[Мунк]

Сообщение от Vladimir

Event frankly export, but then what can and will bring. They brought the same to us when something from another show Mukhina's sculpture.

I do not even pretend to see the objects themselves, would at least look at the film.

Сообщение от Vladimir

No nagging could not have done But, honestly, not malice.

Of course, not malice. Can see that you're more for their cause. And all that I am responsible, too, believe me, not to refute you, well - look at some other point of view, the opinion of another party (if I may so call themselves) vysheupamyanutogo triangle.
 

Сообщение от Vladimir

noted that even an interview artists today have become a rarity? Why would it?

Сообщение от Vladimir

As a result, instead of pure product mix, we obtain: instead of waiting for us steak burger (may not be bad), in which what is not only a mixture. And how it left the meat and some of the cooks rasstaralsya stronger? With whose version in the end the audience is concerned?

I noticed that the interview appear in the events regularly. I read them, or ArtChronika, or Gif.ru or Openspace.ru. The last - interview ArtChronika in Batynkov, Pepperstein, Zvezdochetova, with all participants crown. Biennale. Of these, I often see that the artists themselves prefer that interpretation did art critics and art historians, openly moving away from explanations of meanings. Here even judging by this interview Molodkina. He spoke mainly about the formal methods ( "negative" sculpture, "projection"). And the meaning is extracted Tupitsin, raising parallels with Rothko, and Chaim Soutine, and with Jeff Koons, and even with Adorno. Ie they are trying, I think, to ennoble politically sensitive works Molodkina, because he gives a unique interpretation - a political one. Ie as if to disguise his candid konyukturnost cultural meaning. No one noticed? Is it from this, we lose? And he does not refute Molodkin Tupitsina not send them to hell with their associations. He likes what they say. Of course, we can all their cultural explanations aside and say: "The artist Molodkin operates solely political theme, and it belongs (or is creating) emerged in the contemporary art trend aesthetization policy. And this is likely to be true, but their interpretation of "deepening", forcing the viewer to move convolutions. Also bad.

Сообщение от Vladimir

A little artists themselves complicated things pokommentirovat? What we have them all to a man removed from the madding crowd? All in constant search for meaning? Unlike. Previously, once the innovators did not hesitate to take up the pen: and explained and monographs published.

Perhaps the time for writing monographs for these artists have not yet come. Nonconformists 60's, 70's began to write a monograph in the 90's and zero, except Kabakov. And artists from the 90's now boldly wrote Osmolovsky. More I did not remember.

Сообщение от Vladimir

For a pernicious division of labor: the subject put the curators, the works funded by industry groups, noses mop PR, explaining that generates criticism.

This life How else ...

Сообщение от Vladimir

Fresh interviews with Molodkin in Art Chronicle: http://artchronika.ru/item.asp?id=1640

Read with great interest the interview. I am sorry that we did not show his projects. I do molodkinskogo in Moscow has not seen. He says - export an artist? Or have I missed something? Inform forumistam interested in the actual art, that on July 8 in the Garage will be a lecture by Alexander Panov "political as an aesthetic category." It may be interesting, given that it is now superaktualno.