[ Home | Comment | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: coldfusion
Date: 11 Nov 2010
Time: 13:03:01 -0600
This I agree with: "It may be easier to kill two birds with one stone - revise their(American) own recent art history through recognising the undeniable ascendance of a remarkable generation of Germans, Richter very much to the fore." That is right- Polke Richter Baselitz Palermo stand up to de kooning Pollock Rothko Newman. The rest of the article I dont follow- what is the significance of "P and D" ?.Polke painted onto decorative fabrics but he was not interested in that aspect of them. What he was interested in was their abject quality- their cheapness. Its capitalist realism - cheap mass produced fabrics , commodifed repeating and dumb images. The paintings then transcend. Buchloh simply is critical of the "spectacularisation" of art - a good point if you ask me ( have you been to White Cube recently ?). He may be over - determined historically - thats the gamble of his writing. Richter is not deficient because he does not engage with other languages of abstraction. His works are existential - screens for reality. They are also very beautiful.