Washington Post to cut in half its gallery coverage

Today I called the Style desk at the WaPo and discovered that the Washington Post intends to reduce their already measly gallery coverage to only twice a month. This is a reduction from their one weekly column: "Galleries," which is published on most Thursdays, a day which according to the Style section's banner, is supposed to be a day focused on "Galleries and Art News."

Yeah...

"Galleries" has been written for the last few years by freelance writer Jessica Dawson (that's right... Jessica is not an employee of the Post, but a freelancer assigned that column). The task of writing a weekly column to review area shows is not an easy one, and it takes a lot of time, effort and driving around to see a lot of gallery shows in order to pick one or two a week. So Jessica wanted some time off, and thus the Post hired Glenn Dixon a few weeks ago.

The idea was for Jessica and Glenn to share the column and each write a review every two weeks and thus cover the gallery scene with a review a week. Measly coverage in comparison to the Post's excellent and in-depth coverage of our area's theater, music, clubs, dance and other performace art... but better than nothing.

But then something happened, and Dixon and the Post had a dispute and Dixon quit.

And now, someone at the Post has made the decision to cut down the column to just twice a month. I don't know if this is a temporary decision or not. I have emailed Gene Robinson (editor of Style) and Chip Crews (temporary Arts Editor while John Pancake, the Post's Arts Editor, is away on a teaching gig).

I am hoping that this is a temporary situation while the Post finds another freelancer to augment Dawson's biweekly coverage. I cannot, even in my darkest Post-bitching mood, fathom that the Post's editor would think that it is OK to write two columns a month to cover the nearly 100 new visual art shows that our area's galleries and artists offer each month.

Let's keep our collective fingers crossed. More on this issue as I find out more.

UPDATE: Chip Crews (who is the Post's acting Arts Editor) tells me that the decision about the "Galleries" column "may change at some point but there's no timetable. Our arts editor, John Pancake, is on sabbatical until mid-January, and it's highly unlikely any permanent action will be taken before then." I volunteered my services, but it was declined until Pancake returns to make a decision.

Jessica Dawson sends a cosa nostra goodbye kiss to Troyer Gallery (which is closing) in today's Galleries column in the Post (halfway through the column).

This is the last paragraph in the review:

"Like much of the work shown at Troyer in recent years, the show is unremarkable. And the same can be said for most all of Troyer's Dupont Circle neighbors. There is a market for the kind of work Troyer, and her colleagues, have sold. Yet Dupont Circle needs more exhibitions that stimulate and advance contemporary art practice. I'm hopeful that Irvine will lead the way."

I have known Jessica Dawson on a professional capacity for several years (ever since she was a freelancer for the Washington City Paper), and I respect her as a writer and as a person. In the past I have both criticized her writing and critical opinions and also applauded it when deserved (in my opinion). This BLOG has ample evidence of both.

At the improbable risk of not ever getting reviewed by her again, let me say that I find it absolutely astounding and depressing that she has used the very little print space that the Washington Post gives for reviewing our area's art galleries to paint "most all of Troyer's Dupont Circle neighbors," with a single negative and undeserved brushstroke.

It is her clear right as a critic to express her opinion about Troyer's last show, and we all know that criticism without teeth is useless.

However.

There are many different art galleries around Dupont Circle. On a month-to-month basis, the more reputable amongst them, manage to present their own individual discourses in the difficult business of offering artwork to the public. And on a month-to-month schedule dealing with the difficult issues of running a type of cultural business in a metropolitan area where the visual fine arts are nowhere near the top of the interest list of any of our area's mainstream media sources, and because of that, our general public. The "chicken and the egg" syndrome is rampant in this last issue; no interest from the media equals no interest (read awareness or knowledge) from the pubic.

Difficult issues that are frustrating and invisible to most people who just "visit" galleries. The goal of a good art gallery is not just to stimulate and advance contemporary art practice. That is an important part of a reputable gallery's business ethic - but it is just a member of a much more difficult and heroic set of goals, which also include paying artists on time and paying the rent, the electricity, the advertising, the catering, etc.

And because most of these galleries are independently owned small businesses, none of them are eligible for grants, which is a proven way for art non-profits to raise financial funds to pay their directors a salary, and also pay their monthly bills, while affording them the luxury of stimulating and advancing contemporary art practice in the eyes of some, without the urgent and delicate balancing act of also trying to sell the work. And that is why a city's cultural tapestry is made up of commercial independent fine arts galleries, non profit art spaces and other alternative art venues such as libraries, restaurants, etc.

But...

The independent fine arts gallery that manages to present art shows that try to advance and stimulate contemporary art practice (and there are many in our area), while at the same time managing to maintain a reputable exhibition program, plus ensuring that the artists get paid (first priority), then the rent, plus all the other expenses, and still survive for a few years, deserves to be recognized as a distinct voice in the cultural tapestry that makes up our area's art scene. Dismissing most of them in one sentence does a huge disservice to that same cultural tapestry.

Jessica Dawson visits six spaces in today's Galleries column in the Post.

I like this mini-review approach that the Post has implemented in the last couple of years or so. In fact, a few years ago - before Dawson replaced Protzman as the Post's galleries' critic - I had suggested this mini-format directly to John Pancake (the Post's Arts editor) as a way to "spread the wealth" of the Post's very small print space dedicated to gallery reviews.

This is hard work on Dawson, who has to visit a lot of galleries, all over the city, just to produce one column. Too bad that the Post's online art pages, which used to run its own set of gallery reviews independent of the print section when John Poole used to be its Arts Editor, no longer does so.

This is puzzling to me, as at one point, when Poole was the Online Arts Editor, he had several additional writers (including Dawson) "augment" the print version of galleries and museum reviews with several freelance writers.

When Poole moved up the food chain and was promoted, his job was left vacant for a while, and when the Arts Editor job was finally filled a year later or so, whatever funds were available to pay the freelancers had probably been snatched by another department or cut, and thus the current Online Arts editor (Maura McCarthy) no longer has the luxury of augmenting the Post's meager gallery criticism with additional online writers.

Dawson leaving the WaPo

The WaPo's Galleries critic Jessica Dawson, who for about 10 years has freelanced the Galleries column for the Washington Post (and who prior to that used to freelance art reviews for the Washington City Paper) will be departing the Washington Post as that newspaper's visual art critics' bleeding continues and Jessica is heading to a new gig at the Hirshhorn Museum, where she will join the museum's staff working on the Hirshhorn's Bubble.

We wish Jessica the best at her new job.

More later...

You read it here first: Jessica Dawson, who has been writing the Washington Post's "Galleries" column for the last few years, will now only be writing the column every other week due to other writing commitments.

Glenn Dixon, who used to be the Arts Editor at the Washington City Paper until a few years ago, and then became the City Paper's ad hoc art critic will now write the "Galleries" column the rest of the time.

Two reviews a month from Jessica and two reviews a month from Glenn... I hope that Jessica gives Dixon a map to where all the galleries in Washington are located.

P.S. - By the way, Dawson's review last week of Carrie Mae Weems at G Fine Art was excellent. In case you missed it, read it here.

Today is "Galleries" focus day at the Post's Style section, and Jessica Dawson reviews a library show in Baltimore.

In the "Arts Beat" column, Chris Richards discusses the Convention Center's art collection. For my opinion on that subject, read my Nov. 11 posting.

And just as I predicted yesterday, there are two music reviews in the paper.

This gets to the heart of the matter of my bitching about the Post's gallery coverage. Because Jessica is the only freelance writer that the Post employs to review galleries, and because not only does she review gallery shows, but also sometimes museums, and also embassy shows, and university shows, and alternative spaces shows, and library shows, and because (as she did today) she sometimes includes Baltimore in her geographical area, there just isn't enough coverage in the newspaper on a par with what the Post does for music, theatre, performance and even fashion!

In fact, a quick check online reveals that since April 25, 2002 the Post has published 146 columns on fashion while Dawson has only written 76 in the same time period.

How can the Post justify having several contract writers for all those other art genres but only one for our area galleries?

I believe that they feel that their gallery coverage is appropriate and see no need to expand it to the same degree of coverage that they provide in Style for music, theatre, fashion, etc. I disagree, but I am certainly not objective about the issue.

Why does the Post feel that way?

Simple: Because no one complains except gallery owners. And of course from our perspective the coverage could always be better and to them it is just sourgrapes.

But do the readers care?

I don't know, but the Post obviously thinks that they don't care. This is clear because once in a while, when Jessica is away or on vacation, they just skip the column.

I guess that we should be grateful that the world's second most powerful newspaper allows one freelance writer to write an (almost) weekly column to cover all of our area galleries, plus Baltimore's, plus embassies, and libraries, etc. And also lucky that over in the Weekend section Michael O'Sullivan has been allowed by his editor to expand his column from just covering museums and also include galleries in his coverage.

Thank you guys.

Talking Done

Just back from the curator's talk at Seven. A nicely sized crowd showed up, which was a little surprising to me, since usually it has been my experience that these curator talks only attract the artists involved. Thanks to all the DC Art News readers who came by and said howdy.

Bailey has a nice photo storyline of the talk here.

He also managed to fall in love in the subway on the way to Seven and on the way back! The two photos below are courtesy of Bailey:

Me outside Warehouse discussing Seven

Me discussing Tim Tate's work
And the below photo courtesy of Mark Cameron Boyd:


Alessandra Torres discusses her installation
After the talk Alessandra and her family took me out to dinner to Lauriol, where I had some excellent Cuban food.

And Bailey also managed to whip out a monster letter to the Washington Post editors taking Jessica Dawson on for her dismissal of Seven.

It's OK; it's her right as a critic.

And yet, a bad review is better than no review at all. Jessica's expected dismissal of the show has nonetheless resulted in one major sale to an important DC collector.

In addition to Jessica's and John Blee's review, there are three separate other reviews being written right now, and hopefully they will be published soon; let's see what some other observers think.

Dawson on DMV

The WaPo's Jessica Dawson covered a wide range of the DMV art scene in this review(s): She covered shows at McLean Project for the Arts, Thomas Drymon Selects at the Studio Gallery, Carroll Square Gallery, Amy Lin's exhibit at Addison Ripley, and Andrew Wodzianski's Pop-Up living space in 100 sq. ft. performance.

Think about this: in order to cover all those shows, Dawson had to travel all over the DMV - and I'm sure that she visited a lot more spaces than those that she wrote about.

That is why writing art criticism is so time consuming: it takes a lot of gallery hopping just to produce a good round-up article like this one. Good job!

Dawson on Lass

Jessica Dawson reviews Berlin-based photographer Anne Lass. Read the review here.

Bravo to Dawson for asking the photographer questions about the work. In my opinion, often art critics seem to avoid this part of the critical process - the gathering of information from the source.

Dawson on Conner

Freelancer Jessica Dawson has a gorgeous article in the WaPo on the District's powerhouse and uber hardworking dealer Leigh Conner.

Word of advice: Art dealer Leigh Conner is many things -- well-connected, a powerhouse, the District's top gallerist -- but one thing she isn't is laid-back. Never, ever cross her. Trust me, I know.

Read Dawson's really good piece here.

Dawson on Foon Sham

The WaPo's freelance gallery critic Jessica Dawson has a great review of Foon Sham's latest work.

Read Dawson here.

Art-O-Matic Opens Today

As I am pounding into your heads by now, AOM, the region's most energetic artist-driven visual arts display opens today at 3PM in Crystal City at 2121 Crystal City Drive, just a couple of blocks from the Crystal City Metro station and also boasting plenty of free parking after 4PM. Expect a huge, multi-party at many levels, set of events to start later in the evening.

As there are around 600 artists, plus bars, music stages, performance stages, etc. it helps that ArtDC has an interactive map of AOM here (thanks Jesse!).

Lately I've fallen into the habit of predicting how the regional DC art press, both online and printed, will react (or not) to particularly interesting shows.

- At the last AOM, the WaPo's chief art critic, Mr. Blake Gopnik, brutalized the show in one of the bloodiest art reviews that I have ever read. And yet Gopnik's review had the usual opposite effect, and it in turn galvanized several hundred artists and WaPo readers against Blake and it also probably delivered several thousand extra curious visitors to AOM, so in the end, the Gopnik review was a good thing for AOM. I think that this year, Gopnik will not venture into AOM at all, since he is conceptually against the concept of AOM. It is a shame that the area's largest homegrown arts event will thus be ignored by the world's second most influential newspaper's chief art critic, who tends to forget that it is also a local newspaper. In the unlikely event that his boss (my good friend John Pancake, the WaPo's Arts Editor), actually tells Blake to go and review AOM, I suspect that Gopnik will once again tear it up, as conceptually, his mind is already made up that this most democratic and liberal of art shows is flawed from the beginning by a lack of a traditional curatorial hand.

- Also at the WaPo, we can pretty much count on a review by art and movie critic Michael O'Sullivan, as O'Sullivan is perhaps the only one in that newspaper that understands that AOM is not just about the artwork that hangs and is presented on the walls, but about the spectacular footprint that it leaves upon the region's art scene and the breath-taking success that it has had over the years in bringing art to the public, and artists to the eyes of collectors and gallerists. Leave it to O'Sullivan's keen eye to spot the potential "new" art star to emerge from this year's AOM.

- The WaPo's freelancer charged with covering DC art galleries is the fair Jessica Dawson, currently a graduate art history student at GWU. If history teaches us anything, it is that Dawson has been pretty regular in covering all the previous AOM's, usually led around by the indefatigable Judy Jashinsky. And so I think that Dawson will once again write about AOM, and probably deliver her standard "what I didn't like" report, mixed in with a couple of lukewarm maybes.

- The Washington City Paper will probably give AOM decent coverage, and I'm sure that we'll see a profile of either the show itself or some of the more colorful characters that inhabit AOM. Art critic Jeffry Cudlin is also an artist, and he participated in the last AOM, but since his name is missing from this year's AOM artists' list, I suspect that Jeffry will review this year's AOM provided that he can arrange his schedule so that he can get his skinny buttocks over to Crystal City (Note to Cudlin: start planning the trip now). As usual, we can expect a brooding, intelligently written review, which (since he was an ex-participant), we hope will explore the impact of AOM on the regional art psyche and public, besides the art on the walls.

- The bloggers I suspect have already made up galvanized minds, and if we liked it before, we'll like it again, and those who hated it before, will most likely hate it again, and already do, even before they set foot in Crystal City. Curious to me is how many of them/us seem to focus on the artwork, and completely miss the true impact of AOM. Also curious to me is how writers who are generally lefty pinkos in almost all they profess, become neoconartcritics when it comes to a massive open show organized by artists, lacking a curatorial Big Brother and essentially a 21st century rebirth of the democratic artistic movement that dethroned the academic art salons of Europe back in the late 1800s.

See ya there!

Styling

Today's WP has a really good piece by Jessica Dawson on the Ledelle Moe's heads installed at the 14th and Church streets NW empty storefront. Dawson writes:

This street-level exhibition is the blessing of a sluggish economy. Metropolis Development Corp., owner of the storefront and the condo building encasing it, awaits a retail tenant for the space. Until then, Moe's installation, certainly one of her most effective to date, serves the Metropolis brand.

A signal of aspiration and good taste, art provides Metropolis -- the firm behind a handful of brand-new, loft-style condominium buildings around the intersection of 14th and P streets NW -- with a strategic dose of cachet. John Grimberg, a consultant to Metropolis and the man who suggested installing art in the storefront, says the impromptu exhibition helps Metropolis remain on the neighborhood radar. Grimberg says the company's aim was "to use the space to create a presence" for the firm's brand. As Grimberg phrased it, showing art is "in keeping with the Metropolis aesthetic."

More than just a review, this piece is more like a really good art column on this installation, the artist and the landlord.

Read the column here.

P.S. to Dawson: What "sluggish economy?" Read the financial section once in a while.

Elsewhere in Style, Lavanya Ramanathan, who likes to use the imperial "we" in writing (and I sorta, kinda like that)... ah, writes:

The sentiment behind all the exhibitions of recent grads' work this summer is not lost on us: Forward-looking, progressive galleries that recognize fresh viewpoints and encourage local artists make up the bedrock of the arts.

But we have to admit, we've been nearly glassy-eyed trying to make sense of the wide range of voices -- and talent -- represented.

From some shows, including Irvine Contemporary's "Introductions 2" (bachelor's and master's grads), we've been able to embrace only a piece or two. Is it that the rest weren't any good? Not at all. It's just that few were able to rise above the yard-sale curation.

Lavanya Ramanathan!

Yard-sale curation! Harsh words to use in describing a show by one of our top area galleries.

At first I was a little shocked at the description (and I haven't seen this show yet, but I will next week), and then I realized that we should applaud Lavanya Ramanathan for using tough, passionate opinion in writing about art instead of the usual wishy-washy art writing that we've all become used to. I do however, also hope that Lavanya Ramanathan will use equally strong positive adjectives and passion when the artwork or show in question deserves it from Lavanya Ramanathan's perspective and opinion.

Lavanya Ramanathan also reviews "15 Minutes" at Project 4 in the column. For a different perspective on "Introductions 2," read Jeffry Cudlin's review in the CP here.

And it is a good thing to see a different WaPo writer writing about our galleries once in a while.

PS #2 - The other current show of students and recent grads, Academy 2006 at Conner Contemporary, also gets pommeled by Kriston Capps in the CP. Read that review here.

Dawson on the Washington Body School

The WaPo's Jessica Dawson comes through with a really good review, in fact one of the better ones that she's ever delivered, of Meg Mitchell and Jeffry Cudlin's Ian and Jan: The Washington Body School at District of Columbia Arts Center.

Read Jessica's review here.

The Mystery of Twittering Machine

As I have been traveling so much lately (and I'm heading off to the Poconos this weekend), I have been trying to catch up with some of the art reviews that the WaPo has done in the last couple of weeks.

And I have noticed an interesting mystery in a recent review.

On Sunday, June 18, 2006, Jessica Dawson reviewed the Paul Klee show at the Phillips Collection.

It always bugs me somewhat when Jessica "uses" the Galleries column to review a museum show that will most likely be reviewed by Gopnik or O'Sullivan anyway - to me she's wasting the precious "Galleries" print space, which I believe its supposed to be focused on galleries, on a museum show.

However, in this review she was writing it for Sunday Arts, I guess subbing in place for the WaPo's Chief Art Critic, who as we all know, only writes about museums, and not galleries.

Read that review here. She writes:

At the Phillips, the Duchampian "Twittering Machine" is on view, as is the anxiously Freudian "Girl With Doll's Pram," where the little girl's breasts are the size of Hindenburgs.

Then, later on I read Michael O'Sullivan's review of the same show, published at few days later on Friday, June 23, 2006. Read O'Sullivan's review here, and he writes:

Oddly enough, one of my favorite paintings, MOMA's "The Twittering Machine," is not on view at the Phillips, although you'll find it in the accompanying catalogue.

Uh?

Is the painting there or not?

And so I call the Phillips, and the nice PR lady tells me that O'Sullivan is right, and that "The Twittering Machine," although published in the catalog, did not make it to the exhibition. And she's cracking up because it was highlighted in the Dawson review, and although published in the catalog, it is not listed in the checklist for the exhibition.

"Did she actually ---," I begin to ask.

"Come to the exhibition?" interrupts the nice Phillips lady, "Yes, she did... and that's what makes the mention of a piece not in the exhibition even odder."

Sigh...

Update: As usual, Bailey is crazy.

Cristin Millett at Arlington Arts Center

Considering that Jessica Dawson wrote that "I regret to report that almost all of the six solo shows filling Arlington Arts Center are underwhelming" when she visited the Arlington Arts Center recently, I wasn't really expecting an artistic epiphany during my recent visit to see Nestor Hernandez's portraits of Cuban-Americans currently on exhibition on the lower level of the center.

Wrong!

The visit to the Arlington Arts Center unexpectedly revealed one of the most memorable art installations that I have ever seen, and even though critics often have different opinions, I am honestly puzzled that Dawson didn't mention the amazing installation in the main floor gallery.

I am referring to Cristin Millett’s astounding solo show at the Center.

Not being familiar with Millett’s work, I asked the Center’s hardworking director Claire Huschle, to tell me a bit about both the artist and the installation. I then stepped back and listened as Claire smartly dissected and explained the installation and commented on it (and then I realized why Jessica missed it completely! -- "listening" being the operative word here).

"She grew in a medical household," explained Huschle, as we walked into the installation. This revelation (I believe) is the key to understanding (and appreciating) Millett's work; forgive my using the critic's crutch and let me describe it for you.

The installation consists of a maze like circular corridor titled "Teatro Anatomico" which uses Andre Levret’s 18th century schematic representations of the female reproductive system at the time of conception.

Millett has reproduced them into chiffon sheets that hang from aluminum tubing that form the maze and deliver a very convincing impression of both a hospital setting and a surgical theater, set-up in uterine forms that lead to a central point.

There’s a certain and strange Victorian parlor elegance to this first part of the installation, and the technical skill is admirable, both in the hand stitching of the lady-like chiffon and the construction of the aluminum tubing.

Millett has realistically constructed a convincing anatomical theatre with a subtle nuance of the female reproductive system (even the Victorian lighting seems like a female vagina when viewed from the outside); we are entering a medical theatre, where anatomy students, erotica voyeurs, and art observers all meld into one.

Inside the maze, a cleverly constructed medical exam table depicts the living digital image of a young woman's body, except its face which is replaced by a living digital plasm.

Titled "Abdominal Mystery: Dissection of the Observer," this is a living, breathing video, where we see the anonymous body breathing, being dissected, wrapped in plastic (I think), explored and manipulated.

Here the voyeur is fascinated, titillated and sometimes repulsed. The Eros of the nude body is coupled with the grossness of the exploration of its insides and the magic of its fragility. The body has become a bridge of sorts between the interior and exterior spaces of architectural entryway provided by the uterine maze: are we entering the theatre, or penetrating it?

The metaphorical relationship can be overwhelmingly sexual, or perhaps an intelligent attempt to place the female body as a comment on its visual power in a Sexual Personae Camille Paglia sort of way?

And therein lies the unexpected success of this piece, which belongs in a museum where it can be admired, explored and discussed: It brings the viewer into a silent interaction with a work of art that employs the most powerful of human icons: our body.

Millett is a young artist on the faculty at Penn State, and if this installation is a sign of things to come, then keep an eye on this promising artist.

And were our museum curators like their counterparts in New York or LA or Seattle or SF, this piece would find a champion (and a home) in one of our area's great museums.

This is my call for Anne Ellegood or Kerry Brougher from the Hirshhorn or Jonathan Binstock from the Corcoran to pay a visit to Arlington and see the newborn that this young brilliant artist has delivered for us.

The exhibition goes through June 10, 2006.

Update: The Washington Post's Express has a little blurb on this review in the Tuesday, May 30, 2006 issue.

The Thursday Reviews

Jessica Dawson has several mini reviews today in the WaPo. Read them here. Still no news from the WaPo as to who will be hired to augment Dawson's twice-a-week reviews. Something new in Jessica's writing (at least new to me):

I also loved Galo Moncayo's installation "So far, I do not know," with its garden of stereo speaker cones arranged faceup like lily pads emitting belches and pops.

At the WCP, Jeffry Cudlin reviews Adam Fowler at Flashpoint.

Blake Gopnik makes a couple of good points about two new local museums while Gopnik's colleage Jessica Dawson reviews Andrew Krieger's 30-year retrospective at the Corcoran Gallery of Art and makes some really good observations.

Both are in today's Washington Post's Sunday Arts section - first time that I recall the Gopnik-Dawson combo.

Since Jessica is now sharing the "Galleries" column with Glenn Dixon, it would be nice to see an occasional review from her or anyone else continue to appear in Sunday Arts to augment Gopnik's museum-only look at our region.

What Dan Zak did

Over the years, decades really, I've been complaining about the way in which the Washington Post treats its own visual arts backyard. If you go back to the very beginnings of this blog, well over a decade ago, you'll find it hard to see a week's worth of postings where I'm not complaining or bitching about something that the WaPo did, or most often didn't do, about our visual arts scene, galleries and artists.

When I first came to the DMV in the late 1980s (1987-1989) it was as a young Lieutenant in the Navy, and in those years I spent most of my summers sailing in the Arctic off the then Soviet mainland at the top of the world, I started reading the WaPo regularly. Back then, the WaPo had a daily section titled The Arts, which covered art galleries, museums, regional visual artists, etc., in addition to all the other genres of the arts.

I left the area for a few years, and lived in Scotland, and then in Sonoma, CA. I returned to the DC area in late 1993, and by then the precipitous decline in the WaPo's coverage of its city's visual art scene was just beginning.

I then began writing about the DMV visual arts scene for a lot of local, regional and national magazines, in the process becoming deeply immersed in the scene itself. In those latter years of the 1990s, the WaPo's Arts Editor was a nice, kind man named John Pancake. I developed a professional relationship with him, and every once in a while we'd meet for coffee and discuss the area's visual arts. It was he who once described deciding to open an art gallery as a "heroic undertaking."

In those years the paper still had multiple columns covering the visual arts, which included the usual Wednesday Galleries column, then authored by Ferdinand Protzman, as well as other ad hoc gallery and museum reviews by Paul Richards. It also included a weekly Wednesday column titled Arts Beat, then authored by Michael O'Sullivan, who as I recall held the title of Assistant Arts Editor. Arts Beat reflected the interests of its author, and essentially augmented the paper's coverage of the DC area visual arts scene.

By the end of the 90s, things began to unravel.

Almost against the will of the WaPo's leadership (as related to me back then by one of the editors of the WaPo Online), the newspaper went on a major expansion of its online presence and also an associated expansion of its printed paper coverage. This included the visual arts, and I was hired, along with Jessica Dawson and others, as freelancers to cover gallery shows for the paper's online site (I wonder where all those reviews are now - have they ever been archived and preserved by the WaPo?).

I can't remember exactly when Richards retired, but his retirement (to Scotland I think) caused all kinds of minor waves for the DC art scene. First, Protzman quit, some say because he was upset that he didn't get "promoted" to Richards' job. Instead, the WaPo began a hiring process and eventually brought Blake Gopnik from his Canadian newspaper to take over as the paper's chief art critic (my titling).

Protzman's departure also brought a need for a regular freelancer to do the Galleries column, and several of those of us who were doing online reviews about Galleries were interviewed. I declined the position once we got deep into it - at the time, as some of you may recall, I was also part of the Fraser Gallery, and didn't think that being a gallery co-owner and a regular Wednesday critic for the paper would pass the smell test with some; but the real victims would be the gallery's artists, as clearly they could never get at WaPo reviews.

Around 2000, Dawson (who had been writing art reviews for the Washington City Paper) was then hired as the freelancer to cover galleries and subsequently Gopnik was hired to cover all the visual arts. 

A few years later Pancake retired, and by the mid 2000s the Wednesday coverage shrunk significantly when Arts Beat was demoted to a twice-monthly column, refocused to cover all the arts, and then eventually terminated. Most of the damage to the visual arts coverage was started by then Style Section editor Eugene Robinson.

It was Robinson who began the process to let Blake Gopnik get away with only reviewing (with one or two very rare exceptions) museums, thus having the nation's only art critic too good to review his city's artists and art galleries. On July 6, 2006, Steve Reiss (the Style section's Asst. Editor) stated online: "As for Blake Gopnik, he is a prolific writer and I find it hard to argue that we should be giving up reviews of major museum shows so he can write more about galleries that have a much smaller audience."

When Robinson left, under the new editor Deborah Heard, the coverage got even worse, with Galleries being reduced to twice a month. That added up to around 25 columns a year to review the thousand or so gallery shows that the DC area gallery art scene had to offer in those days.

A few years ago, when Dawson quit the WaPo (2011) to go to work for the Hirshhorn and in the interim, the WaPo experimented with using a couple more freelancers, but both experiments ended badly from both sides. Eventually they hired Mark Jenkins, who is their current Galleries critic, and who (in my opinion) is the best from all the names mentioned here so far.

What is a constant over all these years and memories, is the miserly coverage of DMV artists and galleries by the world's second most influential newspaper.

And then this past weekend, WaPo writer Dan Zak showed us a brilliant glint of what this coverage could be, if the WaPo "got it."

Zak's The Polaroids of the Cowboy Poet is perhaps the best article that I have ever read on an artist.

Chris Earnshaw is an odd and brilliant and sloppy man who vibrates with great joy and grand melancholy. For decades he has ambled through bandstands, major motion pictures and demolition sites, searching for prestige and permanence, all while being ignored on the gray streets of a humdrum capital.

This work has Pulitzer written all over it, but more importantly, this article is exactly the sort of coverage of the DMV visual artists and galleries, that we've always clamored from the WaPo to do 2-3 times a year - as they do when some celebrity visits the city.

Dan Zak: Well Done! You've not only delivered a brilliant article, but also shown the WaPo and Washington, DC, and the DMV visual arts scene, how it is done.

While I was gone

And nu, I am back from Sedona after an unexpected one day stop at Phoenix courtesy of US Airways.

I have tons of interesting stuff to discuss and report, but first I'd like to make sure that no one misses on the good stuff that happened while I was gone and playing hooky on blogging duties.

DCist Exposed opened at the Warehouse Gallery and it appears that Heather not only did a great effing job, but all of us in the rarified atmosphere of the fine arts arena may have seen the shape of things to come. From the volume of emails that I have received about this show, the opening was a spectacular success and has once again proven the power of the web. I add my vote to those hoping that DCist does this again and maybe even expand the concept, say to my idea about videos and DC, or painting, or sculpture. Bravo to DCist and Heather Goss! Go see this show and buy some really good affordable photography.

One of DC's best-known artists (with hundreds of Indie films about him) Tim Tate opened at Fraser Gallery [formerly co-owned by blah, blah, blah], sold a ton of stuff and had a cool article about the show at the Washington City Paper and a nice mention in the WaPo. Which brings me to the question: This is Tate's fourth solo show in DC and still he has never, ever been reviewed by the sole WaPo art critic charged with reviewing DC area art galleries. Why is GWU art history student Jessica Dawson ignoring Tim Tate? Who knows? Is the fourth time a charm? Maybe Jessica will now take the Metro to Bethesda and offer her thoughts on the artist bringing glass to the 21st century like Stieglitz brought photography to art. Go see this show and this may be the last chance for budget-minded collectors to acquire an original piece at very, very reasonable prices by this artist - news to follow!

My good friend Staff Sgt. Capps has a really good update on the hot issue of the Randall School, the Corcoran and the artists who have studios there. Read Capps' piece here and artist Karen Joan Topping's issues here and also artist Ellyn Weiss issues here.

Artomatic is one of the United States of America's premier visual art events, especially for emerging artists and beginning art collectors. It is usually denigrated by repressive art neocons and traditional art writers stuck on the mental payroll of an elitist artworld itself stuck on the shift gear of booshwah museum curators, symbiotic writers and critics, and a handful of NYC art dealers, all so far removed from 9to5 jobs and glued to oversized glossy magazines and books, that they (we) have failed to realize and actualize on the beauty and raw power and energy of the common human and their visual art creations. If you live anywhere near the DC area and want to know what being an artist, feeling like an artist and rejoicing in the spectacular sensuality and power delivered by being able to create and showcase art, then make sure that you become part of (as a participant, volunteer or visitor) Artomatic. And don't let the Hamelin-pied-piper minded neoconcritics scare you away from Art-O-Matic; I can fill pages of this blog with the success stories of artists who first surfaced through this most plebian and democratic of art events, including the top three new DC area 3D artists (artists that these same critics now (probably) wish they had acquired back in those seminal AOM exhibits). Who will be the new star of this coming AOM?