Pennsylvanianing

Today I closed on a new house in PA (always an event somewhat comparable to a root canal), and on the way there I took a van-load of fragile stuff to deliver to the new house, because I don't trust the movers with it.

And in the process I managed to break the glass on the framed Gene Davis charcoal drawing, and drop the framed Vija Celmins drawing, all but destroying the frame, while hoping that the drawing survived.

And I packed the Frank Frazetta oil wrong, and put a dimple on the back of the canvas (but I know how to fix that).

Everything else made it OK, althought I still have no idea (from the last move) where my Ana Mendieta drawing is.

Is that enough name dropping? Oy vey! Still have loads of art to move.

Now I just gotta sell my Potomac house... it has been reduced by $85,000! Buy it here (Mention DC Art News and get a $10,000 discount).

Walter the Ripper?

Crime writer Patricia Cornwell (who I think used to live in Richmond?) will apparently donate 82 works by the artist Walter Sickert to the Fogg Art Museum.

This art collection, worth millions of dollars, was acquired by Cornwell while she was researching and writing Portrait of a Killer.

That book (and the 60 Minutes special) concluded that Sickert was Jack the Ripper.

Cornwell used the visual clues left by Sickert in his paintings to follow a rather convincing trail that led to a very convincing reasoning that deduced that Sickert was the Ripper.

USA Today

Maria Puente at USA Today has a story about artists who are selling their work through blogs and the Internet, and they profile Duane Kaiser.

Puente writes:

"...artist/bloggers such as Keiser are democratizing the art world, using the Internet to change the making and selling of art. Dealers and galleries, who command 50% commissions, no longer have exclusive control in defining who is emerging or successful.

Now artists can sell directly to consumers, using blogs or auction sites at prices more affordable to would-be collectors. The result: More people are making a living as artists, more people are buying art, and more art is selling at a wider spectrum of prices."

Sounds like another blow to art elitists, hey? (Did I sound Canadian?).

And here's my prediction: Sometime in the not too distant future, a major newspaper somewhere (not the WaPo or the WashTimes) will hire a freelance art critic whose job will be to write art reviews of online exhibitions and/or online artists. It may already be happening somewhere (someone let me know), but I wouldn't be surprised to see (for example) a newspaper such as the Washington City Paper start devoting a monthly column to review online art exhibitions or artists - in addition to their current coverage of museum and gallery shows (CP, call me).

Smithsonianing

Two things related to the Smithsonian.

First: At the Smithsonian Institution, they’re working to connect people interested in the art through their online newsletter, Smithsonian Focus. We probably share much of the same audience and I think that DC Art News readers might like to know about upcoming Smithsonian exhibits, events on the National Mall and beyond, exciting online exhibitions, and more. It’s a wonderful resource for anyone who is interested in the arts, science, history, and the world around them. You can check it out here.

Second: A lot of online writing has been done about the Smithsonian, its condition, status, etc. Bailey has an opinion on the subject, and as usual it is... well Bailey. Read it here.

Silverthorne on my last show at Fraser

A while back Alexandra Silverthorne did a cool photoreview of my last exhibition with the Fraser Gallery.

See it here.

And a reader also pointed out to me that the Washington Post had done a small piece on the show as well. See that here.

Another voice

Read this Matthew Langley posting.

Me too!

Me

In the video "Me," artist Ahree Lee began taking daily digital snapshots of her own face in 2001 and did so on a daily basis all through 2004.

In 2004, Lee compiled all of her daily images into a montage set to a musical score, where each second of screen time represents about one week's worth of pictures.

See it here.