{"id":20752,"date":"2014-03-13T14:01:13","date_gmt":"2014-03-13T19:01:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/?p=20752"},"modified":"2014-03-18T13:52:11","modified_gmt":"2014-03-18T18:52:11","slug":"the-brucennial-opening-pix","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/the-bomb\/2014\/03\/13\/the-brucennial-opening-pix\/","title":{"rendered":"~THE BRUCENNIAL – ‘GIRLS ONLY’ !!"},"content":{"rendered":"

like I said about the whole FAIR WEEKEND in general,
\ntoo many MARNIES, not enough . . LENAS !!<\/p>\n

though there were a few good live wires, for sure.<\/p>\n

THE LAST BRUCENNIAL – ‘GIRLS ONLY’<\/a>
\nit’s still up, runs: MARCH 7 – APRIL 4, 2014
\n837 WASHINGTON ST – MEATPACKING DISTRICT, NYC – HRS: WED-SUN \/ 12-6 PM<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nsay what about . . . MOTHER’S MILK ?
\nartwork by . . RAQUEL NAVE \/ BRUCENNIAL 2014.
\ngirrrrls !! the mother of us . . all !!<\/p>\n

I started off writing this, first by tracking the web – to see if I was right about the WHITNEY BIENNIAL. check. <\/p>\n

I had called it as lousy, way before it happened – just from the Whitney press \/ advance curator line-up & kinda stalking their ‘accomplishments’ online. when it’s piles of crap, oops I mean text – and no strong images, not one spark, not one live wire in sight, you know right away – it’s a lost cause. in a city that has kids like 15 WARREN ST<\/strong> throw up a cutting edge group show, high on the talent, coming straight down on issues, and with a super exciting & dynamic presentation, all done with NO budget, a ‘found’ venue, and only 3 weeks to get it altogether, sorry this is just NOT acceptable.<\/p>\n

you don’t have to take my word for it,
\ncheck out: “WHITNEY BIENNIAL DISAPPOINTS . . .” – ANDREW RUSSETH, THE GALLERIST !!<\/a><\/p>\n

he did make an interesting observation:
\n“In a sense, though it feels like an honest description of today’s art world, which is deeply riven, between money and the museum, pop culture and the underground<\/strong>, and marked by competing visions. The Biennial captures – or is perhaps just caught up in – this fraught, tense moment, but it is unable to make anything fruitful out if it”.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nWAVERLY MADEL \/ BRUCENNIAL 2014.<\/p>\n

of course being ALL WOMEN, doesn’t mean . . the wars stop !!
\npersonally I think they just heat up – and get more vicious.
\ncontrary to this image which states: all men fight, all women embrace. (?)
\no.k. maybe they are . . arm wresting ?
\nbut it does let the genie out of the box, and really it stood out for me, for it’s pure visual graphic and strength of imagery vs 3\/4 of what was . . some very bad art, some very, very wishy-washy stuff. just look at the rest of the stuff in the photo. ugh.
\nand, jeez – down with ‘re-invigorating’ abstract art – already !!<\/p>\n

well, anyway . .
\nafter reading that Gallerist take on the BIENNIAL, I noticed MICHAEL H. MILLER, also of the Gallerist – had penned a lyrical, even POETIC low-down on the BRUCENNIAL, titled: ‘LADIES NIGHT’ – !!
\nI had to laugh because almost word for word he had captured my issues, and where we diverged . . it was like a perfect mirror image !! I mean it was such a huge offering, the show – with hundreds of art works, and yet our top ten list matched up . . like MAGIC !!
\nthough at some point, he veered more mid-level blue chip, which I found succinctly BANAL. whereas I being more of a hardcore ‘scout’ dog . . veered more solid underground – maybe that’s to be expected. but my thinking is: give me an A or give me underground, and skip the mediocre.
\nas in . . CAROL BOVE – Peacock feathers ? give me break, so done with that, and years ago.<\/p>\n

but, the shared conclusion is clear.
\nno, the masses do not<\/strong> rule. and the art zone is a pretty harsh place .. itself !!
\na real . . cutting floor !!
\nif, you don’t like the heat – for sure, stay out of the art kitchen.
\nlike I said, live wires are hard to come by, but in a roomful of wishy-washy wannabes – they sure stand out . . “GIRLS” !!<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\n‘DUSTY’ YELLIN, or was that . . ‘DOLLY’ YELLIN ?!!!
\nno mistaking DUSTIN YELLIN . . as a gender ‘interloper’ \/ BRUCENNIAL 2014.<\/p>\n

MICHAEL MILLER started his post . . with this statement:
\n“an email leaked last night from a ‘BRUCE INSIDER’ said that several men had snuck into the show using fake names.’ – !!
\ncheck !!<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\ncould this be another gender ‘interloper’ ?
\nthe name card attributes the work to: RUIZ, ESTHER.
\ncould that be RUIZ – as in . . . RUSE ?<\/p>\n

we both ALSO agree that the BHQF\/BRUCE HIGH QUALITY FOUNDATION can’t be taken so ‘seriously’, meaning, they joke around !! so . . serious, schmerious \/ enough already with the art world !!
\ncritics & collectors alike, enter at your peril.
\n‘RAQUEL NAVE’, I just don’t know, if I believe that, either.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nESTHER RUIZ ?
\ndamn if I didn’t stop flat in my tracks for this piece. so hard, so hardcore, so with . . LIGHT !!
\nthe way a woman could be . . with child.
\nsuccinct, contained, brief and yet . . completely open to worlds of speculation . . and poetry.
\nI wanted to pick this up and walk away with it. like a futuristic suitcase under my arm.
\nstrike me dead, if I am wrong, but this so <\/strong>looks like a BHQF ‘founder’ . . artwork.
\nif not, then I’m awarding it best ANDROGYNOUS piece in the show, and my sincere apologies, Esther – whoever you are !! <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nBAD ART . .
\nMICHAEL MILLER continues:
\n“if one thing doesn’t catch your eye, move your head a few inches in any direction and something else will.”<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nMORE BAD ART . .
\nMICHAEL MILLER:
\n“I cower in the face of the volume of work here, and the quality of a lot of it, and am left with only a . . LIST OF SOME THINGS I SAW THAT I LIKED.”
\nlikewise.<\/p>\n

at the top of his list, and mine:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\n1. ANTONIA MARCH’S . . ‘Toilet Bowl’ with the seat removed and the words ‘GIRLS ONLY’ written on the side.
\ncheck !! so hard-surfaced and so . . hard-core.
\nso right on. think about it. does girls’ art belong in the can ?
\ndoes basing a show solely on gender . . belong in the can ?
\ndoes this amount to a true representation across the board, NO.
\ndo democratic art shows belong in the can \/ is the ‘toilet’ – the missing curatorial vision ?<\/p>\n

how about just jail ‘bait’ for the many so-called critics in this town – whose writings veer heavy on the art historical associations, with little else in the way of creative or truly ‘evaluative’ musing ?<\/p>\n

plus such a nice hard ‘foil’ to all the ‘re-invigorated’ abstract art, and wishy washy girly stuff.
\nit was like bumping into a wall, in a roomful of creative ‘haze’.
\nthe rough black script – was good too.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\n2. MICHAEL MILLER also liked:
\nDANIELLE HO’s “wispy” portraits of PHILLIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN.
\nhard to believe, I know, but the art world is NOT that self-involved that it doesn’t take note of the tragedy of dead ‘poets’, missing airplanes, and, are we, or are we not – at war ?
\nBANKSY goes one-on-one with SYRIA – in TIMES SQ today \/ google it.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nDANIELLE HO \/ BRUCENNIAL 2014.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nDANIELLE HO \/ BRUCENNIAL 2014.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nRAQUEL NAVE \/ BRUCENNIAL \/ 2014.
\nMICHAEL MILLER liked . .
\n3. “VITO SCHNABEL, the BHQF’s dealer canoodling with HEIDI KLUM”.
\ndamn dude, don’t you<\/strong> have a cellphone – I mean just cause you are a writer doesn’t mean you can’t catch a photo every now and then, the line between writer and paparazzi isn’t really all that wide.
\nit’s called: OBSERVATION 101 !!<\/p>\n

well anyway, I’m sure Michael Miller did NOT pull a CHARLIE FINCH, and yell out at the top of his lungs, VITO LOVES THAT MOTHER’S MILK !!
\nwe are both likin’ it – but I would have grabbed a photo.
\nand come on, this is the stuff of what . . makes the world turn.<\/p>\n

though speaking of which. and CHARLIE FINCH.
\nOMG do we really need another artinfo \/ gungho high school version . . re-spilling the aggregate press releases ?
\ndumbing down . . the art. and the scene.
\ndamn, artnet news. if it’s not the death of artnet – as we knew it.
\nand, the PATRICK McMULLAN photos ? yours to love, losers !! <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\n4. MICHAEL MILLER liked:
\n“A photograph of a JENNY HOLZER installation that featured these words projected on the side of a building: ‘To acquire a political meaning you don’t even have to be human. Raw material will do, or protein feed, or crude oil.’ ”<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nI mean, sometimes a picture . . is WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS !! <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\n5. MICHAEL MILLER liked:
\n“A wood sculpture by Z. BEHL of an antelope skeleton, into whose rib cage a naked man<\/strong> stepped. he waited there for most of the opening, silently standing as if in the frame of a guillotine and ready to accept any jeers from the crowd.’<\/p>\n

well, not an hour or so, into the opening, it was a CHICK<\/strong> inside the antelope. photos don’t lie. the big diff ?
\nthe boy was hairy, and the chick was . . buff.
\nbut, that ‘guy’ to ‘girl’ transformation – wasn’t the only thing that changed – with the night !! <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\noh oh check that out . . your typical ‘GALLERISTA’ with a PRICE LIST, at right !! <\/p>\n

6. rolling in at number 6 – on the MICHAEL MILLER liked list:
\nhe ended his post, thus:
\n“A European man who asked me, ‘Is there a price list?'”
\nhe thought it was pretty<\/strong> damn droll that a man had approached him to inquire after the . . ‘price list’.
\nit was a one-liner that we all got !! <\/p>\n

no matter how you defined it.
\n1. how could you ask, of course there is a price list.
\n2. well, who expects a group that stands for such playful ‘subversiveness’ – to have a price list.
\n(we do !!)
\nor,
\n3. more likely scenario:
\nthey never ever get it together to have one ready, and printed out – by opening time. <\/p>\n

a very par-for-the-course kind of thing for big \/ amateur type \/ ad hoc art shows of this nature, and a big headache, a boatload of ‘grief’ for all writers . . who then find it impossible to correctly attribute & describe the work.<\/p>\n

NOT !!
\nand, I thought my<\/strong> price list experience was pretty<\/strong> funny too.
\nfor an ‘alternative’ show.
\nI had<\/strong> a gallerista, on the VITO SCHNABEL staff, yes I asked . . .
\napproach me, and inquire upon seeing how intently I was viewing the work . .
\n“if I’d like to see .. the price list ?”
\nPrice list. priceless.<\/p>\n

normally I would not document the ‘staff’, but damn if I didn’t catch her in the ambiance.
\nso, o.k. I didn’t catch VITO and HEIDI, but I caught the . . ‘PRICE LIST’ !!<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\nJUDY CHICAGO PLATE \/ BRUCENNIAL 2014
\nI hated all that in your-face-explicit porn feminist stuff. all of it.
\nMr. Miller admired quite a few of it, in fact all of it.
\nstuck on the floor, stuck on the wall.
\nthis archival Chicago piece was as close to va jay jays – as I wanted to get !!
\nso we differed there.
\non that, we – parted ways.<\/p>\n

read: ‘Ladies Night’ . . MICHAEL MILLER \/ GALLERIST<\/a><\/p>\n

it was a fun opening, MORE PIX TO FOLLOW !!<\/p>\n

PHOTOS: NANCY SMITH<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

like I said about the whole FAIR WEEKEND in general, too many MARNIES, not enough . . LENAS !! though there were a few good live wires, for sure. THE LAST BRUCENNIAL – ‘GIRLS ONLY’ it’s still up, runs: MARCH 7 – APRIL 4, 2014 837 WASHINGTON ST – MEATPACKING DISTRICT, NYC – HRS: WED-SUN […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20752"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20752"}],"version-history":[{"count":56,"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20752\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20755,"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20752\/revisions\/20755"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20752"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20752"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artloversnewyork.com\/zine\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20752"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}