Damien Cave has written a profile about me in the New York Times today that talks about my position within the art world heirarchy. Personally, I find the article fascinating in that it takes a relatively uncommon perspective by looking at the art world from the lower rungs. This isn’t a qualitative judgement about my position or the galleries that represent me. It’s just an observation of fact that our positions are all relative to the powerful, blue chip galleries that dominant New York, Los Angeles, and Art Basel Miami Beach. I do want to qualify my characterization of Mr. Deitch by saying take a look at his gallery website ; I’m listening to the music and looking at ice cream cones right now. I was trying to make an analogy about the way he markets his artists with a whimsy that masks an aggressive business practice. The many gallery directors working for Mr. Deitch are responsible for promoting and marketing each of the artists. Mr. Deitch puts up an enticing, cheery front for the sometimes ruthless business of dealing art. Unfortunately, I have no idea if Mr. Deitch was presented with my quote or the context for it, and hats off to Mr. Deitch for taking the high road if he was aware of my sensational and satirical comment about one perception of his identity as a major dealer in the art world. At least Mr. Deitch responded on record for Mr. Cave’s article, which apparently many others were unwilling to do. Perhaps Mr. Deitch also recognizes that press is press.
Success, then, is all relative within the art world and I recognize that I am not working outside of the system, but from within the system and with galleries who’ve taken considerable risks exhibiting my work. What Cave’s article does for me is validate their early support and belief in my work. I’ve been slowly building an exhibition record largely on the support of art dealers beginning with Leah Stuhltrager and Cris Dam at Dam Stuhltrager who gave me my first exhibition opportunities. My affiliation with them led to an opportunity to show with Platform Gallery run by Stephen Lyons in Seattle that lead to two solo exhibitions and group exhibitions including The There currently on view at the gallery. Showing with Dam Stuhltrager and Platform helped me develop a relationship with Schroeder Romero Gallery run by Lisa Schroeder and Sara Jo Romero. The gallery is currently forming a new partnership with Sienese Shredder and will be opening up in a new space this spring with a new model for showing contemporary and historical work. Most recently, I’ve begun showing with Charlie James Gallery in Los Angeles, and my current show No One Here Gets Out Alive has gotten strong reviews in the LA Times (along with comments that strongly disagree), Artforum.com , as well blogs like Artwhirled.
These galleries as well the secondary fairs including Aqua and Pulse have helped bring my work to a broader audience, even though that work may be critical of the commercialization of art, the emphasis on celebrity and stardom, and the stratification of the art world. When I say that there are a lot of contradictions, I mean it. The gallery system and the attendant art fairs remain the primary model for exhibiting and selling work. The thing that should be clear is that there are a lot of artists and galleries out there struggling to survive and even grow during the recession and many have not. It’s humbling to be the focus of Mr. Cave’s article and it is because of the work I’ve shown. Mr. Cave saw a print at Aqua Art Miami last year called “Market Crash” (see above) that caught his attention about the potential dangers of an art market bubble. If it seems unusual for the Times to look at Art Basel Miami Beach from the outside looking in, it’s because it is. I guess I’m writing this post to explain that it’s taken a long time to reach a point of recognition, Times article or no Times article. Contrary to Mr. Deitch’s sentiments, there may be a real difference between slowly building a reputation from the ground up than being vaulted into the spotlight. It’s the difference between being an art comet, blazing in and out of the art world, versus climbing slowly up the rungs of the system towards broad recognition. My recent interview with David Goodman for BOMB Magazine gets into more of my background and motivation for making art as we discuss the hierarchy of the art world. I can’t please everyone, and I’ve really pissed some people off in the process, but it should be a challenge for every artist to claim a unique space within the art world whatever their genre despite the influence of the market. Michael Kaiser has a great article about how money and market forces can actually slultify the arts by hindering risk-taking and growth. Read it, and then go make some art. I’m going to continue working on the Hooverville drawing with artist Jade Townsend, which we hope to exhibit this spring.
Many thanks to everyone who has reached out in support through the social web and apologies to everyone who thinks it’s a bunch of nonsense. I’m sure you’ll let me know as much, but we are all in contention in this system. The difference between criticism and sour grapes is a short step. I understand it intimately. As my friend Jeff Parker put it “Congrats, bro. Nice depiction of the artist as an angry middle-aged fuck.”
My first solo show with Charlie James Gallery has been getting some amazing press over the last week, starting with Leah Ollman’s excellent review in the LA Times. Her analysis of the narrative structure of my work is what really stands out for me as the ‘maker’ of the show. She draws clear distinctions between the narrator, the character, and my role as an artist with different agendas and different voices.
Also, Catherine Taft just published another sharp and insightful review of the show on Artforum.com. She notes the importance of looking at the site-specific nature of the work. The common thread, though, between both reviews and the current controversy surrounding my New Museum drawing is social satire. Both writers refer to Honore Daumier whose cartoons piqued French society. As the New Museum controversy rages on, Jeffery Deitch recently waded in to defend Dakis, people are responding not only to the ethical issues, but how vast the divide between the wealthy elite of the art world and the rest of it. While the Daumier reference is apt for my work and position, it is also unnerving that the economic and class divisions also parallel pre-revolutionary France. James Wagner half-jokingly said the same thing in a recent blog post.
Class divisions and wealth in the art world became more of a focus in my work as the market ballooned from 2002 until 2007. In 2006, when I took my first trip to Miami for Basel and the satellite fairs, the atmosphere was one of congratulatory celebration; ‘witness our collective brilliance and the triumph of Capitalism’. Very few people I interviewed that weekend for a long-neglected performance were critical of the wealth and power associated with contemporary art that transformed Miami. The economy appeared stable and few people had reason to raise any complaints. That was before the Dow nearly halved itself and unemployment rose about 10%.
Now, when Mira Rubell is photographed licking a chocolate Jeff Koons' Rabbit during the ‘feast’ for Performa 09, the decadence looks ugly and the mega rich completely out of touch. While I have been addressing the discrepancy between the egalitarian promise of the art world and the elite circle of wealth that supports it in my work, I think the division is far more clear now at the end of 2009. That clarity has brought some unwelcome attention for the wealthiest and most powerful figures in the art world, which they have little control over. Unfortunately for the Rubells and the Joannous there are many more people on the outside than the inside of the art world. Fortunately for me and the broader art world is that the establishment may be rigidly ordered, but it is not monolithic. There are people on the inside who have a self-awareness of their positions of power and do not engage in vulgar displays of that privilege. Some of them also recognize my critique and quietly tell me “You just say what we’re all thinking.” Clearly not all, but hopefully enough who recognize that it’s not 2006 and your wealth looks a little obscene.
The recent New York Times articles about the New Museum have helped
publicize the issues that James Wagner blogged about six weeks ago at
jameswagner.com. A few weeks after his initial
post the editorial staff at the Brooklyn Rail emailed me after
they saw it. Having read it myself earlier and twittering about the
absurdity of it all I was pleased to see the Rail responding to the
post as well. When I got back from LA I met with James and Barry and
we had a great discussion about the ethical issues and the changing
direction of the museum. I interviewed Tyler Green and Paddy Johnson
so I understood their positions and concerns.
With consideration to their critical voices I made my drawing as
sensational and outrageous as I could because that’s how it appeared
considering the museum’s history and commitment to a non-mainstream
program. What the Times seems to have overlooked amid the reporting is
James' early, provocative, and justified criticism. I feel he really
started this critical inquiry from a passionate concern over the
overtly commercial transformation of yet another alternative
non-profit space. This trend doesn’t bode well for unknown and
emerging artists without representation, especially as the gallery
system contracts.
While the interest in my particular take on the imaginary museum
series has been strong I want to make sure that it’s known that this
drawing was a collaboration with the support of people who don’t just
accept the status quo. Particularly James, Barry, Tyler, Paddy, Phong
Bui, and the Brooklyn Rail. [Note: I will be meeting with the Rail editorial staff next week to discuss an ongoing series of editorial cartoons for the Rail. Maybe I could call them the imaginary drawing series.]
William
William Powhida
www.williampowhida.com
Who is ‘William Powhida’? Check out the trailer for the Hollywood film. Unfortunately, due to major financing problems the film has been delayed indefinitely. Username and password for access is powhida. The trailer is currently on view at Charlie James Gallery in Los Angeles.
Update: A friend brought it to my attention after some confusion that there are indeed three different covers for the November issue of the Brooklyn Rail. I spoke with Phong Bui, the publisher of the Rail, who told me he wanted to promote other artists featured in the issue and do something different with the publication. The issue was divided into thirds, and I believe my drawing about the New Museum can only be found on the cover of the 7,000 issues printed. They are currently available in Williamsburg, Brooklyn at Spoonbill & Sugartown as well as other locations on Bedford Avenue. It is also available elsewhere and I will see if I can get a list from Phong where those are. The fact that there are different covers came as something of surprise to me and with such a politically sensitive issue I think it may appear that the Rail may have hedged in their commitment to the cover. I’d prefer to think after knowing Phong for many years that he felt obligated to run the other potential covers as well, since my drawing was delivered two days before the current issue was finished and ready to be sent to press.
The fact is the drawing was originally slated to be an editorial cartoon in the spirit of Ad Reinhardt. For Phong to make the decision to use the image on the cover at all attests to the Rail’s commitment to critical perspectives on art.
High-Resolution
