The premise is simple. Take an artist, any artist, who is embraced and celebrated by curators but often snubbed by:
- self appointed art critics, usually conservative in taste
- people who enjoy saying 'I could have done that' in museums
- people who enjoy using the word 'overrated'
- the type of art student who thinks their favorite tattoo artist is better than Rothko
- and sometimes me before I realize the error of my ways and come to Jesus, etc.
Then I explain why this artist is worth looking at (in 800 words or less.)
The website has multiple formatting errors and keeps turning my em dashes to hyphens. I nagged them to fix it, but you can only nag so many times before giving up.
"Pollock is a hack, my dad used to say, before he saw one in person at The Art Institute of Chicago: 'Greyed Rainbow,' 1953."
"I have no proof he buried time capsules as a child, but I believe it."
"Several years before I visited the Whitney, I read an article in Time Magazine on civilian and military drones. Its author compared the “humble” Roomba to a drone, and argued robotics would inevitably lead to the air, where machines move freely. Some have blamed Calder’s mobiles for steering art away from engineering; his sculptures depended on motors before he hung and set them at the mercy of air currents and human intervention. But the future vindicated what Calder saw back in 1930."