Emmanuel Galland and Nicolas Mavrikakis are elitist bullies


It was over almost before it started. Last week there was a press conference about André Desjardins and the Academy of Fine Art Foundation‘s donating a sculpture to Montreal that was going to be installed in the Olympic Park. The following day Nicolas Mavrikakis wrote an article questioning M. Desjardins’ artistic capabilities, the only reason I can think of why M. Mavrikakis didn’t call M. Desjardins a hack, is because I don’t think there is any word in the French language for it. The following day Emmanuel Galland wrote an open letter in Le Devoir (who should know better) going even further and questioning the motives of the donation as well as the quality of the art.

Well, on Friday M. Desjardins decided that he didn’t need any of the controversy, and asked the people donating the sculpture to not do so.

Obviously the lutte contre l’intimidation hasn’t made it here, yet. Which is kind of a pity, because Hochelaga-Maisonneuve could definitely use some public art.

8 thoughts on “Emmanuel Galland and Nicolas Mavrikakis are elitist bullies”

  1. Yes, I agree Hochelaga-Maisonneuve could use some public art, but surely the art it deserves should be selected as a result of an approval process compatible with public placement, or even better, a public juried competition. There is enough schlock everywhere in the private domain – and it is there as a reminder of the individual freedom we all enjoy – that the public has a right to expect better from public authorities for our public spaces. And when in doubt, let’s plant a tree or add a simple fountain: Hochelaga Maisonneuve could use more of them, too.

    1. Howdy!

      The Academy of Fine Art Foundation and Galerie Roccia did their homework well by choosing the Olympic Park. It’s unfortunate that M. Desjardins got caught in the crossfire. There is still plenty of room for hanky-panky in the city’s new rules for accepting donations of art. I agree 100% that Hochelaga-Maisonneuve could use more art, trees and fountains. Let’s hope that because of the new guidelines the offers come in flying fast and furious.

  2. What is the real issue here is why such a donation? After 25 years in the art business, I am more than skeptical when it comes to the purpose of such charitable gift.
    There are just too many sharks in this business to accept everything as cash!
    Whether it is good or bad art is another issue but certainly when you mention a fair market value of 1,000,000 dollars, you can ask yourself where this figure come from and whether or not it is reasonnable.
    For an artist discovered at the very commercial ART EXPO New York in 2008
    ( http://www.artexponewyork.com ), it is quite a giant step to say the least.
    You should also ask what are the tax implications of such a donation? As
    taxpayers, as is way too often the case, are we literrally paying for the art work through tax credits?
    Unfortunately, this is just one case, most art donations do go ahead without being scrutinized by really objective and unbiased people. It is quite a shame!

  3. oh Zeke, you are just a snob in reverse. Your populist leanings will always put you in the corner: pot calling the kettle black.

  4. Les maitres de l’art Neo-Pompier a l’oeuvre. Quelle arrogance de traiter l’art des autres de mediocre! Le Quebec vit sous un regime d’Art Officiel…

Comments are closed.