that he made it appear as if I lied and he “discovered” my lie.

The worst offense in this article, and one that should get the attention of the CP’s editors and publishers and all of Capps’ employers, is the fact that Capps purposefully omitted information which would have destroyed his argument about my ethical issues with this book.

Even though he knew that I had placed a disclaimer in the book, and referred all artists to other dealers so that no referral ever came back to me, he never mentioned the steps that I took to eliminate any perception of conflict of interest. That is unethical and malicious.

Considering that in past CP articles (not once, but twice), Capps own journalistic ethics have been questioned, and considering that he was once dismissed from the CP for issues related to one of his articles, he has huge cojones writing about my ethics when his are the ones on the record as lacking integrity.

Pyramid Atlantic gets NEA Big Read award

Pyramid Atlantic, the cool nonprofit arts center in Silver Spring's arts and entertainment district, is one of 75 nonprofits across the U.S. that is receiving a total of $1 million in grants from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) in connection with the NEA's fifth annual Big Read project, a yearly effort that spotlights reading as a vital element of American culture.

Each grantee receives an award ranging from $2,500 to $20,000. Pyramid, the only Maryland organization to receive a Big Read award, was awarded $17,050. Founded in 1981, Pyramid is “dedicated to the creation and appreciation of hand papermaking, printmaking, digital arts and the art of the book.”

Cyber influences

Americans who participate in the arts through technology and electronic media – Internet, television, radio, computers and mobile devices – are nearly three times more likely to attend live arts events compared to non-media participants, according to a recent report from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA).

Audience 2.0: How Technology Influences Arts Participation also showed that media participants also attend twice as many live arts events and attend a greater variety of the events. A multi-media version of the report is on the NEA’s web site.

Airborne

Heading down to Florida for one week of R&R with the family. I am mentally and physically exhausted after putting together the first volume of 100 Washington Artists (and then having to defend it); I haven't done any artwork in months; my hair is too long and my shoulder hurts from where that British Marine broke my clavicle in Palma de Mallorca in 1983. Besides, it is time to expose Little Junes to the warm sea.

Banner year so far!

Campello Pinot Grigio is available practically everywhere, most notably at Trader Joe's in those non fascist states where supermarkets can sell wine.

Reviews and comments here. For around six or seven bucks it has been getting rave reviews!

Keep buying!

Busy, busy...

Former Trawick prizewinner Linn Meyers is not only one of my favorite DC area artists, but also one of the area's hardest working. Her show at the Phillips Collection in Washington, D.C., will end in just over 2 weeks. This means that August 22nd is the last day to see the piece before it is painted over and forever gone! And she's got a full schedule ahead of her:

- This September she will create a wall drawing at Paris Concret for the show titled Touch. The show open in Paris, France on October 3rd.

- Next January, 2011, she will have a solo show at The Katzen Museum at American University in Washington, DC.

- In February 2011 she will have her third solo show with G Fine Art in Washington, DC in their new gallery space at 1350 Florida Ave, NE.

- Linn will be making a wall drawing in NYC at The Museum of Art and Design, in 2011, dates to be announced soon.

Wanna go to an opening tonight?

City Gallery is hosting the opening for their First Annual Regional Juried Competition. The opening reception is tonight from 6-9PM.

Gopnik on Steinhilber

The Washington Post's Blake Gopnik has a really good focus piece on DC area artist Dan Steinhilber in today's WaPo.

His 38th birthday is approaching, but he looks much younger, with wavy shoulder-length hair and a compact build. He's wearing plaid capris, much washed, and a hip green T-shirt with a drawing of a parking lot and the single word "hermetic." He could easily pass for the bassist in some alt-rock band. With his puppy eyes and big, shy smile, he'd be irresistible to groupies.

Read the article here.

This Weekend

Art Scam

I've got another art scam email to share:

From: Samuel Matinez (s.martinez212@gmail.com)
Sent: Wed 8/04/10 4:12 PM
--
Hi Dear,
My name is Samuel Martinez, i will like to order for some piece of your work from your studio as gift for my parent are celebrating their wedding anniversary, so i will be glad to have your reply as soon as possible, i will be glad if you can send me your website address to choose or send me four of your product via email that is available for me to choose.

Waiting to read from you today.so that we can make some progress.

I will be waiting to read from you at you convinet time.

thanks

Samuel Martinez.

This asshole can't even spell his fake name right (Matinez). But as it is the tradition in my dealings with these scam emails, I always send them a hook back. Here's my response:

Dear Samuel,

Thank you for your order and interest. I am very pleased with your interest and desire to own some of my artwork. As you probably already know, recently I've sold a lot of work thanks to all that great publicity that I received! I've never had so much money in the bank in my life before. It is so odd to struggle in making good art for so long, and then suddenly a break happens and people are buying my artwork from all over. Last month alone I deposited over $750,000 in my bank account from art sales. There's well over a million dollars in there now!

I am very picky as to who owns my artwork. Before I sell it to you, I need to know a few things about you. Also, I will need an international money order as payment or I can send you all my bank account details and you can transfer the funds. I will ship the artwork as soon as I receive an International Money Order.

But before that can even be a conversation I need to make sure that my precious, beloved artwork will be loved and in the collection of a deserving collector. Therefore, I need to know a little more about you. Where do you live and what do you do for a living? (Warning: if you are a Kosher or Halal butcher, I will refuse to sell you my art). Also, if you are married, I need to know if you have children. If you do, you must promise in writing that you will protect my artwork from possible damage from the rugrats.

I am also picky as to where you will hang the work. Please send me JPG (not TIFF) images of your walls in your house so that I can select the spot where you'd hang the work.

Please forgive me for being so picky, but my artwork is very important to me, and I know that it will give you years and years of visual pleasure. We can work together to make sure that it works out well.

May Allah, Yaweh, Buddha, Christ and Crom bless your home and may the bluebird of happiness fly all over the house of Martinez

your friend The Lennymeister....

PS - Can I call you Sammy?

Orchard Gallery

This terrific review by Dr. Claudia Rousseau in the Gazette newspapers discusses the paintings of Anamario Hernandez's recent show a year ago or so in Bethesda's Orchard Gallery.

Like most of Rousseau's art criticism, it's an elegant and erudite piece of writing from this well-traveled and experienced art scholar.

But the key issue here and what this review triggered in my mind is an interesting thing that is happening associated with this small, unassuming gallery and frame shop at 7917 Norfolk Avenue in Bethesda.

Most of you have probably never heard of Orchard Gallery because as far as I know it has never been written about in any of the local press. I have written about it a few times, but never in depth.

Part of that is because the owners, a very nice and unassuming Korean couple, don't seem to be too concerned with the press. As far as I know, they don't even send out press releases (at least to me), although they do participate in the monthly Bethesda Art Walks.

But they are doing something right that seems to have escaped most galleries these days: they are selling a lot of artwork.

When I first walked into Orchard a few years ago, I was expecting to find the usual mediocre art that one finds on the walls of most art venues that rely on framing as a business. I was pleasantly surprised not only by the quality of the artwork (at the time they were showing a recent MICA MFA graduate whose name escapes me now), but also by the fact that the framing business does not interfere with the art gallery space at all. It's a clean, minimalist art space.

The owners were very nice and warm, and were genuinely surprised when I identified myself (they had no idea who I was anyway), described what I do, and then told them that I really liked the work. I also noted that there were a lot of red dots.

Over the next couple of years, every time that I find myself around Norfolk Avenue, I drop by into Orchard to check out their shows. I haven't been WOW'd every time, but I've never been disappointed. It is clear that the owners have a particular taste and sensibility that is working for them. And I've always seen a lot of red dots.

So after reading Rousseau's review I reached out and try to gather some info on this gallery and the one constant that comes back is that they're selling artwork. A recent show with a price point of $3,000 - $4,000 a piece sold out and the current show (I am told) is selling well.

What's even more refreshing is that in these times of austere fiscal environments, when galleries are closing all over the nation, and where they turn away new artists by the droves, Orchard's website still says: "We encourage local and emerging artists to contact us for details on our monthly gallery exhibits."

Orchard, my kudos to you. Keep doing whatever you are doing to put original artwork on peoples' walls.

Update: Read Rousseau's review of the most recent show at Orchard here.

Art Dealer Is Sentenced for $120 Million Scheme

The victims took turns standing at a lectern in State Supreme Court in Manhattan and calling for a harsh sentence. And in the end, despite a tearful plea for mercy from the defendant, Justice Michael J. Obus ordered Mr. Salander, 61, to serve 6 to 18 years in prison, the maximum term agreed upon in the plea arrangement. He also ordered Mr. Salander to pay more than $114 million in restitution, but acknowledged that it was unlikely that Mr. Salander would be able to come up with that sum.

Read the NYT story here.

Errors, omissions, etc.

Someone formerly from the Washington Projects for the Arts just pointed out a big error in the CP article by Kriston Capps. In the article Capps compares my 100 Washington Artists book to WPA efforts to expose DC area artists; he writes:

"And the gains may be limited for the artists, whose peers are many, and who compete for a vanishingly small slice of the pie. Half of Campello’s selections appear in the WPA’s Artfile, a browsable archive where member artists upload artists’ statements and images—a lot like what Campello is offering. Until recently, the WPA Artfile was published in print: a guide, not a game-changer."

This is completely incorrect and inaccurate.

The WPA Artfile has never been published in print.

What was published in print in the past was a separate WPA project which had nothing to do with the Artfile, and it was done at a very reasonable cost to the artists ($80 per artist as I recall) and open to anyone who submitted their inclusion fee and WPA membership fee. There are hundreds of artists in these WPA guidebooks, and each artist had one page with contact information and one image.

Also, as far as I know that WPA guidebook was never offered for sale in bookstores or Amazon, etc. as my book will be. And in my book none of the artists pay a cent to be in it.

Thus the comparison (erroneous to start with) is like comparing apples and mangoes.

Kiddie art

...child's art is often displayed prominently on the family fridge, but one English boy has far surpassed that standard, recently exhibiting and selling his collection of paintings for more than $200,000.
Photo: Painting Prodigy: Kid's Art Sells for Over $200,000: People from as Far Away as South Africa and Arizona Traveled to U.K to Buy Seven Year Old's Paintings
Seven-year-old Kieron Williamson, known in the British media as "Mini Monet," recently exhibited and sold his collection of paintings for more than $200,000.
(picturecraftartgallery.com)

Seven-year-old Kieron Williamson of Norfolk, U.K., known in the British media as "Mini Monet," has impressionist style and impressive impact: All 33 works in his latest collection sold in 27 minutes, earning $236,850.

Read it and weep here.

Gallery Neptune to close (and change)

From Elyse Harrison, the hardworking and talented owner and director of Gallery Neptune:

In the spirit of economic realism (but indeed not cultural nourishment), Gallery Neptune will conclude it’s seven year run this summer on August 21st.

The good news though is that elements of the gallery’s programming such as our special events will continue, as will the very important work of Studio Neptune, our 20 year old educational program. In fact, Studio Neptune is positioning itself to go non profit and add a wonderful online component that will reach out to art educators and creative people everywhere.

I want to personally thank all of you who have shown dedicated support in covering our numerous exhibits over these past years. It is truly a labor of love to run an art gallery and our two year old gallery space in the building we so carefully developed is proof that my husband and I are firmly dedicated to inspire through good design and excellent programming.

I hope you remain interested in Studio Neptune’s bounty, as we step forward this fall on our world wide journey.

Not good enough

Kriston Capps responds to my defense responding to his his highly flawed and deceptive article on the 100 Washington Artists book and I. He writes:

Seventh-generation Texan, in fact. There are many Mexican Americans in my family, but I don't have much Latino blood in me. And I'm a fanboy for Star Trek and Marvel Comics.

Okay, a couple of points:

On Fraser: In my article I write, "As a curator and a dealer, he’s shown 100 Washington Artists selections Lida Moser, Andrew Wodzianski, Tim Tate, Michael Janis, Joseph Barbaccia, and many others," which is correct. I note that in D.C., he's primarily shown these artists through Fraser--also true. But I did not write that Fraser represents these artists. Somewhere in the editorial process, "Lida Moser" became "Linda Moser," a typo that was either my fault or editorial's.

No way did I fabricate any quote or bend the context to fit the narrative.

More broadly, I think it is a misreading to say that I've fingered Campello in a conspiracy or scheme to profit. I speculate that that opportunity is probably not even there. Rather, I say that Campello has conflicts of interest with regard to artists he works with and artists he is covering in this book. I cited the Alida Anderson/art fair example because it was recent and clear (and because Campello told me that). It doesn't destroy my argument that he skipped last year's Affordable Art Fair. His financial relationships with specific artists continues and will continue in the future.

Again, I acknowledge that Campello has kept nothing hidden. I don't say that it's a scheme to make money. The takeaway is that a conflict of interest doesn't bother him and isn't keeping him from writing a survey of D.C. artists.

Campello writes, "He does shoot himself in the foot by later acknowledging that I did tell him that I have current commercial interests in some artists." I do not see how reporting that constitutes shooting myself in the foot.

Campello says I "strangle the truth" by saying he blogs about artists he admires (and represents), but that is correct. I don't say they are one and the same.

No more hairsplitting from me. I would refer back to my story on all the other points.

Let's examine this response in detail.

Capps writes that: "No way did I fabricate any quote or bend the context to fit the narrative." But he did bend the context. The quote in question is: "I have zero commercial relationship with them."

This quote is in the context of our discussion on the past and former Fraser Gallery artists in general that we were discussing in our telephone conversation. He even listed a few artists by name at one point and that quote was in response to that context. I then immediately followed that by listing the very few artists that I do have a relationship with - which Kriston admits in his response "I acknowledge that Campello has kept nothing hidden" - but in the article he follows the "I have zero commercial relationship with them" quote with "That’s not wholly true." He then details all the facts that I revealed to him without telling his readers that it was I who revealed that information to him.

If you follow the thread of the writing, the implication is that I lied to him, unless someone knows of another meaning for "not wholly true." Had he written in the article what he wrote in his response ("Campello has kept nothing hidden") then this part of my argument would have been a moot point. But to make that clear in his article would have seriously undermined his goal to make this project seem full of conflicts of interest.

I also told Capps of the safety valves that I had implemented to minimize the potential conflicts of interest with the artists in question. I'll repeat myself: 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 info 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 avoided 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.

He shoots himself in the foot because first he implies that "That's not wholly true" as in a lie, but then later reveals that I did tell him that I have a relationship with a tiny percentage of the artists in the book. So he has told you that I told him that I have zero relationships with any artists and I also told him that I do have a relationship with some artists. It is the flow of the sentences that don't follow a logical path other than to imply to that I tried to hide my relationship from him.

And he does strangle the truth when he writes in the article: "As much can be ascertained from his blog, D.C. Art News, where he has written for years about artists he admires (and represents)." Clearly this was meant to incorrectly suggest that I only write and admire artists that I represent. In his response he says: "I don't say they're one and the same." See how a dishonest employment of English to convey one meaning - the one the author wants to convey - works?

What an honest journalist would have written should have been: "As much can be ascertained from his blog, D.C. Art News, where he has written for years about artists he admires (and some of whom he represents)."

You see the difference between the truth and unethical journalism designed to carry the author's agenda forward?

In another response in reference to my anger at being called a "fanboy", Capps tells me that:

But to say that I kicked my story with a slur to insult you personally -- or that City Paper would publish that kind of attack -- is not true. As another commenter says, it's a word that comes from comic-book and nerd culture that suggests extreme enthusiasm for a subject.

Fair enough, but I'll say it again: regardless of the actual meaning of "fanboy", the intent was the same: to diminish and reduce. He could have written "fan" and accomplish the same point without the denigration to a juvenile status that "fanboy" brings to those readers not in tune with the arcane meanings of the sci-fi and comic book culture.

Capps doesn't respond of his denigration of the publisher. In the article he picked as examples 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. This is a highly respected publisher that is taking a huge chance financing this book, its marketing and exposure at zero cost to the artists or anyone.

It all comes down to choice of words and the intended meaning that the author wants to accomplish.

What bugs me the most out this whole episode is that I really tried so fucking hard to bust my ass to cover every possible angle dealing with conflicts of interest; that I've spent some many hundreds of hours putting together this volume with the real Pollyanna goal of doing something good for the DC art scene; that I tried so hard to focus all possible future "financial rewards" to other art dealers or to the artists themselves... and still, after all that, in the end a piece of shoddy attack journalism still tries to focus most of the attention on conflicts of interest without pointing out the steps that I took to remove them.

For that there's no semantic excuse other than a flaw of character and a scary disregard for ethics. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander, right? and one lesson that Capps will learn from this episode is that you reap what you sow.

Critique the critics

On Tuesday, August 3rd, the Arlington Arts Center and The Pink Line Project are turning the tables on writers who cover the DC area arts and culture beat.

For Critique the critics, "eight authorities on all things stylish will compete head to head, attempting to create works of art on the spot and exposing themselves to the scrutiny of a horde of artists, patrons, and other curious onlookers who will judge their artistic abilities (or possible lack thereof).

These eight brave writers will use familiar kids’ toys and craft materials—from play-doh, to finger paints, to duplo blocks—to battle in a humorous tourney filled with unlikely aesthetic challenges. By competition’s end, one writer will emerge victorious."

The roster of warrior critics includes:

Maura Judkis (tbd.com), Stephanie Kaye (WAMU), Svetlana Legetic (Brightest Young Things), Danielle O’Steen (Washington Post Express), Holly Thomas (Washington Post), Ben Eisler (WJLA), Annie Groer (Politics Daily), Peter Abrahams (DC Modern Luxury).

Music provided by DJ Anish. Tickets are $5, and are available on the AAC website.

Tuesday, August 3, 6 – 8 pm at the Gibson Guitar Showroom (above Indebleu), 709 F St NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC.

Worth noting

Back when the WaPo announced the Real Art D.C. thing where the WaPo's Galleries critic Jessica Dawson reviews online entries and selects work that she liked, there was a good discussion about the rules of the entries, which seemed particularly one-WaPo-sided towards image copyright issues.

Not sure if that was a lot of wasted words worrying about copyright. I think.

Jessica's first pick was Joel D'Orazio, and she really liked his chairs but didn't seem so hot on his paintings. By the way, I'm the opposite: I like his paintings better.

Anyway, score is Jessica one, Lenny zip as Joel's chairs are featured in Dwell Magazine.

And by the way, all of Jessica Dawson's picks will be automatically invited for the next volume of 100 Washington Artists, tentatively titled 100 More Washington Artists.

Congrats!

To 18 year old Bethesda artist Carolyn Becker, who just won the grand prize in the Plein Air Easton, The Next Generation painting competition.

Having been a guest speaker in this competition in the past, I know that it is very difficult and an amazing art experience.

Carolyn also won the Alma Thomas award for painting this past year at American University for her work in the undergraduate show there. She is a painting major at American University.

Keep an eye on this young talented painter.

Curioser and curioser...

Someone just pointed out to me that this earlier blog post in the City Paper about the 100 Washington Artists book has so far drawn 49 comments. But what is very curious is that it seems that someone has caught the key "negative" poster(s) as being a sockpuppet!

It is also very curious to read the chain of comments as the various flamers are made up and subsequently destroyed by the other commenters. But someone is really trying hard to make a good story smell fishy here, and the comments have been strangely quiet since the sockpuppet got called out.

Check this online drama here.

Who would have thought that a book still to be published could have stirred so much interest, debate and chicanery.

At 87FLORIDA

Ceci Cole McInturff, hard-working and talented owner of 87FLORIDA has put together a sculpture show to coincide with the Bloomingdale Artwalk on August 7th. The venue is located at the intersection of Florida Avenue and First Street NW, caddy corner to the Big Bear Cafe in DC.

Saturday, August 7th, 12-4 during the Bloomingdale Artwalk (sponsored by the Pinkline Project and North Capitol Main Street). The show is titled "Mafia Swimwear and Other Narrative Objects" and the participating artists are:

Cindy Milans-Brown
Andrew Christenberry
Lisa Dillin
Dianne Stermann
John Simpkins-Camp
Ceci Cole McInturff

There's also a wall exhibit titled "White Works" by Lisa K. Rosenstein. There will be a sneak preview of new work by Afaf Zurayk's "Drawn Poems." Live Music by Thad Wilson from 1-4 and a special outdoor showing of a kinetic sculpture, "Eureka" by the late Phyliss Mark whose work is in the Hirshhorn and several outdoor venues in New York City.

Opportunity for DMV Artists

Deadline: October 30, 2010

The BlackRock Center for the Arts has a huge gorgeous gallery space and their call for artists for the 2011 art season is now up.

The 2011 Call to Artists is open to all artists residing in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC over the age of 18 for original artwork only. This call will cover exhibits in the gallery from October 2011 through August 2012. An exhibit may include on applicant or a combination of applicants, based on the judgement of jurors. The jury panel is comprised of Kathleen Moran, Jack Rasmussen and yours truly.

Details here.

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.

Ideas that make sense

Whatever is left out of ranking, jurying, selection, among the unnoticed strengths of Washington artists, is probably of greater interest to anyone attuned to risk-taking artists, the 'outliers' who actually define "what's going on," the "transgressors," who are pushing art. A bimodal curve, or 'distribution' lies within an assured 67% of a normal distribution. You are dealing with the norms expresssed in a highly politicized area. Rather than continuing to pursue a range that will not challenge the arts or challenge any other city, you might hesitate, for once, and think about a book that values the marginal, the peripheral, the seekers and transgressors to any book 'already written' and highly predictable.

That was an anonymous comment left in my earlier post about lists. And the Lenster thinks that this is a fucking brilliant idea and one that I should have thought of myself.

"Challenge the arts or challenge other cities" is the key and most brilliant part of this terrific suggestion. And while this suggestion makes things 1000% harder (and putting together this first volume was incredibly hard and took at least 10 times more time than I had originally planned for (thus my lack of really decent posting for the last few months), it also makes this future book a true one man's informed perspective on what he (he being me) thinks is the folks who are "pushing art."

Consider it done sir or madam!

And if I may, in reviewing the (much debated) list for the first volume, I see several artists, quite a few in fact, whose artwork is already doing what Anon. suggests: the 'outliers' who actually define "what's going on," the "transgressors," who are pushing art.

Suggestions welcomed. And O yeah... power just came back.

Powerless

No electricity since Sunday, cell phone almost dead, many trees down in the Soviet Socialist Republic of Montgomery, no Internet, cough, cough...

Another list

And now that I am essentially finished with 100 Washington Artists, one of the main lessons learned is that the futile job of putting together a "fair" list of 100 artists in such an area so full of talent and creativity is full of landmines.

Like I told you readers when I first announced the book: I was about to make 100 friends and piss off a few thousand artists.

Since announcing the list a while back, I've recognized that I probably fucked up the list by around 5-6 artists who should have been there, but are not. I take the blame for that, which is a nice way of saying that the folks who unofficially helped me to put the list together... ahhh... also never mentioned those artists.

But the flood of emails (and even some phone calls) telling me how I should have had this artist or that artist in the list has identified a significant number of blue chip artists that will ensure that volume two of the book series is not the "second 100 DC artists" - In an odd way, by the time I am done with volume two, I think that the danger of having a tiered set of artists (where the first volume is the "best" 100 and the second volume the "second best 100") will be minimized significantly.

Now I know about some really big name artists who live in the DMV but for whatever reason don't show here and are truly blue chip international artists. Now I know about at least another dozen brilliant artists who are second to none in the DC area.

So I've got a good start to the list for volume two; thanks to all of you.

Because I have been and am an art dealer, in compiling the first list I had to deal with the issue of including artists in the list with whom I've had/have a dealer relationship now, in the past and perhaps even in the future (if I ever get to open an art gallery again). In doing list one, I thought that it would be grossly unfair to exclude them from the list, because then the list would be truly flawed and it would be a huge hole in anyone's list and immensely unfair to the artists in question. But I was attentive and harder on some of the candidates that fit that bill, and I'd say that only a tiny percentage of the final list represents that category, and yet I can think about another half a dozen artists who could have been in the first list and will now be in the second volume.

Like I told John Anderson in the Pink Line interview, nepotism is part of making any list and I challenge anyone in the DMV who fantasizes about doing an objective list of any sort. I addressed that in the first volume by putting a disclaimer in the introduction which identifies the issue. Also, every single artist in the list has a website listed as a contact point. Where an artist is represented by a gallery, the contact info is for that gallery. For unrepresented artists, the contact info is the artist's own website. Not a single contact info for a single artist points back to me. I stress this here, because the usual cowardly anonymous flame throwing commenting about me "pumping my bank account" has already started in the comments section of the CP blog post about my list. Check that out here.

And in the end, it is my list, and everyone hates making lists, but I was the one who busted his ass with 100s of hours in the preparation of this volume, which I believe is great start to document 300 or so deserving artists in the cultural tapestry of the DMV.

The list for volume two has started; suggestions welcomed.

Airborne

Heading back to the DMV today via USAirways; while I was gone Stephen "Thor" Strasburg won another game for the Nats.

The book cover

Now that the 100 Washington Artists book is nearly done and almost shipped to the publisher, I am going to try to convince them to use just one image on the cover, instead of a set of handpicked thumbnails of images, as they'd prefer to do.

My idea is that a super strong, interesting representational image with an eye-catching subject would make the book stand out and attract a little more attention in passing. Layout designers tell me that color is always better than B&W, so sorry to all the grayscale artists. I am also told that titles with numbers in them attract more attention (who knew?) and that the title should be centered on the top of the book cover with the number "100" larger than the "Washington Artists" line underneath the "100."

So I've selected 3-4 images (from the 700+ images that are to be submitted to the layout gurus) which I will send to the publisher to see if I can convince them to pick one of the images for the cover of the book.

And if you think that the list of 100 artists was controversial, imagine now trying to whittle down the 732 images to one.

Selecting the 3-4 images was a difficult process. I started by eliminating all the artists with whom I've had/have a commercial art dealer relationship, now or in the past or future. It is unfair to them, but too bad. Then I eliminated all the abstract artists; this is also unfair, but layout gods tell me that a strong, interesting representational image is what is needed. And let's face it, we're trying to hawk some books here.

Then I nixed all the black and white artists, screwing Ben Tolman's powerful imagery ("sorry, no B&W," said the layout gurus) and several photographers in the process. Then I had to nix all the nudes.

That really pissed me off, but the layout gurus tell me that some bookstores and libraries would not carry the book if it has a nude on the cover; welcome to 21st century America.

That still left a significant number of images, and now I looked for the images that were interesting enough; that had something unusual and eye catching... something that would raise an eye-brow and make a person pick up the book.

That was still hard. In the end I had 3-4 images. Three are by three of the DMV's best-known artists; one is by an emerging artist who is making a lot of waves in the artsphere already. Let's see what the publisher let's me do.

DC area art dealer murdered

Details here.

Campello & KRUE

My daughter Elise just cut a song with rapper KRUE. Check it out below...

The long, dry summer

The Gazette's Jordan Edwards has an excellent report on the tough times being faced by Bethesda's art galleries. Read it here.

Gallery moves

Morton Fine Art (MFA)'s "a pop up project" had to move from its initial location at the old Numark Gallery space on 7th Street downtown. And Amy Morton has found a new location in DC. MFA’s innovative art lab will serve as part studio, part art consulting space and part gallery. As part of the unveiling, MFA will showcase an inaugural art exhibition, “Small Works on Paper.” The work featured in this exhibit includes watercolor, gouache pieces, wood engravings and mixed media paintings.

Featured Artists:

* Vonn Sumner – An LA based artist whose fanciful and eccentric characters invite the viewer into a parallel world. His work was honored with a solo museum exhibition, ‘The Other Side of Here’, at the Riverside Art Museum in California.
* Rosemary Feit Covey – A local preeminent wood engraver whose prints are held in permanent museum and library collections around the world. Featured work will include pieces from the ‘Strip’ series (including a unique artist’s proof) and the ‘Peep Show’ series.
* Laurel Hausler – A Washington, DC native who is inspired by her love for literature, antiquity and the absurd. Working in a subtractive process, she first covers the surface of her paper with multiple layers of paint, and then removes the layers to reveal the subject.

WHAT: MFA debuts new art lab with grand opening exhibit, “Small Works on Paper”

WHEN: Friday, July 30th 2010, 6-9 PM

WHERE: MFA’s Innovative Curators’ Studio, 1781 Florida Avenue NW (at 18th and U St.), Washington D.C., 20009

Wollheim

"Painters make paintings, but it takes a representative of the art world to make a work of art."

- Richard Wollheim

Airborne


Heading to the Left Coast for some unexpected last minute work and also a possible meeting with the Campello daughters in LA. Meanwhile, the comments about the list of 100 Washington Artists book is still fast and furious here.

So predictable, so predictable...

Way back, when I first announced the Rockwell exhibition now at the Smithsonian American Art Museum I wrote:

Now for some easy predictions: the high brow elitist critics will all unite in one front and all hate this show. The public, being far more progressive and democratic in their acceptance of what is art (without silly obsolete notions of "high" art and all other art, and without ingrained notions of "illustration" versus "high art") will line up to see the exhibition and continue to love Rockwell as they have for decades.

Boom! Then the first shot came across the bow of the exhibition a few weeks later when the Washington Post's chief art critic, Blake Gopnik wrote in an otherwise quite good and interesting article on the future of photography that "It's not that art museums never show "low" painting. The Corcoran has shown Norman Rockwell..."

Gopnik exposed his hand way back in that piece about how he (and most other art critics, I think) feel about the work of Norman Rockwell. It is the classic and antiquated and uniquely American traditional cliche-ridden critical view of Rockwell and his work; it's their key example as offerings of a critical perspective of high art and low art.

Separate everything; label everything, put everything and everyone in a box with a label: high art, low art, fine art, illustration, Hispanics, Latinos, Scots-Irish, Jewish-American, Cuban-American...

The problem is that the world has moved on since that critical perspective of Rockwell was a mandatory regulation to be obeyed by art critics in years past. And thanks to other sources of information, and thanks to the spectacular popularity of the Rockwellian legacy, that dog doesn't hunt anymore, and people like Blake Gopnik just don't get it that when they write in such "traditional" party line ways; it doesn't stick anymore.

Today, anything and everything can be art, and to the horror of the old-fashioned critical cabal, Rockwell has managed to sneak in museums as a key "fine art" figure, perhaps one of the most important, historical fine arts figures in 20th century American art.

And so it was no surprise that on July 4, Blake Gopnik, in his WaPo review of the show wrote that:

Norman Rockwell is often championed as the great painter of American virtues. Yet the one virtue most nearly absent from his work is courage. He doesn't challenge any of us, or himself, to think new thoughts or try new acts or look with fresh eyes. From the docile realism of his style to the received ideas of his subjects, Rockwell reliably keeps us right in the middle of our comfort zone.

That's what made him one of the most important painters in U.S. history, and the most popular. He had almost preternatural social intuitions, along with brilliant skills as a visual salesman. Over his seven-decade career, that coupling let him figure out what middle-class white Americans most wanted to feel about themselves, then sell it back to them in paint.

Gopnik then goes back to an antiquated anti-Rockwell weapon: that he painted a "homogenized vision of the country," in other words, Rockwell is a white bread painter who only painted... ahhh white America.


Norman Rockwell. The Problem We All Live With. 1963.
But there's a huge fly in that old ointment; in fact a lot of flies. Because Rockwell's popularity continued to grow after his death, countless documentaries about his life, coupled with mega retrospective exhibitions, showed us that Rockwell, along with the many in rest of the country, discovered his social activism and conscience in the early 1960s. In fact, historians point to his marriage to Molly Punderson (a retired school teacher) in 1961 as the key event that lit his social conscience on fire. Punderson's influence on Rockwell's painting activism has been well-documented and had a huge influence on what the painter painted over the next 17 years. Together with Rockwell's close friends Erik Erickson and Robert Coles, both of whom were strong advocates of the civil rights movement, Punderson's profound influence over Rockwell's artistic involvement in the Civil Rights movement yielded Rockwellian paintings that don't fit the mold that Gopnik wants us to believe, because it would destroy his entire flawed argument.

Gopnik does a drive-by shooting of this subject (he has to) when he erroneously reports that "toward the end of his career, Rockwell got Look magazine to publish a few heroic scenes from the civil rights movement -- at just the moment when such subjects had moved into the mainstream of American thought." Note the way in which the above is written to minimize this huge contribution by Rockwell to American art history.

I say huge because Rockwell didn't do this "towards the end of his career" (he painted for another 15 years) but in 1963, just precisely at the moment when the civil rights movement needed it and the same year that Dr. King's march on Washington took place (not years later).

Only Nixon could have gone to China and only Rockwell could have convinced America's leading magazine at the time, Look, to carry his artwork about the Civil Rights movement. And indeed it was Rockwell who convinced Look magazine (not the other way around) to publish his historical paintings celebrating the emerging civil rights movement in America. It was Rockwell who put a painting of a little black girl being escorted to school in a magazine laying on the breakfast tables of millions of American homes, and it was Rockwell who painted lynchings in the South, and "New Kids in the Neighborhood". He did this while no other major white painter that I know of, even remotely addressed the civil rights movement in such depth and historical candor as early as he did.

Gopnik also selects words carefully and tells us that "The Saturday Evening Post, for instance, for which Rockwell painted 323 covers, forbade him to depict blacks except in subservient roles." That was true, and a gross sign of the times. But what Gopnik doesn't tell you, is that Rockwell quit the Saturday Evening Post and moved over to Look precisely because of artistic freedom issues and his desire to paint the events in America which interested him, such as the emerging Civil Rights movement.


Norman Rockwell. Southern Justice. 1963.
This powerful painting depicts the murder of three Civil Rights workers who were killed for their work to register African American voters in the South.

But to admit that would seriously undermine the main critical argument against Rockwell. You see... Gopnik's greatest sin as a critic is simple: His is a critical perspective of unending clichés. The reason we so easily recognize the flawed points of anti-Rockwellism in his writing is because they reflect the standard critical image we already know from countless other critics' reports. His negative viewpoints are so familiar because they are the stories that we've been told by art critics a thousand times before.

But now they fail to stick with all of us. On Saturday, July 10th, David Apatoff, from McLean, VA responded to Gopnik's article and writes in the Post:

Norman Rockwell's work is no longer a cliché ["Afraid to make waves," Arts & Style, July 4]. He has been replaced by a new cliché: dogmatic, postmodernist art critics who believe that anything may qualify as legitimate art (including a belch or scribble) as long as it is not a painting by Norman Rockwell. When Blake Gopnik dismissed technical skill and traditional technique in his quest for "new acts," he failed to realize just how much of a tired stereotype he has become.

The taint of Rockwell's commercial sponsors has dissipated over the years, so the artist can now be viewed more objectively by those with an open mind to do so. If Gopnik had some of the "courage" that he claims Rockwell lacked, he would see beyond his personal grudges with Rockwell's content and recognize a contemporary art scene that is self-indulgent, decadent and listing toward irrelevance. Time for "new acts," indeed.

And he's not alone, as Carl Eifert of Alexandria adds:

Those days of the late '30s and early '40s were times that Blake Gopnik obviously does not understand. His America is about "equal room for Latino socialists, disgruntled lesbian spinsters, foul-mouthed Jewish comics" and, we are to understand, critics like him.

Eifert's point is a good one, Gopnik is judging Rockwell's earlier work with the sensibilities of 2010, and failing to put it in the context of the harsh realities of the 30's, 40's and 50's.


Norman Rockwell. New Kids in the Neighborhood. 1967.
And what is also clear to me, is that if Rockwell were alive today, he would be probably painting Latino socialists (whatever that is, is he talking about the Castro brothers or Hugo Chavez?), disgruntled (and happy) lesbian spinsters, foul-mouthed Jewish comics, but probably not Blake.

And what is also clear, given the mounting evidence of growing Rockwell intrusion into the sacred and forbidden halls of fine art museums, and even his tiny advancements in being grudgingly accepted by the artcriticsphere as one of the key American artists of the 20th century, is that decades and centuries from now, when Gopnik's and this post and most other critics' writings will be a dusty memory in the archives of the Internets, the Rockwellian Empire will continue to rock and the Jetsons and their kids will continue to line up outside museums to see Rockwell's artwork.

Read 163 comments on Blake's article here.

Telling Stories: Norman Rockwell From the Collections of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg is on through Jan. 2 at the Smithsonian American Art Museum, at Eighth and G streets NW. Call 202-633-7970 or visit http://www.americanart.si.edu.

Smith on Academy 2010

DCist's Matt Smith reviews Academy 2010 at Conner Contemporary Art.

By the way, on July 31, Conner Contemporary will host an (e)merge discussion panel + party at the gallery, 4 to 8 p.m., sponsored by Pink Line Project.

MOCA to stay in Georgetown

A while back we learned that MOCA DC was being kicked out of their spaces in Canal Square in Georgetown. Just today I found out that Dave Quammen has been able to find some leverage and has renegociated their lease with the Canal Square landlord. And they are still having a Super Party Artists & Models Ball. Make your plans now:

July 30 - Friday Night - 6 pm to Midnight - $5 entry fee - includes raffle ticket for 3 major art pieces - do not have to be present to win

6 pm - doors open

7 pm - models for artists to draw - $20 all night

7 pm - photography models to shoot $25 all night

8 pm - Body Painting - Free all night

Models will be paid from fees charged

For more info check out www.MOCADC.org.

Lists

Good discussion about my first book list going on here, with the usual share of optimist and pessimist comments.

Wall Mountables return

The District of Columbia Arts Center (DCAC) has announced the return of 1460 Wall Mountables, DCAC’s annual open exhibition. On Wednesday, July 21 DCAC will open its doors at 3pm, beginning a three-day installation process during which artists can purchase up to four 2' x 2' spaces to hang their work.

Since the first Wall Mountables in 1990, the exhibition has become a celebrated summer tradition at DCAC. One of the center’s most important fundraising events, the open exhibition runs from July 23–August 29. On a personal note, I can tell you that since 1990 I've probably done this show 3-4 times, putting up all together about a dozen drawings in these shows and have always sold all of them.

Spaces sell on a first-come, first-serve basis. It’s not unusual to see returning participants lined up outside DCAC’s door by 2:30pm, patiently waiting for installation to begin with an eye towards grabbing the galleries prime wall space. All work is accepted from a wide range of media created by artists at various stages in their careers.

The exhibition provides a great opportunity for experimentation, as artists challenge themselves to make the most out of such limited space. The coveted $100 “Best Use of Space” prize is presented during the opening reception to the artist who makes the most innovative use of their 2’ x 2’ squares. Whether Wall Mountables is an artist’s first show, 59th show, or an opportunity to pull out canvases from their attic, 1460 Wall Mountables has spots ready to be filled.

General Guidelines
• Each 2' x 2' space is $15 for non-members (maximum 4 spaces)
• DCAC members receive one free space. Additional spaces are available for $10 each (maximum 4 spaces)
• Become a DCAC member at the event and receive four spaces for free! (regular membership starts at $30)
• Each piece must be 2' x 2' or smaller. Spaces may not be combined to accommodate larger pieces (larger pieces can be divided and placed in adjacent squares)
• All art must be wall mountable
• No painting or writing directly onto the wall
• No adhesive materials can be used for hanging (i.e.- spraymount, adhesive velcro, 2-sided tape or wallpaper glue)
• Artists must bring their own materials for hanging their work (hammer, nails, screws, wire)

District of Columbia Arts Center
2438 18th St. NW
Washington, DC 20009
202.462.7833

Mona Lisa Secrets Revealed

Specialists from the Center for Research and Restoration of the Museums of France found that da Vinci painted up to 30 layers of paint on his works to meet his standards of subtlety. Added up, all the layers are less than 40 micrometers, or about half the thickness of a human hair, researcher Philippe Walter said Friday.

The technique, called "sfumato," allowed da Vinci to give outlines and contours a hazy quality and create an illusion of depth and shadow. His use of the technique is well-known, but scientific study on it has been limited because tests often required samples from the paintings.

Read the article here.

Proofreading

76 single spaced pages of text + 93 single spaced pages of image captions for 732 images submitted for the 100 DC Artists book have just been finished through the magic of WORD.

It took over an hour to spell check each set. Now to proof-read before I send it to the real proof-readers.

Good point

John Anderson, writing at the CP discusses that

The Corcoran has just announced a new contemporary program called NOW at the Corcoran, a series of one- and two-artist exhibitions that presents new work addressing issues central to the local, national, and global communities of Washington, D.C.

He then makes the point of asking "why isn’t a D.C. artist represented in the series?".

Read John Anderson at the CP here.

All shook up

Yes, the 3.6 earthquake did wake me up. Little everything else, I am sure that it is Busch's fault.

Book Questions

The very tall John Anderson asks me a few questions about the "100 Washington Artists" book. Read them in the Pinkline Project here.

Leslie Swching at CHAW

Bruce McKaig reviews the solo exhibition by Baltimore artist Leslie Swching opening this coming Saturday at the Capitol Hill Arts Workshop. The show is July 17 through August and the Opening Reception is Saturday July 17th 5 – 7 pm.

By Bruce McKaig

A sensation, a memory, a small…a feeling on the back of your neck, something tells you that you are in touch with the long thought.

There is no clash between the urban and the rural in Schwing’s work, both serve equally as backdrops for her observations and subsequent depictions of fractal patterns. With materials as diverse as watercolor, pastel, and scratch boards, Schwing meanders a path that starts near her home in Baltimore, twists through a system of patterns molded by the materials she uses, and ends at an internal place that was calling her from the start. Starting in an alleyway or a field, she begins en plein aire, but buildings or trees become spotted with, or overtaken by, glyph-like patterns emerging over an evolution from external observation to internal contemplation. In works where the patterns have overtaken their makers, the abstracted result is an encrypted narrative, a story that does not translate as much as resonate.

Lost in the woods, you’ve been there before, everything has overgrown and become unrecognizable, but you get active, you pick up a scent, you find yourself back on the path.

In working with diverse materials, Schwing has given her visual language various accents. Her own vision persists across the materials, perhaps because she does not seem to fight with them, instead letting each one take her exploration into its own material specificity.

It doesn’t matter if you are working blindly so long as you stick with it until you are back on the path.

Schwing’s work and life have evolved to include collaborations with other artists. Her past projects include Road Kill Resurrection, which began as a date with Greg Fletcher, also a Baltimore artist and her partner for 15 years. “We realized that we could work together because the work would not be competitive.” That project lasted three years and eventually involved other participants.

For all the diversity in content – rural vs urban vs abstract – and the diversity in materials – watercolor, pastel, scratchboard – what stands out most in surveying these collected works is Schwing’s persistent visual language, built around the word harmony. The images are charged and active, but the activity is sans stress. Buildings and trees establish a space that Swching populates with fractal patterns that add a temporal dynamic, a reference to cycles and change. “I’m not trying to replicate a scene, but to catch its scent.”

If I now where I am going, I get bored.

All quotes in italics by Leslie Schwing 2010

For more information on Leslie Schwing, click here.

For more information about CHAW and opening, click here.

For more information about the author, click here.

Anniversary of a Massacre

Lest we forget:

"In the early morning hours of July 13, 1994, three boats belonging to the Cuban State and equipped with water hoses attacked an old tugboat that was fleeing Cuba with 72 people on board. The incident occurred seven miles off the Cuban coast, outside the port of Havana. The Cuban State boats attacked the tugboat with their prows, while at the same time spraying everyone on the deck of the boat, including women and children, with pressurized water. The pleas to stop the attack were in vain, and the old boat-named the '13 of March' - sank, with a toll of 41 deaths, including ten children."

-- Ted Koppel, ABC's Nightline, July 1994.

These were the victims of that brutal massacre by the Castro regime:

Abreu Ruíz, Angel René. Age: 3.
Alcalde Puig, Rosa María. Age: 47.
Almanza Romero, Pilar. Age: 31.
Alvarez Guerra, Lissett María. Age: 24.
Anaya Carrasco, Yaltamira. Age: 22.
Balmaseda Castillo, Jorge Gregorio. Age: 24.
Borges Alvarez, Giselle. Age: 4.
Borges Briel, Lázaro Enrique. Age: 34.
Carrasco Sanabria, Martha Mirilla. Age: 45.
Cayol, Manuel. Age: 56.
Enríquez Carrazana, Luliana. Age: 22.
Fernández Rodríguez, María Miralis. Age: 27.
Feu González Rigoberto. Age: 31
García Suárez, Joel. Age: 20.
Góngora, Leonardo Notario. Age: 28.
González Raices, Amado. Age: 50.
Guerra Martínez, Augusto Guillermo. Age: 45.
Gutiérrez García, Juan Mario. Age: 10.
Levrígido Flores, Jorge Arquímedes. Age: 28.
Leyva Tacoronte, Caridad. Age: 5.
Loureiro, Ernesto Alfonso. Age: 25
Marrero Alamo, Reynaldo Joaquín. Age: 48.
Martínez Enriquez, Hellen. Age: 5 Months.
Méndez Tacoronte, Mayulis. Age: 17.
Muñoz García, Odalys. Age: 21.
Nicle Anaya, José Carlos. Age: 3.
Pérez Tacoronte, Yousell Eugenio. Age: 11.
Perodín Almanza, Yasser. Age: 11.
Prieto Hernández, Fidencio Ramel. Age: 51.
Rodríguez Fernández, Xicdy. Age: 2.
Rodríguez Suárez, Omar. Age: 33.
Ruíz Blanco, Julia Caridad. Age: 35.
Sanabria Leal, Miladys. Age: 19.
Suárez Esquivel, Eduardo. Age: 38.
Suárez Esquivel, Estrella. Age: 48.
Suárez Plasencia, Eliécer. Age: 12.
Tacoronte Vega, Martha Caridad. Age: 35

And 4 more that still remain unidentified. They will never be forgotten and one day soon justice will be served and those who ordered the massacre and those who executed it will be brought to justice.

Lists, lists, lists

Lists are always so much fun and so good for debate; and judging from the number of emails that I've already received, quite a few of you have your own opinions as to the 100 DC Artists list for the first volume of the art books about the DC visual art scene.

And now the Washington City Paper wants to hear your opinions. Read and then comment here.

MOCA DC closing party

MOCA DC is being kicked out of their spaces in Canal Square in Georgetown and they are having a Super Closing Party Artists & Models Ball. Make your plans now

July 30 - Friday Night - 6 pm to Midnight - $5 entry fee - includes raffle ticket for 3 major art pieces - do not have to be present to win

6 pm - doors open

7 pm - models for artists to draw - $20 all night

7 pm - photography models to shoot $25 all night

8 pm - Body Painting - Free all night

Models will be paid from fees charged

For more info check out www.MOCADC.org.

David Quammen's closing remarks:

Well, it has really been a fine experience to play host to the things that have gone on at MOCA DC over the 5 and a half years that I have managed it. It builds on the foundation laid by founder, Michael V. Clark, now Clark V. Fox,who created it about 20 years ago.

And who can forget Felicity Hogan, Clark's wife of about 8 years. She played a significant role in the gallery's evolution, which is now going into another phase.

All things considered, I believe that MOCA DC has chartered new grounds in DC's art scene through each of its iterations, always gutsy enough to take a cue from Gene Roddenberry and "boldly go where no man has gone before."

Our new web site will have an Archives section - I invite past and present members to contribute to a history of the gallery from start to finish. It will most certainly be one of the most interesting reads you can find.

Coverage at artDC Gallery

artdc Gallery presents a group exhibition of works that "explore coverage with relationship to the body, geography, and memory. Accumulating gestures and layers, while referencing the passage of time, these artists present works of sculpture, painting, printmaking and drawing. Sabeth Jackson’s work chronicles domestic themes and uses archetypal and culturally charged imagery to communicate emotions and stories. Megan Mueller finds inspiration in the architecture of tents and the lifestyles of the transient to investigate the idea of permission. Samuel Scharf explores the physicality of movement, collection and deconstruction."

July 17, 2010 - August 14, 2010
Opening Reception: July 17, 2010 - 6pm - 8pm
Artist Lecture: July 24, 2010 - 6pm - 8pm

Congratulations

To Ryan Hackett on being the first DC-area artist to win the Sondheim Prize!

MOCA DC in trouble

Georgetown has never been known for its eroticism. But in the brick courtyard of Canal Square—an upscale piece of real estate nestled between M Street NW and the C&O Canal—gallery owner David Quammen, 70, has carved out a space for the risqué. Since 2005, Quammen’s MOCA DC has exposed Georgetown passersby to paintings of childbirth, photographs of Playboy Bunnies, and sketches of Quammen’s own nude body, all via the gallery’s 12-foot-long front window.

But next month, the gallery may very well shutter its doors over a pair of nipple pasties. Why now? The modesty-preserving devices appeared on the breasts of a live woman, not in a work of art. “I think that having live nudity at an opening reception is akin to having it on the wall,” Quammen says. “But a lot of people don’t like what I do.”

On June 24, the landlord gave MOCA DC a notice to vacate the premises by July 31. Read the City Paper article by Amanda Hess here.