evening thrills

The catalyst for our downtown adventure last night was an art reception.
Because we could not afford the parking garage we parked east, far east.
I knew the Padre’s where not playing, but the stadium was all lit up. As we walked west we noticed the gate to go through the ballpark was open. As we walked through we could see a game going on, with people only seated in the lower level behind home plate and a little to 1st and 3rd base. How bizarre it was to see the entire stadium fully lit, with mostly empty seats.

Later we found out it was high school teams playing. What a waste of energy, but what a thrill for them.
As we left the reception we decided to check out the new foot bridge at night.

What a thrill for us.


todays history lesson

Just read another article on the exhibit “Art In The Streets”, a historical survey of street art, now on at MOCA.

My favorite comment from all the posts I’ve read thus far is: As someone from the gallery world, 
Deitch’s job experience is to monetize art. Isn’t it ironic that now he has taken an art form that’s philosophy was to defiy monetization and monetized it? Of course as an owner of this work and a galley owner the worth his portfolio will increase because of this exhibit.

At least because of this exhibit, the Resnick show, the Peter Marino Collection and the Broad collections/influence has finally laid bare the fact that museums have become institutions whose purpose is to increase the value of their collections and the collections of their “friends” and no longer to educate and benefit the public. In the past his relationship between art and money was hidden, but no longer.

As “Deep Throat” said if you want things explained “follow the money”.

I still have much disapproval of the removal of Blu’s mural, and it makes me not want to support this exhibit. Time will tell if I make the time and effort to go and see it.

It seems that the time has come for artists to stop handing over power to museums and galleries. The concept of museums and galleries seems so old school, not to mention limiting to the creative process. I know my art practice is not defined by exhibiting, selling, being written about, fame or recognition. There have never been, nor will there ever by, enough galleries and museums to show the work of all artists. This world we live in, now, in 2011 is filled with so many opportunities. I can see in my minds eye that these institutions are obsolete. artists can take control. After all they need us more than we need them, exhibitions are not a necessity for the creative process to exist.
Today I also listened to Suzanne Lacy speaking at the Demanding Conversations conference. It has reaffirmed my belief that feminist art is historical, and feminists artists, now referred to as artist, moving into all encompassing practices. It is not surprising to see kind of shift.
Although I find myself shaking my head with much of the goings on in the art world, I am also very inspired and energized by much I see going on. Suzanne Lacy spoke about Allan Kaprow and how for a time it looked as though his work would be lost, and I wondered about this. During his life he altered art practice, he did it, a done deal. Therefore, I am not sure it would ever be lost.

History can be placed easily in museums, while the future holds endless possibilities, not always easily contained.