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.
![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)