Column

Writer

Criticism

issue-118-p58-60.pdf

Environment

Residencies

Work

The article lists noteworthy art publications and events including the exhibition _Mobile Homestead_ by Mike Kelley at the Museum of Contemporary Art Detroit, the exhibition _They Made A Day Be A Day Here_ at the Art Gallery of Grande in Prairie, Alberta and a forthcoming book by Lane Relyea.

Noteworthy: Criticism 

md_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_300x250.png

sm_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_300x250.png

thumbnail_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_300x250.png

Capture_Web 1_April 2024_300x250.png

lg_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_970x180.png

md_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_970x180.png

sm_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_970x180.png

thumbnail_Capture_Web 1_April 2024_970x180.png

Capture_Web 1_April 2024_970x180.png

Capture

thumbnail_CanadianArtHop_April_SizeB.jpg

CanadianArtHop_April_SizeB.jpg

md_CanadianArtHop_April_SizeA.jpg

sm_CanadianArtHop_April_SizeA.jpg

thumbnail_CanadianArtHop_April_SizeA.jpg

CanadianArtHop_April_SizeA.jpg

ADAC

thumbnail_CraftCouncilNL_Web1_Apr1-May1_SizeB.jpeg

CraftCouncilNL_Web1_Apr1-May1_SizeB.jpeg

md_CraftCouncilNL_Web1_Apr1-May1_SizeA.jpeg

sm_CraftCouncilNL_Web1_Apr1-May1_SizeA.jpeg

thumbnail_CraftCouncilNL_Web1_Apr1-May1_SizeA.jpeg

CraftCouncilNL_Web1_Apr1-May1_SizeA.jpeg

Craft NL

sm_Optica_Web 1_mobile_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

thumbnail_Optica_Web 1_mobile_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

Optica_Web 1_mobile_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

lg_Optica_Web 1_banner_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

md_Optica_Web 1_banner_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

sm_Optica_Web 1_banner_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

thumbnail_Optica_Web 1_banner_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

Optica_Web 1_banner_April 15-May 15, 2024.jpeg

Optica

thumbnail_Gallery44_Mar27-Apr30,2024_Size B.jpeg

Gallery44_Mar27-Apr30,2024_Size B.jpeg

md_Gallery44_Mar27-Apr30,2024_Size A.jpeg

sm_Gallery44_Mar27-Apr30,2024_Size A.jpeg

thumbnail_Gallery44_Mar27-Apr30,2024_Size A.jpeg

Gallery44_Mar27-Apr30,2024_Size A.jpeg

Gallery 44

lg_C_Magazine-PKB-simple.jpg

md_C_Magazine-PKB-simple.jpg

sm_C_Magazine-PKB-simple.jpg

thumbnail_C_Magazine-PKB-simple.jpg

C_Magazine-PKB-simple.jpg

Editorial

One of the most glaringly obvious problems in much of contemporary art criticism is its stark lack of social and geographic diversity. As Editor of a magazine that purports to be both national _and_ international in its scope and readership, by far the greatest number of proposals I receive are from major urban centres and propose covering major public art galleries and/or artists with significant commercial representation. It feels formulaic too — a writer interviews an artist who is already widely acclaimed or reviews a show at a venue that’s known and trusted by other art-world insiders. Such artists and institutions are safe entities and the writing they seem to inspire could just as easily be a press release, anchoring the artist’s work in ideas that simultaneously legitimize the artist and the writer while often failing to articulate how the work offers anything that hasn’t already been tracked and mapped in critical discourse. In many cases, writers enact the very conditions of art as the form of spectacle and elite entertainment that they claim to critique. Both art and criticism should do much more.

For every hundred emails we receive proposing to review a show in Toronto or New York, we receive only a few that suggest covering a show in Ottawa or Victoria. And of all the proposals that we receive, most are for exhibitions at major institutions, like the Museum of Modern Art or the Art Gallery of Ontario. It’s only a few times a year that we receive any proposals to cover an exhibition at a gallery outside of major urban centres, artists working from less central locations, or those who have carved out their own spaces outside of public galleries and artist-run centres. And comparatively few propose writing about new and emergent artists who haven’t already been covered in the art press. Having chosen a line of work that is both grossly under-compensated and mercilessly competitive, art writers would do well to look beyond the well-worn paths of established practices. I suggest this not for the benefit of emergent artists, or artists who live in lesser known places, but as a necessary intervention into what we consider to be the role of contemporary art, and the kinds of experiences and subjectivities that it produces. This might further expand our ability to embrace other experiences and our understanding of what it means to be part of contemporary society. 

In April, in partnership with Halifax-based _Visual Arts News_, we held _The Atlantic Symposium: New Directions for Art Writing in Atlantic Canada_, which included a full day of sessions led by writers and editors from various regional, national, and international art magazines and newspapers, attended by writers and artists who live and work in Atlantic Canada. The objective was to find ways to better support and engage writers working in a region that’s also home to many of Canada’s most interesting artists-as well as important institutions and histories of artist culture-but which aren’t widely covered in national or international publications. At the symposium, there were a number of topics raised that have significant bearing on this issue of _C Magazine_. Among them was the question of why art writers often don’t write critically-a topic writer Richard William Hill took up in relation to contemporary Indigenous art, where the writing tends to be largely celebratory, thus resulting in a lack of critical engagement. Arguably, this problem extends to much of art writing. In her keynote lecture, editor and curator Sylvie Fortin took up the recurrent idea of the “crisis” in art criticism, arguing that despite its problems, criticism is live and well and noting that the very role of criticism is to _produce_ crisis, as a way of challenging and intervening in established intellectual or social discourse. While there was much discussion about the different _places_ where criticism can occur – newspapers, art magazines, and within the work of artists themselves, much attention still needs to be given to how we _perform_ criticism, as well as to what forms of public engagement and what kinds of communities we enact through our practices. 

Some of these ideas are among those taken up in this issue of _C Magazine_. Ben Davis dissects three different crises that most frequently arise in relation to contemporary art, suggesting a way of moving beyond some of these sticking points. Stephen Horne presents an idea of “doing“ ~~in contrast to “waiting” or “making”~~ as a way of describing how critical practice exists through a space of play. Charlene Lau tackles the broader neoliberal context of contemporary art practice and art writing through phenomena such as the Top 10 list, addressing how critics risk collusion with the market, and undermine criticality itself. Peta Rake turns towards how we _read_ criticism, surveying a number of artist projects that take critical writing as their content, sometimes redacting or commenting on it and translating the reading process into new material and textual objects. Also addressing the theme of the issue, Sky Goodden interviews Dave Hickey, who delivered the 2013 Shenkman Lecture at the University of Guelph. In their conversation, Goodden and Hickey discuss some of Hickey’s thoughts on art education and art criticism – and his experience at Guelph. Ostensibly delivering a critique of post-secondary art education as part of his lecture, in his deliberately provocative style, Hickey made many derisive comments targeting everyone from women students, people with mental disabilities to universities that have cows on their campuses. While these comments might be read as a performance of forms of intolerance that persist in many parts of the art world and consequently shape aesthetic judgment and artistic success, by masquerading as institutional critique they effectively legitimate these attitudes. Consequently, his lecture polarized his audience between those who were entertained, and perhaps affirmed by his lecture and those unable to dismiss the gravity of many of his comments. It is important to consider Goodden’s interview in this context.

Presenting still other models for producing or performing art criticism, this issue includes Charmaine Wheatley’s “The Painting is Better,” an article-as-watercolour painting based on conversations she had with Newfoundland painter Mary Pratt. Here, photographs are translated into paintings, which are translated again by hand into words and yet more paintings. And using means that are entirely automated, Dave Dyment ran the content of this issue through a word analysis program, as a way of visualizing the language of writing about art criticism. The words that appear most often are illustrated in the centrefold, scaled according to their relative frequency. Both of these projects call out for new ways of doing art criticism that diverge from established practices.

Amish Morrell is Assistant Professor at OCAD University, where he teaches Criticism & Curatorial Practice, and Visual and Critical Studies.

Editor

issue-118-p2-3.pdf

Publishing

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses art criticism, including the general lack of social and geographic diversity in much of contemporary art criticism. He discusses The Atlantic Symposium: New Directions for Art Writing in Atlantic Canada, which was organized by C Magazine in partnership with Halifax-based Visual Arts News. He discusses various articles within the issue that consider different models for producing or performing art criticism.

Editorial: Criticism

Feature

issue-118-p4-12.pdf

Canadian

Photography

Conceptual

The article focuses on the Vancouver, British Columbia-based art collective N. E. Thing Co. and the research they conducted on the concepts of Sensitivity Information. The article discusses the collective's involvement with developing photo-conceptualism in Vancouver, their influence by the theories of Marshall McLuhan, and artists associated with the collective such as Jeff Wall and the Vancouver School.

"Sensitivity Information": The Wild Body of N.E. Thing Co.

issue-118-p12-14.pdf

Technology

The article focuses on what is considered the “crisis of art criticism” and a panel that the author participated in at the College Art Association in New York City. The article discusses crises in art criticism including the decline of print outlets that include criticism, the global nature of the art world and the concern that contemporary art criticism is not relevant. The article goes on to discuss the role of money in criticism, aesthetic experience and art in other discourses like science.

Surviving the Crisis

issue-118-p15-20.pdf

Representation

Painting

The illustrated article focuses on Canadian artist Mary Pratt. The article discusses Pratt's use of a camera to paint from photographs, the way her monocular vision has affected her painting and her interest in commercial art. The article goes on to discuss her interest in the Dionne Quintuplets of Callander, Ontario and her relation to the Canadian providence of Newfoundland.

The painting is better

issue-118-p20-24.pdf

Philosophy

Art movements

The article focuses on the relationship between art criticism and postmodern art. The article discusses the art museum as an apparatus for formatting space and time, the basis of criticism in opinion and evaluation and the opinions of artist André Jodoin and philosophers Gianni Vattimo and Jacques Rancière. The article goes on to discuss art critics of the past who were primarily poets and playwrights and the art critic's task to evaluate the relevance of aesthetic situations.

On The Doing(s) of Art Criticism

Charlene K. Lau is an art historian, critic and Curator of Public Art at Evergreen Brick Works.
She has held fellowships at the Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity; Parsons School of Design,
The New School; and Performa Biennial. Her writing has been published in _Art in America_,
_Artforum_, _TheAtlantic.com_, _The Brooklyn Rail_, _frieze_, _Fashion Theory_, and _Journal of Curatorial Studies_, among others.

> Could it be that contemporary art is neoliberalism in its most purified form?

—Julieta Aranda, Brian Kuan Wood, Anton Vidokle, editorial in e-flux journal #21

With Top 10 lists, Power 100s, “must-see” shows and end-of-the-year lists, contemporary art discourse is rife with bite-sized amounts of art criticism. This ranking of artists, collectors, curators, dealers and anyone else who has a hand in shaping contemporary art has become the accepted norm for disseminating easily-digestible servings of the haves and have-nots. The Fortune 500 or any Forbes lists immediately come to mind, where rankings reflect net worth. Is it a coincidence that these “rich” or “power” lists are seemingly models for the lowly art list? The increasing number of lists in critical art discourse is a symptom of art criticism in crisis, an art criticism “lite” that is rarely substantiated and often championed by the short attention span of social media and the Internet.[^1] As Julian Stallabrass argues in _High Art Lite_, contemporary art’s bedfellowship with commerce prevents any “meaningful judgement” from being proffered.[^2] In this way, lists truncate or eliminate the physical and theoretical space traditionally allotted to substantiate criticism, whether negative or positive. Rather than elaborate on an argument or a critical judgement, lists employ a methodology that is contemporaneous to the digital age and the Internet. Boris Groys has discussed his concept of binary code of “zero or one, mentioned or not mentioned”[^3] in relation to the value ascribed to art. Similarly, lists demonstrate a behaviour whereby critical judgements are reduced to atomized packets of information; they dictate trends rather than promote analysis and evaluation.

At first glance, the _ARTNEWS_ 200 suggests that it is a list covering the whole contemporary art scene; beyond the ambitious title, it becomes blindingly clear that it is a list of collectors. The title of the accompanying article to the 2012 directory reads like a gauche self- help book: “How to Make a $119.9 Million Bid.” Although there are no numbered rankings, collectors are listed along with the source of their wealth (banking, hedge funds, inheritance, real estate and the like), and their collecting specialty (Chinese antiquities, contemporary, modern, Old Masters). The list functions more like a calling card, a who’s who for dealers or aspiring art stars to identify with whom they should be currying favour. Two questions initially arise: upon what criteria is this list based? And what have collectors done within art to receive this standing? Is there more depth to these exercises than that they are lists of those who acquired the most or the most expensive art? If so, none of this is evident or presented to the reader. As such, groupings like this one seem to bear few criteria beyond net worth. Contributions to philanthropy or broader volunteerism within the art system are not reflected.

_ArtReview_‘s annual Power 100 is perhaps the most evocative art list, openly displaying the machinations of neoliberal capital in contemporary art. The numbered list ranks artists, collectors, critics, curators, museum directors and art dealers (or “gallerists” as the publication euphemistically terms them). Upon closer analysis, dealers, collectors and museum directors comprise the majority of the list. In present terms, those who hold the reins in the circulation of global capital in the art world are best represented. Unsurprisingly, artists constitute fewer than twenty percent of the list. And those listed are the usual suspects: Ai Weiwei (3), Gerhard Richter (6) and Cindy Sherman (13) are the only three artists in the top twenty. The likely reason is that such artists function like brands: their work is instantly recognizable and has high symbolic value that translates into market value. Specifically, Ai is a symbol of the struggle against a corrupt regime; his high position on the list (which was criticized by the Chinese government) indicates the championing of freedom over state oppression. To give the rankings validation, three spots were allotted to theorists: Boris Groys (61), Slavoj Žižek (65) and Jacques Rancière (92). This inclusion appears to be an afterthought, both obligatory and ornamental; their presence on the list gives it the appearance of intellectual and critical rigour. The remaining 78 spots are comprised of “players” in the game of capital, those who either have wealth or who have the networks to access wealth. The term “power” in the title distinctly refers to economic heft, rather than the capacity to produce or examine art.

It is interesting to note that _ArtReview_ served more as a lifestyle and society magazine before its relaunch in 2006 when it was branded “International art and style.” The social feature “Party,” which contained names and faces, was replaced by “On the Town,” a section that lasted until partway through 2012\. Despite this, _ArtReview_ has not fully severed ties with its prior incarnation; in fact, reminders of its past are evident in the March 2013 issue featuring a list of “Future Greats” in the contemporary art world. For instance, the list of young up-and-comers was underwritten by efg International, a global private banking group. While it is important to support emerging artists, they are easy to exploit due to their economic precariousness; the potential is to be the “hot new thing,” the soon-to-be stars driving the market onwards and upwards. Young blood is required to keep the celebrity star system churning out more objects (read: subjects) of desire. Lists play upon the sycophantic imaginary of contemporary art, where the publicity machine seeks to gain advantage in naming the stars of the culture industry whilst pitting its players against each other in competition. As a function of neoliberal economic ideology, competition is naturalized while inequality is the unfortunate, yet inevitable secondary result.[^4]

Other lists of emerging artists bring into question the effectiveness of selection processes. A close look at _BLOUIN ARTINFO_‘s “Canada’s Top 30 Under 30” reveals its inherent lack of diversity. The list is not representative of the diversity of a country that considers itself a cultural mosaic. It is a grievous oversight, a reality in which criticality plays no part. In response to this “controversy,” the editor admitted to not “thinking politically” and “not consciously seeking a diverse swatch of representatives.”[^5] It is a clear indication that the function of discourse has shifted from a concern with constituent politics to wielding favour. A further demonstration is its limited geographic scope, with the vast majority of entries residing in Toronto.

_Artforum_‘s end-of-year “Best of…” lists for film, music, books and art allow for some justification, but not very much. The film and music lists by John Waters, Amy Taubin and John Cale adhere to the standard format, with short explanations for each position, whereas critics like Thomas Crow, Hal Foster, Benjamin Buchloh and Claire Bishop contribute short essays on the “best” art exhibitions. Perhaps this illustrates _Artforum_‘s uneasy position within neoliberalism and the market, and the more critical and alternative mode of discourse from which it originated.

More critically-minded publications rank actual content, such as exhibitions and events, rather than art world personalities. The list functions as a promotional vehicle, and people are marketable celebrities promoted as such; the artworks are merely a means to that celebrity. A position on a list is a reward for one’s work and an indication of symbolic value; any PR is a replacement for future market value and, ideally, monetary remuneration. One only has to think back to October 2012 when Carolyn Christov-Bakargiev made an off-the-cuff remark at an Artists Space lecture, stating that artists invited to exhibit at Documenta do not receive payment: “If you were an artist, you didn’t get any money, no, because you were already invited to the exhibition…”[^6] Christov-Bakargiev implies that the prestige of exposure provided by such an international art event suffices as exchange for the production of art and its related costs.

With lists, things can no longer just be good, they must be the very best.[^7] Superlatives proliferate and hyperbole is king. The affirmative nature of lists conveniently sees that no feelings of those who went unmentioned are explicitly hurt. As Isabelle Graw argues, to criticize an artwork is to criticize the artist personally, for network capitalism demands that we all get along with one another for fear that our networks will collapse and we will experience what Diedrich Diederichsen calls certain “social death.”[^8] Just what exactly are the criteria for these lists? How does one rank an artist against a dealer against a theorist? They do not have the same function in the art world, nor are those functions easily quantifiable. Market capitalism attempts to enumerate a person’s effectiveness in order to ascribe a market value.

_BLOUIN ARTINFO_ is a curious creature, self-confessed as the “Premier Global Online Destination for Art and Culture.” A glance at the website demonstrates the perplexing hodgepodge of content bursting out of this massive enterprise. Subject headings for the visual arts, performing arts, architecture and design, and artists sit uneasily alongside tabs on art prices (a section which houses the Blouin Art Sales Index), market news, lifestyle, fashion, events and travel. Amidst the jumble, further probing locates the Blouin Boutique, where potential collectors can purchase or bid on $30,000 wines, vintage cars, fine art, homes, antiques and fashion objects. It is a one-stop shop where art criticism, news, market analysis and commerce attempt to merge. This is a contemporary colonialist structure in operation in which the market engulfs autonomous discourse, although one could debate its success.

If the age of neoliberalism sees the increasing omnipresence of market forces in all aspects of the social order, then contemporary art and its discourse function alongside the so-called invisible hand of the market that guides them. Self-styled art/media baroness and philanthropist Louise T. Blouin is a case in point. After her divorce from classifieds-ad king John MacBain, Blouin used a portion of her settlement to start the Louise Blouin Foundation in London, and bought up a round of magazines including _Modern Painters_ and _Art+Auction_, all of which now reside under the banner of her publishing empire, Louise Blouin Media. In late 2012, the Internet was a flurry with rumours that Blouin was in talks to acquire the Armory Show. As Will Brand wrote sardonically in a post on _Art F City_, “Will Louise Blouin own us all by 2016?” In true market capitalist fashion, Blouin outrightly purchases cultural and symbolic capital. With her global website/brand _ARTINFO_, she attempts to privatize and colonize art news. In dissecting the very name _ARTINFO_, one is led astray—surely this is a place for all news from an organization that disseminates information in the name of the public good? Furthermore, _Modern Painters_ has been rebranded as _BLOUINARTINFO.COM Modern Painters_. _Art+Auction_ was spared this treatment, for its title already directly speaks to the aims of the market. In so doing, Blouin has effectively subsumed and dwarfed any trace of what autonomy _Modern Painters_ had left as a periodical with its roots in British art criticism. What does history matter if global domination can be had instead? Blouin has, in recent years, expanded the _ARTINFO_ empire to emerging markets of the so-called Global South including Brazil, India and Southeast Asia. If neoliberalism is a “missionary faith” whereby prevailing markets are broadened and new markets are formed,[^9] then Blouin succeeds in carrying out her assignment.

How can the increasing involvement of the private sector in contemporary art allow for free and well-informed critique, the very basis of which is to question, investigate and probe the system? Critical discourse is stifled when it colludes with the market, for with the commodification of contemporary art comes a publicity machine for profit where “hollow cheerleading,” as termed by artist-critic Keith Miller, takes the place of strident critique. Lists create a culture of affirmation and are a self-supporting gesture for contemporary art and its market; to do otherwise is to bite the hand that feeds it. In today’s political climate, cutbacks to cultural funding and evisceration of government programs for culture pave the way for an uncertain future where critical discourse must, too, be guided by the hand of the market, by the private foundations and their own neoliberal agendas. As Isabelle Graw contends, the “right to denounce hegemonic value judgments is the right of criticism. Criticism is both associated with market conditions and capable of defying them.”[^10] Thus, the role of criticism is two-fold: to simultaneously operate within the neoliberal system of contemporary art and its markets, and to dissent from within the confines of that hegemonic ideology. We can be privy to the degradation of criticism, but we never have to be complicit.

[^1]: I borrow the idea of “liteness” from Julian Stallabrass’ discussion of the Young British Artists in High Art Lite: The Rise and Fall of Young British Art (Oxford: Oxford University Press, \[1999\], 2006).
[^2]: I take this term from critic Daniel Mendelsohn. See “A Critic’s Manifesto,” The New Yorker, August 28, 2012; [www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/08/a-critics-manifesto.html](http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/08/a-critics-manifesto.html)
[^3]: Boris Groys in conversation with Brian Dillon, “Who do You Think You’re Talking To?” Frieze, 121 (2009). http://www.frieze.com/issue/article/who\_do\_you\_think\_youre\_talking\_to/
[^4]: Susan Braedley and Meg Luxton, Neoliberalism and Everyday Life, eds. Susan Braedley and Meg Luxton (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2010), 8.
[^5]: Sky Goodden, “A Response to the 30 Under 30 Controversy,” artinfo Canada, January 31, 2013; [ca.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/862409/editorial-a-response-to-the-30-under-30-controversy](http://ca.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/862409/editorial-a-response-to-the-30-under-30-controversy)
[^6]: “100 Notes – 100 Thoughts: A reflection on documenta (13) Notebooks by Avital Ronell, with a response by Carolyn Christov-Bakargiev,” (lecture at Artists Space, New York, October 18, 2012).
[^7]: Neal Gabler, “Everyone’s a critic now,” The Guardian, January 30, 2011 [www.theguardian.co.uk/culture/2011/jan/30/](http://www.theguardian.co.uk/culture/2011/jan/30/) critics-franzen-freedom-social-network
[^8]: Isabelle Graw, “Judging – Yes, but How?” The Power of Judgment, eds. Daniel Birnbaum and Isabelle Graw (New York: Sternberg Press, 2010), 38.
[^9]: Raewyn Connell, “Understanding Neoliberalism,” Neoliberalism and Everyday Life, 23.
[^10]: Isabelle Graw, “High Price: Art Between the Market and Celebrity Culture.” (lecture at Art Dubai 2012, United Arab Emirates, March 21–24, 2012); [vimeo.com/33472517](http://vimeo.com/33472517)

issue-118-p24-28.pdf

International

Critique

The article focuses on lists and rankings of contemporary art shows, galleries and artists as evidence of art criticism in crisis. The article discusses the relationship between contemporary art and commerce, the way in which lists dictate trends instead of providing analysis or evaluation of art and the way in which successful artists operate as brands. The article goes on to discuss specific lists and rankings from art periodicals such as Artforum, ArtReview and ARTnews.

Resist the List: A Problem of Politics in the Evaluation of Contemporary Art

issue-118-p33-39.pdf

The article focuses on art criticism and the way in which people respond and reflect on published criticism. The article discusses a publication and exhibition by the class of 2011 Masters in Curating Contemporary Art program at the Royal College of Art in London, England which consisted of annotated texts, work by the collective BANK, Simon A. Bedwell, Amelia Thompson and John Russell, which “corrected” art gallery press releases and the relationship between the critic and the criticized.

Private Acts: Note-taking in the Margins of Art Criticism

Interview

issue-118-p40-43.pdf

An interview with American art critic Dave Hickey is presented. When asked about the annual Shenkman Lecture he delivered at the University of Guelph in Ontario in March 2013, Hickey discusses his goal of sharing an idea about art education and commentating on art and civilization. He goes on to discuss his experience writing for the periodicals _Artforum_ and _Vanity Fair_, other art critics such as Jerry Saltz, Roberta Smith and Christopher Knight, and his support of negative art criticism.

Interview with Dave Hickey

lg_118

md_118

sm_118

thumbnail_118

Chris Lee is a graphic designer and educator based in Buffalo, New York and Toronto. His research explores graphic design’s entanglement with power, standards and legitimacy. Chris is an Assistant Professor at the University at Buffalo SUNY.

Designer

Publisher

Artist Project

Artist

issue-118-p29-33.pdf

An artist project by Dave Dyment, titled _Old Man Deciphering a Briefcase_ (2013), is presented. The project presents a “word cloud” of the text in this issue of _C Magazine_.

Old Man Deciphering a Briefcase 

Review

**Rose Bouthillier** is Curator (Exhibitions) at Remai Modern in Saskatoon. Previously, she was Associate Curator & Publications Manager at MOCA Cleveland.

issue-118-p42-44.pdf

Sculpture

The article reviews an exhibition by American artist Julia Dault at the Jessica Bradley Annex in Toronto, Ontario from January 25 – March 9, 2013.

Julia Dault

Heather White is a writer, and a psychotherapist-in-training, in Toronto.

issue-118-p43-45.pdf

Economy

The article reivews the exhibition _Jimmy Limit: Show Room_ at Clint Roenisch Gallery in Toronto, Ontario from January 10 – February 23, 2013.

Jimmy Limit: Show Room

Shannon Anderson is an independent writer, curator and editor based in Oakville, Ontario.

issue-118-p44-46.pdf

Sound

Music

The article reviews the exhibition _Volume: Hear Here_, which focuses on the intersection between art and music. The exhibition featured works by artists such as Marla Hlady, Dave Dyment and Ian Skedd. The exhibition was held at the Blackwood Gallery in Mississauga, Ontario and the Justina M. Barnicke Gallery in Toronto, Ontario from January 16 – March 20, 2013.

Volume: Hear Here

issue-118-p45-47.pdf

Mapping

Found

The article reviews the exhibition _Peter Dykhuis: Inventories & Micro-mapping_ at the Red Head Gallery in Toronto, Ontario from September 5-22, 2012.

Peter Dykhuis: Inventories & Micro-mapping

issue-118-p46-48.pdf

Politics

Indigenous

The article reviews the project _Rebecca Belmore, Ken Gonzales-Day, Francisco-Fernando Granados, and Louise Noguchi: Invisible Violence_ at Artspeak in Vancouver, British Columbia on February 15, 2013.

Rebecca Belmore, Ken Gonzales-Day, Francisco-Fernando Granados, and Louis Noguchi: Invisible Violence

**Gloria Hickey** is an independent curator and writer living in St. John’s, NL. In 2017, Routledge published her book chapter on curatorial strategies in _Exhibiting Craft and Design: Transgressing the White Cube Paradigm_.

issue-118-p48-49.pdf

Installation

Nature

The article reviews the exhibition _Philippa Jones: MIRIAD_ at The Rooms Provincial Art Gallery in St. John’s, Newfoundland from March 16 – April 28, 2013.

Philippa Jones: MIRIAD

Jane Affleck is a PhD candidate in the Cultural Studies program at Trent University, a part-time instructor at NSCAD University and a freelance writer.

issue-118-p50-51.pdf

Portrait

The article review the exhibition _Position As Desired/Exploring African Canadian Identity: Photographs from the Wedge Collection_ at the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 in Halifax, Nova Scotia from January 22 – March 20, 2013.

Position As Desired / Exploring African Canadian Identity: Photographs from the Wedge Collection

Daniella Sanader is a writer and reader who lives in Toronto. 

issue-118-p51-52.pdf

Activism

History

The article reviews the exhibition _Manuela Lalic: Activisme timide_ at the Optica Centre for Contemporary Art in Montreal, Quebec from January 19 – February 23, 2013.

Manuela Lalic: Activisme timide

null

[^1]: Hal Foster, et al., _Art Since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism_ (London: Thames & Hudson, 2012) 
[^2]: In 1989, Washington’s Corcoran Gallery of Art, pressured by members of their board and the U.S. Senate, reversed their agreement to host the exhibition _Robert Mapplethorpe: The Perfect Moment_ This incident fuelled the so-called culture wars, instigated by Senator Jesse Helms, and led to dramatic funding cuts for the National Endowment for the Arts.

issue-118-p52-54.pdf

Sexuality

The article reviews the exhibition _This Will Have Been: Art, Love & Politics in the 1980s_ featuring the work of artists such as Richard Prince, Cady Noland and Jeff Wall at the Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston, Massachusetts from November 15, 2012 – March 3, 2013.

This Will Have Been: Art, Love & Politics in the 1980s

issue-118-p53-55.pdf

Video

The article reviews the exhibition _Jordan Wolfson: ‘Raspberry Poser’_ at the gallery REDCAT in Los Angeles, California from December 2, 2012 – January 27, 2013.

Jordan Wolfson: Raspberry Poser

issue-118-p54-56.pdf

Artist-run centres

Institutional critique

The article reviews the exhibition _Robert Tombs: L’Occupation_ by Canadian artist Robert Tombs at ParisCONCERT in Paris, France from January 5-26, 2013

Robert Tombs: L'Occupation

issue-118-p56-57.pdf

Education

The article reviews the book <em>The Last Art College: Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 1968-1978</e> by Garry Neill Kennedy.

The Last Art College: Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 1968-1978, by Garry Neill Kennedy

The article reviews the book _West of Center: Art and the Counterculture Experiment in America, 1965-1977_ edited by Elissa Auther and Adam Lerner.

West of Center: Art and the Counterculture Experiment in America, 1965-1977, Edited by Elissa Auther and Adam Lerner

issue-118-p57-59.pdf

The article reviews the book _Work Work Work: A Reader on Art and Labour_ edited by Cecilia Widenheim, Lisa Rosendahl, Michele Masucci, Annika Enqvist and Jonatan Habib Engqvist.

Header

C Mag

Issue 118