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.