Reviews of the Everson Biennial
REVIEWS OF EVERSON BIENNIAL
They are not posted online, but we have copies here in the gallery. Here's a brief overview of the articles from The Post-Standard:
1. Katherine Rushworth reviewed the Everson Biennial by interviewing Jeremy Bailey, who won best in show, on Sunday June 18, 2006.
2. Katherine Rushworth reviewed the Salon de Refuses on Sunday, June 25, 2006 with the title, "Second Chance, Work in 'Salon des Refuses' brings 'Biennial' unevenness to light"
After reviewing the history of the Salon de Refuses, Katherine writes, "Biennial selection poor / I'll say it upfront. I'm not particularly fond of this year's rendition of the 'Everson Biennial.' / Juror Claire Schneider, associate curator of contemporary art at the Albright Knox Art Gallery in Buffalo, should have taken a couple of additional passes through the slides before she made her final decision as to what works made the cut. / As a result, clutter reigns; too many works of art fill the two main galleries. Why choose three to six pieces by an artist when one or two would have done the job just fine and space is definitely a factor? / The show is uneven; shallow, or poorly executed works hang around the corner from solid conceptual and technically sound pieces. The drawing and painting category is expecially weak with several pieces glaringly out of place. / I found some of the work to be derivative rather than insightful, trendy versus enduring. / Good works of art linger with you after you've experienced them like a good meal. I left the Everson Biennial hungry for something substantial. / Finally, the deep, aquamarine blue covering the main wall in the Coyne Gallery detracted from rather than enhanced the works of art. Vivid color photographs and pastel drawings fought for their visual lives agains the over-powering color. / So how did the works in the 'Salon des Refuses' compare to those in the 'Everson Biennial?' There were two or three pieces in the former show that could have held their own amongst those in the latter. / However, there were many more pieces included in the 'Everson Biennial' that would have been more at home beside those in the 'Salon des Refuses.'"
3. On Thursday, July 6, 2006 under the headline "Everson show is not a reflection of region," Victoria Romanoff of Ithaca writes:
"To the Editor: / Kudos to Katherine Rushworth, contributing art editor, for writing it like it is. The Biennial Show is abysmal! The emperor has no clothes on, while strutting around arrogantly on the second floor of the Everson Museum. / No criteria (that's evident) were used to select this exhibition, and the quiet and empty museum should alarm the board of directors. / That is not to say we should all start painting damp dog noses or pansies in bisque baskets. But pseudo-post-Dada art does not represent the varied and interesting work currently being created in the Finger Lakes area."
4. On Thursday, July 7, 2006 under the headline "Different juror may have chosen Victoria's work," Sandra Trop, the director of the Everson Museum of Art writes:
"To the Editor: / I'm sure Victoria from Ithaca didn't mean to disparage all of the artists in the Biennial exhibition at the Everson. Of the 231 artists who entered, Judge Claire Schneider, associate curator of contemporary art at the Albright Knox, selected this exhibit. Every judge selects a different show. / I'm sorry Victoria didn't get selected. A different juror might have chosen her work. The Salon Des refuses exhibits pieces not at the Everson. / No need to criticize the Everson, nor the Biennial. Please come and visit the Everson when it is crowded or when it is quiet. It is worth the trip and it is free."
Additionally, the New Times published an excellent review by Carl Mellor, which can be read here:
5. http://newtimes.rway.com/2006/070506/art.shtml
Comments? I love the debate. This is the most print I've seen about one show in quite awhile.
-Courtney Rile, Delavan Art Gallery
posted by Delavan Art Gallery @ 7/13/2006
3 comments
3 Comments:
it's good to see Katherine finally getting out to actually see the art! I was worried for a while she may have been ill. Or something. It's clear the Everson is trying to do SOMETHING. that should be applauded. however, the last show (dubbed Overstock-dot-yuk)does seem to make one wonder if indeed the emperor is naked. there is a difference between making one's point in a conceptual way, and fine art. or fine craft, as it may be. there are those who are of the mindset that if one calls oneself an "artist," then any work produced by their hand is, indeed, art. I beg to differ on that point, and the so-called "Overstock" show makes my point quite clearly for me. I'm not certain by which standard, if any, the Everson is judging this, or any other featured shows/artists, but they should take a very very hard look at what they are presenting as "art" and perhaps rethink the idea of a gallery within a museum. with the exception of schoolchildren and fundraisers for worthy medical causes, it does indeed seem to be a large, empty building. more's the shame.
In response to Anonymous:
I would first like to respond to the statement that "I'm not certain by which standard, if any, the Everson is judging this." The Everson actually was NOT judging the biennial show, as you may know. The show was curated by Claire Schneider, curator of contemporary art from the Albright-Knox Museum in Buffalo. It was not the decision of the Everson to put certain pieces in the show over others, nor was it the Everson's choice as to how many pieces were shown.
Anonymous also writes that "there is a difference between making one's point in a conceptual way, and fine art. or fine craft, as it may be". While I'll agree that the conceptual and technique components of artmaking are quite different (though the two must support each other in a successful piece), I am unclear whether Anonymous thinks that the work in the show is lacking in the technical or conceptual components. But I will say that I was gald for the opportunity to at least consider for myself what Miss Schnieder chose to present as good art.
Finally, in light of what I have just said, I don't think it is appropriate to refer to the show as "Overstock" (and I would like to know who exactly has dubbed the show "Overstock-dot-yuk"... I have been paying close attention to this issue and have not heard anyone use that term.)
Courtney,
This is Raquel (the fashion writer). Nice little blog you have here. I actually finally made it down to the Everson Biennial today and plan on writing in my own blog about it. I will say though that one thing that struck me about the exhibit was how much I (generally) disliked the artists' comments on their work and on what they think beauty is. I like the idea of art being subjective and of beauty being subjective, and their telling us what we're supposed to get out of their art seemed to directly conflict with what they were trying to say about beauty, how it can't be defined or it isn't just one thing etc. It was distracting having their comments next to the artwork too, I felt like it distracted me from really experiencing the art. But I still enjoyed the show.
I was pretty impressed by the permanent collection too -- a Pollock, Warhol, De Kooning and Basquiat! Very cool.
Post a Comment
<< Home