In the PR they boast how influential Lasker has been over the past 30 years. But apart from Christopher Wool and early Monique Prieto... like, who exactly has displayed any compelling influence of Lasker over this time? People might say well, Gunther Förg, but really, on the linear tip you could as well argue for Brice Marden or Australian aboriginal art.
In Art Forum, Lasker points out how visible or well exhibited his early work was, how it got bracketed with the Neo-Geo and Po-Mo dudes like Taaffe and Halley, as well as the more trad NY abstraction like Tom Nozkowski and Gary Stephan, while also showing at Michael Werner (German Neo-Ex king) as a demonstration of how it fits in a lot of places, slightly, but nowhere especially well. And that's its strength of course - originality if you will - but in the end I think it also sidelines it when critics fall to looking at longer art history and broad strokes - like in Art Now - by Germans Grosenick and Riemschneider, where they just completely discount him (and Lari Pittman) basically because Germans are never quite comfortable with Minimalism, much less the Maximalism that follows it.
I like Lasker, but I can also see how people quickly grow bored with the work - you sense he's not about to embark on the kind of errant pilgrimmage that makes Marden a star - then again Marden doesn't rate a mention with the Germans either.