Category Archives: Painting

Claude Tousignant : Périphériques et Retables at Art Mûr

Howdy!

So do you know what a retable is? As a good Jew and a card carrying squarehead and bloke, I had no freaking clue what so ever. But after seeing the exhibit by Claude Tousignant at Art Mûr and then looking the words up on Wikipedia, Google and a couple of other places just to make sure, it all made sense. I could kind of muddle through “périphériques.” Ditch the accents, modify the “ques” to an “als” and even the most stubborn monolingual Francophobe can get an idea of what Claude Tousignant meant, but the second part of the title is a little bit more obscure, Especially if you were born after the Quiet Revolution. Although to be honest, the paintings look to me, more along the lines of Devices and Altarpieces and not quite Periphials and Retables, slightly less precise terms leave a lot more room for interpretation of the art.

If you weren’t aware, Claude Tousignant is one of the heavy hitters of contemporary Quebecois art. He is, along with Françoise Sullivan, Armand Vaillancourt, Fernand Leduc, Jacques Hurtubise and Marcel Barbeau kind of like the really, really old guard. Still working away and making things (although I am not certain if M. Leduc is still making things, and I wonder why M. Barbeau hasn’t received a prix Borduas yet, but I digress…). The people who signed manifestos and who actually caused change here. Although I have never met him, I imagine he is a very nice person. Or at least one of his daughters is. I got to know Isa Tousignant via her sweetie and the local across the street from Zeke’s Gallery where a bunch of us would have a glass or two of beer after work.

Claude Tousignant, Retables #2,
Claude Tousignant, Retables #2,

One of the things that caught my eye, was how Art Mûr did not print any prices on the wall tags. Normally, when something like that happens, it is the super-secret-art-world-insider-code for “too rich for your type.” But in this case I am not so certain, because upstairs they were exhibiting a sculpture with a price tag of $160,000 clearly marked. And despite how many times I buy a 6/49 ticket, $160K is too rich for my type. Maybe M. Tousignant is not only a very nice guy, but a private one as well, and isn’t quite comfortable with something potentially as crass as cash money. I don’t think I have ever seen a painting of his go up for auction, and if my memory is correct the prints of his that I’ve seen have gone for something like a couple of thousand dollars. So it is quite possible that the Périphériques and Retables weren’t outrageously expensive, merely a lot of money. If anybody knows what the prices were don’t hesitate to pipe up.

But enough about the background, what about the paintings themselves? They are variations on a theme. The two Retables are each three canvases attached side to side to side, with the middle canvas being slightly higher than the ones on the sides. Number One uses canvases 4′ 2″ square, Number Two has two canvases of 5′ square and one of 5′ 2″ square. For lack of a Pantone chart, Number One consists of a white, a blue and an red canvas, while Number Two’s canvases are green, purple and orange. I presume that the date and M. Tousignant’s signature is on the back. Overall they are quite stately and imposing. I preferred Number Two, although that might just be because it was the first one I saw and has a much more significant placement within the gallery. Now I could go completely off on abstract painting, post-painterly abstraction, color fields and minimalism, but I won’t. I’m fairly certain that if you want to, you can find someone or someplace that will expound upon them to your heart’s content.

Claude Tousignant, Retables #1
Claude Tousignant, Retables #1

Obviously made to be hung in the front of a church, I’m not entirely certain what denomination of Catholicism would be appropriate. Despite the fact that I refuse to use a flash, it’s still possible to tell from the crappy pictures I took that Number Two is the three secondary colors. The closest I can get to figuring out the color theory behind Number One is that M. Tousignant took the Russian flag and turned it on its side. The Périphériques are where the fun kicks in. There are four of them exhibited, but as the largest number in the titles is thirteen (they are all part of a series, which I presume is numbered consecutively), there are at least nine others kicking around someplace. All marked as “variable dimensions,” that incredibly useful phrase to hide (or ignore) all sorts of details. Each consists of a collection of smallish square canvases painted one color. These canvases are then arrayed on the wall in a way that on first glance looks like some sort of cubic solar system or a three dimensional still from one of those trippy-dippy animated films that the NFB made in the sixties.

With the Périphériques, the big deal is how M. Tousignant uses the wall as part of the installation. His instructions for installing them are shown in the inside front page of the magazine that Art Mûr publishes, and I was very surprised to see that the dimensions are in inches (and in certain cases sixteenths of an inch) nor does it appear that there is any theory behind how they are hung. It’d be kind of neat to see what M. Tousignant could do if he got rid of the canvases and started painting directly on the wall. Not quite Sol Lewitt, but kind of. I’m certain that if I studied each one close enough, I could possibly knock together some kind of color/size theory on how they were created. But I instead, decided just to try and get a sense of what M. Tousignant was getting at. Trying to get into his frame of mind by proxy if you will. Where the Retables come across as heavy and domineering, like one of those chords on an organ, the Périphériques are much more recorder like, similar to one of those renaissance songs with the typos and the musicians in all sorts of puffy clothing.

Claude Tousignant, Compostion Murale #1 (suite Périphérique)
Claude Tousignant, Compostion Murale #1 (suite Périphérique)

It’s extremely heartening to see an artist of M. Tousignant’s caliber exhibiting in a gallery such as Art Mûr, it obviously speaks highly of Rhéal Olivier Lanthier and François St-Jacques, the two guys who run it. The one slight negative thing I would have to say, is just I wish that they were capable of getting M. Tousignant’s work noticed on an international level. There is not a single museum outside of Canada listed on his CV in the Art Mûr magazine. Which is a glaring hole, but to be expected with how Quebecois Art is viewed (or not viewed) in the rest of the world.

If I had any theories about Contemporary Abstract Art made in Quebec, this would be the place to state them. But I don’t, I just kind of look at it, wonder why it doesn’t get better recognition in the rest of the world and then go look at it some more, M. Tousignant’s work to my mind, is on a par, if not better than any other living artist in the world today (including such folks as Gerhard Richter, Peter Doig and David Hockney) if Art Mûr is in fact charging millions of dollars for M. Tousignant’s work, then I am completely and utterly astonished and will gladly take back everything I have ever said about Contemporary Quebecois Art not getting the fiscal respect (and all other types of respect that go along with it) that it deserves. Baring that, M. Tousigant’s work makes me hope that I can make as effective, entertaining, interesting and kick-ass work when I am 80 years-old.

East vs. West at Three Monkeys

Howdy!

Since I’m on the topic of sellable art, I should mention that I also went to see the East vs. West exhibit at Three Monkeys. I don’t think anyone has ever done a study on it, but I would venture a guess that if you own a store, putting art up on the walls and hosting exhibits is a cheap and effective way to market and promote the store. On the other hand, wall space is valuable real estate for merchandising, and if it was truly effective than there probably would be more stores that did it, right?

Anyhow, either way by presenting the show, it succeeded in getting me into a clothing store, which is no mean feat. According to the folderol that they put out on Facebook and Twitter

the show was organized with the help of the Ayden Gallery in Vancouver and some clothing company called Lifetime Collective. My guess would be that the folk at Ayden put some art in the mail, and the folk at Lifetime sent a check – but I could be wrong. The large majority of it is arranged grid-like on the back wall of the store. There are a couple of other places as well where they have managed to hang some stuff, but as it really and truly is a clothing store, the art is not quite as front and center as I would have preferred.

East vs. West at Three Monkeys, installation view, image courtesy Three Monkeys and Facebook
East vs. West at Three Monkeys, installation view, image courtesy Three Monkeys and Facebook

It’s a fairly large group of artists, thirteen to be exact, six from Vancouver and nine Montrealers (Peter Ricq was identified as being from both Montreal and Vancouver). Other than the geography, there isn’t really anything linking the art together which depending on where you sit could be a good thing or a bad thing. Bad in that anytime you try to start making links between art it is unlikely to work as well as you think, and there is a strong chance that someone like me will come along and question just about everything. Good in that it does give the viewer some kind of hook on which they can hang their hat. The geography thing does work as the hook in this case.

East vs. West at Three Monkeys, installation view
East vs. West at Three Monkeys, installation view

But since there was nothing on the tags to identify who came from where, and I didn’t really go from one end of the store to the other to double check against the list that was written by the door, I didn’t really get any sense of regional identity for any of the artists. It was much more like, “here it is, look at it.”

East vs. West at Three Monkeys, installation view
East vs. West at Three Monkeys, installation view

So I did. The quality of the work was uniformly pretty good, there wasn’t anything that really jumped out a beat me over the head with how great it was. The closest would have been the double exposure portrait by Andrew Young, either because it was centered on the back wall, it was a larger piece, because of its unusual canvas, or more likely all three.

Andrew Young, Untitled, Oil on Wood,
Andrew Young, Untitled, Oil on Wood

Another piece I quite liked was the group piece on the bottom of one column in the store, judging by their facebook photo album it was done by at least Mr. Ricq and Guillaume Blackburn. probably due to them copying the En Masse style.

Overall, as you might have guessed, I’m quite fond of shows like this. A sort of pop-up gallery if you will, furthering the idea that art should be an inegral part of everyone’s life. It especially helps that there wasn’t any heavy theory behind it, and that the quality of all the work was above average. I hope that the people who attended the vernissage bought some clothes as well as some art, so that more exhibits like this can be done.

If you want to take a gander at it, Three Monkeys is on the Metcalfe side of Les Cours Mont Royal right next to the fountain, and the show itself is up until the end of the month.

Description of show
Highlights
Mention of NYTimes article

Blanc et Noir at Galerie Mile End

Howdy!

I freaking hate it, when I ask if I can take pictures at an exhibit, and some person who doesn’t know any better starts spouting about copyright and uses that as the excuse why they won’t let me take a snapshot. Listen people, the Canadian copyright act is right here. In it there’s a paragraph, number 29 to be exact, that talks about Fair Dealing. If I am writing a review of your show, I can use pictures that I took to illustrate the article and not impinge, infringe or otherwise step on your intellectual property. So folks, how about this? Next time I show up and ask to take pictures, understand I am being courteous and polite and be courteous and polite in return and say, “yes.”

I bring this up, because last weekend, I went to Galerie Mile End, and asked to take pictures. The woman who was there, didn’t know copyright from a hole in the wall, but insisted that was the reason why I couldn’t take pictures. She then proceeded to watch me for five minutes (there was no one else in the gallery except the two of us) until I realized that the only reason she was watching me was that I had not put my camera away (like I’m going to surreptitiously snap a picture and copy someone’s art and call it my own! Gimme a break!). So I put away the camera, she went back to making art, but then to make matters worse insisted on coming out once every five minutes for the next 15 minutes with some supposedly helpful suggestion (“the artists’ have their business cards over here, if you take them, you can call them and ask them if it is ok to take pictures,” “the artist who did these pieces is going to be here at 2:30, if you wait you can ask her if it is ok to take pictures of her work,” “if there was any of my work in the show, I’d let you take pictures of it”).

Suffice it to say, I was not in a good mood, and slowly got more and more annoyed at her as time progressed. Instead of snapping and throwing or shouting something. I gripped my pen and clipboard even tighter still, took a couple of deep breaths and did my best not to let my foul mood cloud my judgement or opinion of the work on the walls – but man, oh, man was it tough. All the way home I was contemplating some kind of savage ripost or 10,000 word screed. Or just spiking the whole darn thing. But when I got home, I put on Brahm’s Symphony #1, took a nap, and when I woke up, everything was much better. Thanks Johannes.

OK, now that I got that off my chest, some background. Galerie Mile End is an offshoot of the Park Avenue YMCA. It’s a kind of community centre/art studios/gallery/collective type of thing. You know, one of those places where people with day jobs that aren’t quite as fulfilling as they hoped, go after work to do creative things. Paint, Sculpt, Draw, etc. As a consequence a small supportive community arises out of and around them, and the people making the art don’t get driven crazy by their jobs/commute/relationships/kids, etc. Just in case yo9u thought I was being 100% literal, sorry, I over simplified things – it obviously isn’t that easy in real life, but you get the point. I’d like to say that I have followed the members of Galerie Mile End closely for the past 14 years and as a consequence can say with authority, that none of their members have ever gone on to make the jump from day job to full-time artist. But I haven’t, so I can’t and that’s just the last little bit of frustration leaking out of me, pay it never no mind. Things start looking up from here on it, I promise.

The reason I was interested in going to see the exhibit was because En Masse has kind of been taking over the city. It seems that everywhere I look, there is some very large black and white cartoon-like mural made by something like 70 dozen different local artists. It seems to me that Black and White is the new black – or maybe the new Friday, or something like that. Anyhows, I was curious to see if En Masse had had any influence on the fine folk at Galerie Mile End. In short no. While the exhibit at Galerie Mile End was a group show, it was not collaborative in the least. While there was something approaching thematic unity based on the title, I did see some greens, and a couple of other colors that were not black or white – and there was quite a lot of gray as well, which technically I figure is alright, but if I wanted to get all nit-picky about it, I could. But I think I have gotten rid of all the frustration I had over the weekend (I actually listened to the Brahms #1, something like four times…) so we’ll let it slide.

There were about three dozen different artists involved. Some of them showing multiple pieces (alright), some of them showing multiple pieces in very different media (not so hot). Anytime I look at any type of collection of art (or for that matter a collection of anything else) I try to make some sense out of it by looking for connections. When I am introduced to an artists’ work, it is extremely difficult to be able to grasp what they do, how they think, why they create or the thoughts behind their creations if their output goes from one extreme to another – especially with artists that I am unfamiliar with. It’s all fine and dandy for Picasso to sculpt, paint, and draw, he’s been dead for almost 40 years and his art is fairly well known in the Western world. He is not trying to impress anyone with his art anymore. However, some artist who isn’t quite as well known as Mr. Picasso ends up confusing the heck out of me if the first time I see some of their work there’s an abstract sculpture, a painting of some flowers and a cliched photograph with some kind of motivational text on it. I’m left wondering if the artist thinks that these particular objects are in fact their best work, or if in fact they think that absolutely everything they make is worthy of being exhibited? While I realize that people have many different facets to their personalities, trying to group the three pieces together into on e larger understanding of the motivation of the artist is not exactly easy. From where I sit, it would be better to have a show of just abstract sculptures, then another show of flower paintings a third of cliched motivational photography and only then have a show combining all three media. But that’s my personal preference, your may be different.

So as I can get it out of the way, and not have to try to remember to do it, these are the names of the artists participating in Blanc et Noir at Galerie Mile End: Anne Salomon, Bouthaina Bouzid, Celine Landry, Claude Lépine, Claudette Seguin-Beaulieu, Emily Wai Yee Leong, Esther Kanfi, Gaby Orbach, Henri Enfant, Josée Laurion, Laila Maestari, Louise Rousseau, Marcia Campillo, Michelle Bonneville, Monique Corbeil, Myles Johnston, Olga Maksimova, Paulette Dufresne, Pierre Foret, Rachel Dionne, Sandra Glenns, Thibauld Lelievre, and yves vaillancourt. By my count I think I liked four pieces (or at least that’s how many I starred in my notes). Not a good percentage in any way shape of form.

However (at some point I am going to have to either drop the use of the word “however” altogether, or start using it even more) that is not to say that the other works were not good, just that they weren’t up my alley. Using a different method of scoring, I would say that that about 90% of the works exhibited were technically good, proficient. That the artist making the work knew how to use their tools properly. That’s a much better percentage, don’t you think? But either way an exhibit is only as good as the worst piece in the show. And no matter how you cut it, there was some stuff in the exhibit that was weak both on a technical level and personally on an aesthetic level. If you’re going to use something as vague as “Black and White” as a unifying theme the quality of the art by definition needs to be of the highest caliber. I don’t know who was responsible for picking and choosing the art, but somehow I get the distinct impression that there was some kind of call made, and anyone and everyone who responded (including the people with art that included green) was accepted.

The show was hung, not so much with an eye to balancing the works. Nor did it seem to me as being hung in order to create (the dreaded) dialogue between pieces. The way that I saw it, the show was hung in an attempt to maximize the number of pieces that could be shown while for the most part trying to keep everything at eye level. As a consequence I either would hate to see the work that wasn’t accepted or I strongly suspect nothing was turned down.

Initially, in my outline this was where I was going to write about “The Good Stuff.” But now, I realize that really wouldn’t serve any purpose other than to piss people off – and given that I was pissed off over the weekend, passing it on doesn’t strike me as being particularly useful. As I said there are good pieces in the show, and there are even pieces in the show that I quite like, a lot. But the instant I make that division, someone is not going to be happy. Unfortunately, I really didn’t like the show itself. By now, that should be obvious. To me it was kind of like going to a restaurant where there was one dish that was amazing and wonderful, the rest of the meal was acceptable but the service was horrendous. An art exhibition is more than just slapping some art on the walls and serving some cheap wine at an opening. There needs to be something holding it together. There needs to be some focus and while there doesn’t need to be some theory behind it, it certainly doesn’t hurt. Then finally there should always be some threshold of what is acceptable to exhibit. It’s all fine and dandy to be polite and diplomatic in person and with people. Art (for the most part) is made up of inanimate objects that do not have feelings that would be hurt if they weren’t exhibited. Someone needs to take charge and draw that line when organizing an exhibition. That and let me take some pictures as well.

Blanc et Noir at Galerie Mile End, 5345 Park Ave. until June 17, 2012.

Roméo Savoie, Éventail (J) – stolen art alert

Howdy!

Roméo Savoie, Eventail (J) - image courtesy Sûreté du Québec
Roméo Savoie, Eventail (J) - image courtesy Sûreté du Québec

Unfortunately I have no details as to when it was stolen, where in Quebec it was stolen (if in fact it was stolen in Quebec), who it was stolen from or how it was stolen, or how much it is worth. The Sûreté du Québec has teamed up with the RCMP (and possibly the Montreal Police department as well) to have an art crimes unit. Every now and again they send out an email which lists (sometimes with pictures, sometimes without) of art that has been stolen. This was what was in the most recent one which was sent out last week.

It’s kind of nice, while at the same time being kind of frustrating. Not having access to all the information possible kind of makes for less than half a story. If you’d like to get on their mailing list and find out about stolen Quebecois art (although in this case it appears to be stolen Acadian art, as Roméo Savoie is Acadian) then send an email to Art.Alert@surete.qc.ca and ask.

I every now and again scan Craigslist and Kijiji, but haven’t come across anything yet. I presume that all the local auction houses check their lots against some list, but as I am typing that, I suddenly am not as confident. Empire, Iegor and La Maison des Encans de Montréal are the three major places to buy art in Montreal at auction.

The future belongs to crowds by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace

Howdy!

Over the weekend my timing was seriously off. I went to go see one exhibit that wouldn’t be opening for another two weeks, and then ended up at a second one almost two hours before the vernissage. Which actually, come to think of it, wasn’t half bad. For the most part, when alone, I hate, abhor, detest and really really dislike vernissages (aka art exhibit openings) and on Sunday, I was alone.

They are so bad, because a) because there are so many people, it’s always difficult, if not impossible to see the art. B) While there are exceptions, conversations with strangers about the art in front of you (that you haven’t really been able to see) can be awkward and difficult. C) Cheap wine is cheap wine. The gallery by offering it means well, but… D) Because I’m a sucker for most free stuff I end up drinking too much of it, which is never a good thing. E) Which leads to eating too much of the snack food, which is also not a good thing. F) Occasionally, Fairly often, some well meaning gallery owner will recognize me and try to buttonhole me, either earnestly trying to explain the art to me or very nicely, ask me my opinion about the art. And then G) Don’t even get me started about taking pictures.

But in this case it was perfect. As I was early, there was no one else there to block the art. As I was early the staff of the gallery were scurrying around opening bottles of wine, making party platters, etc and did not have that much time to buttonhole me. As I was early and the bottles of wine weren’t open, I didn’t drink the wine. Overall, if I can get my act organized I might just try to do it again.

Weegee Crowd at Coney Island, July 22, 1940, image courtesy The International Center of Photography
Weegee Crowd at Coney Island, July 22, 1940, image courtesy The International Center of Photography

But enough of the preamble. If I had been organized and shown up a week after the vernissage, this is how I would have started this article: Pink Espace is one of my favorite galleries in the entire city for a variety of reasons. In no particular order, Pat Pink is a really nice person. Pink Espace is run kind of like Zeke’s Gallery was run (although Ms. Pink started running galleries way before Zeke’s opened and will be running galleries for a long long time after. Most of the art she exhibits is really good. And in the past when I would show up, I would bring a six-pack and she would join me in a beer as I looked and we discussed whatever she was exhibiting at the time. This time it was an exhibit by Alain James Martin (not this guy) called The future belongs to crowds. He snagged (or borrowed, depending on your perspective) the title from the last line of the prologue in Don DeLillo‘s book Mao II. He also snagged (or borrowed, depending on your perspective) the content of the show from two photographs taken by Weegee in 1940. In a nutshell, he made 13 different drawings of the photographs. Each one a variation on a theme, changing either the inks, the type of instrument or focusing in on a different part of the photographs (or quite possibly, and I did not have the patience to check, possibly combining parts from both photographs into a new drawing).

Installation view of The Future Belongs to Crowds by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace
Installation view of The Future Belongs to Crowds by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace

Don DeLillo snagged (or borrowed, depending on your perspective) the title of his novel from an Andy Warhol painting. Given all this snagging (or borrowing) it’s a good thing that you can’t copyright a title… but I digress. However, I kind of like all this circular motion of art borrowing (or snagging) from other art. Not quite appropriation, but… And given that Mao II has a similar circularity, among other things it begins and ends with a wedding, it all seems rather appropriate. Contrary to Mr. DeLillo, I am quite fond of Weegee. I found out about him at about the same time Mr. DeLillo was writing Mao II. John Zorn had this band called Naked City that released an eponymous record which used a photograph by Weegee as its cover. As the internet wasn’t quite the thing that it is today, when I discovered that Mr. Martin was using a Weegee photograph as his source material, I exclaimed to Ms. Pink, “I didn’t know that Weegee took pictures of people who were still alive!”

The photographs themselves are called Crowd at Coney Island, July 22, 1940. In doing research, I couldn’t quite figure out if the photograph had been published anywhere during Weegee’s lifetime, but it is in the collections of both the International Center of Photography and MOMA. It’s also fairly small, especially in comparison to what Mr. Martin has done, pretty much 11″ x 14″. Whereas Mr. Martin’s largest drawing is 70″ x 38″. Also while doing research, it was a Sunday, both Alex Trebek and George Clinton were born (but neither in New York City, nor Coney Island) and Duke Ellington recorded four songs at RCA-Victor’s Studio 2. But none of that is here nor there with regards to the drawings by Mr. Martin. I just mention them in passing to give you a sense of what was up then.

Installation view of The Future Belongs to Crowds by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace
Installation view of The Future Belongs to Crowds by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace

Before I get too carried away with myself, I probably should try and explain to you what I saw. As I said, Mr. Martin basically copied the photograph 13 times. But the exhibit itself is much more than that. Whereas making a copy of a photograph using photographic means and methods was purely a chemical process and is now an electronic one. Making a copy of a photograph by drawing it yourself is very human. There are obviously going to be differences between the copy and the original. As well as differences between the copies themselves. Add to that, that Mr. Martin himself deliberately made changes in how he drew (changing frame colors, changing ink colors, changing pen types – fountain pen, crow quill tip – using a variety of tones with each color of ink, changing techniques – crosshatch, ink wash – as well as using different types of paper) along with choosing different parts of the photograph to copy and things can get dizzyingly confusing. However if you take a step back, it is way easier to view each of the drawings as something unique, which they are, things immediately become much simpler.

Crowds behave differently than individuals, there is a whole branch of psychology dealing with that. But it’s not worth getting into here. Seeing all 13 of the drawings together is an inherently different experience than looking at just one of the drawings. Each of the people in the original photographs taken 72 years-ago is an individual, but collectively they come together into something different. Mr. Martin by copying the original photographs probably has done more than anyone else has in regards to these specific pictures to break them down to their individual portraits. At some point, when I don’t have anything better to do, I’m going to have to go back to Pink Espace and plot out the drawings on a copy of the photographs to see for myself if he missed any spots. Ultimately though each drawing needs to be viewed individually. While the future may belong to crowds, the only way to understand that is by deciding that you agree, or disagree individually. There ain’t no crowd in the world that can make you change your own mind. If you prefer, and I kind of roll this way, they can be viewed as variations on a theme. Kind of making it obvious that they are unique and individual while at the same time accepting that they are linked.

Detail of Blue frame, 5 tone, ink crosshatch on Japanese paper by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace
Detail of Blue frame, 5 tone, ink crosshatch on Japanese paper by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace

In the press release Mr. Martin states that he was struck by the fact that “the scene is empty of mass-market merchandise and branding in all their forms.” I would respectfully disagree with him. While it is obvious that there are no logos in the way we are accustomed to seeing them today. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that due to the size of the original he wasn’t able to see the Coca-Cola and Pepsi bottles, the packs of Pall Mall, Chesterfield and Camel cigarettes, the Rheingold and Schaffer beer cans, the Levis’s jeans and the Converse sneakers. All of which would have been mass-marketed and branded. As well, since Weegee did not take a picture of the parking lots at Coney Island there are no Chevrolet, Chrysler, Ford or Cadillac logos to be seen, and since he didn’t take the picture on the boardwalk, there is no Nathan’s logo to be seen either. In choosing to use these specific photographs as his original source material he prevented himself from being able to see the mass marketing and branding. But it doesn’t mean that it wasn’t there.

I‘d also be extremely skeptical of the quote from Weegee that he uses in the press release

And this is Coney Island on a quiet Sunday afternoon … a crowd of over a million is usual and attracts no attention (I wonder who counts them) … it only costs a nickel to get there from any part of the city, and undressing is permitted on the beach. … Some come to bathe, but others come to watch the girls. A good spot being the boardwalk. … Of the families, some manage to get through the day without losing their children … but the city is prepared and at the Lost Child Shelter the crying kids are kept cooped up behind a barrier of chicken wire ’til their parents call for them … also in this shelter are kept the peddlers who are arrested for peddling on the beach … seeing their merchandise melt, the peddlers give their ice cream to the kids.- source

In 1940, the population of New York City was about 7.5 million. There is no way that 13% of NYC went to Coney Island, absolutely no way. In 1947 attendance for the whole year was five million. Also Weegee died in 1968 and the book where the quote is taken was published in 1975.

Bright Red frame, 5 tone, ink crosshatch on Japanese paper by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace
Bright Red frame, 5 tone, ink crosshatch on Japanese paper by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace

Then finally, I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least mention A country as big as a house, a series of watercolors done by Mr. Martin in the back room at Pink Espace of images from real estate listings. I think they’re all about 3″ x 5″ (maybe 4″ x 6″) in size and exquisite in nature. Initially done in 2008, it gives great insight into Mr. Martin’s ideas about making art and upon seeing all 50 of them it immediately makes perfect sense why he chose to copy Crowd at Coney Island, July 22, 1940.

This is running long now, and I probably should try and wrap things up. So while I’m not entirely convinced that the future belongs to crowds, I am 100% convinced that Mr. Martin’s The future belongs to crowds is an amazing series of drawings that really needs to be seen in person to be completely understood. The very nature of the task of copying such a small photograph so large is a feat to behold. Then once you start looking at what he has created, you can begin to appreciate both the exquisite nature of the drawings along with teh theoretical and historical nature behind it.

The future belongs to crowds by Alain James Martin at Pink Espace, 1399 Saint Jacques, Thursday to Sunday 13h to 17h.

Other at Yves LaRoche

Howdy!

Continuing on the exhibits I saw last week, while Yves Laroche says the show is called Tempest, it struck me much more as a solo show by Derek Mehaffey as I couldn’t really find anything where the work exhibited was thematically linked, let alone being tempestuous. (Although, if pressed, it’d be easy enough to say that all of Mr. Mehaffey’s work is tempestuous to a certain extent).

When I asked if I could take pictures, I was told “no.” So we’re going to have to do with versions from their website, and my pictures from the street. Another reason why it feels to me more like a bunch of paintings by Mr. Mehaffey than anything show-like, is that what they show on the website and what is shown in the gallery, are reasonable facsimiles, but not close to being the same thing. Kind of like the catalogue and exhibit for Wangechi Mutu at the Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal.

Then, one more thing before launching into the art itself, upon reading the press release, I truly hope that Mr. Mehaffey’s art can’t be seen in “countless art galleries around the world.” That would either imply a level of irresponsibility that is just mind boggling or that his work has been forged enough that he can’t be bothered to fight it anymore. Personally, I hope that it was just slip-up on the part of M. Laroche, when he was writing the press release, and he wanted to give the impression of lots and lots and lots of galleries, instead of giving the impression that Mr. Mehaffey can’t be bothered to keep track of the galleries that show his work.

Other  Pile of Person , Mixed media on paper, 11,25'' x 8,5'', image courtesy yveslaroche.com
Other Pile of Person , Mixed media on paper, 11,25'' x 8,5'', image courtesy yveslaroche.com

Yves Laroche Galerie d’art is one of the older art galleries in town having opened in 1991. They moved from Old Montreal to Little Italy/Mile End something like two years ago (although I could have sworn it was more like five years ago) and this was my first visit since the move. The two spaces couldn’t be more different from each other. Back in Old Montreal, there wasn’t a single white wall that I can remember, pieces were hung cheek to jowl, almost salon style. In a word cluttered, which was entirely and completely appropriate given that they had chosen (and continue to choose) to exhibit street art and other objects that are a reaction to, or commentary on the visual overload one gets in a 21st century city (I can’t remember ever seeing any graffiti in the countryside, can you?) Visiting the old space was almost like being an anthropologist and being able to study some previously unknown Amazonian tribe in situ (back when that was a good thing).

The new space is the exact opposite, all white walls, lots of space between the pieces of art. It seems like an attempt at getting uppity, possibly to justify the prices, possibly because as M. Laroche got older, he, like everyone else, got more conservative and did not need his senses assaulted from every angle, 24/7 when he went to work. Possibly because he got a great deal on a long term lease in a place that, unfortunately, did not have any 15 foot high brick walls, or most likely, some other equally valid reason, mine just being guesses.

Installation shot from the street of Tempest by Other at Yves Laroche galerie d'art
Installation shot from the street of Tempest by Other at Yves Laroche galerie d'art

When I visited, there were 19 different pieces being shown, although two of them were multiples, W, a linoleum print in an edition of 30 and Crying Boxcar in an edition of 10. As I’ve said previously, Mr. Mehaffey’s work can be called tempestuous. Mostly due to the fact that he makes big things with lots and lots of little things. In the same kind of way that a tempest is made up of lots and lots of tiny rain drops to make a big storm. Each of his large pieces is formed by many smaller drawings, sketches, collages, call them what you will, combined together not to make a larger whole image, but just a larger image with specific and individual parts that, for the most part, are recognizable as being separate from the whole. Kind of like a group portrait, in that we all recognize that there are a bunch of different people in a group portrait, and it is the group that makes the whole.

The major difference being that Mr. Mehaffey will not only use different objects, faces, things within a larger whole, he also will use a completely different method of making the image. One being drawn with marker, another in paint, a third in pencil, etc. And it is this heterogeneity that make his larger pieces absolutely fascinating and wonderful. I’m kind of annoyed that I was only limited to taking pictures from the sidewalk and using what’s on the yveslaroche.com website because neither one allows for closeups to show to amount of detail in any of the larger paintings.

Installation shot from the street of Tempest by Other at Yves Laroche galerie d'art
Installation shot from the street of Tempest by Other at Yves Laroche galerie d'art

For purposes of this article, I’m going to call those 19 different pieces the “show” despite the fact that there are 20 different pieces on the website with something like half-a-dozen that don’t correspond. The ones that worked best to me were the larger pieces on non-traditional bases, such as Pile of person 2.

Other  Pile of person 2 , Mixed technique on wood cut out, 79'' x 63'', image courtesy yveslaroche.com
Other Pile of person 2 , Mixed technique on wood cut out, 79'' x 63'', image courtesy yveslaroche.com

Although I’m still trying to decide if the dirt marks on How We Were were intentional or just an oversight.

Other  How We Were , Mixed media on canvas, 67,5'' x 53,75'', image courtesy yveslaroche.com
Other How We Were , Mixed media on canvas, 67,5'' x 53,75'', image courtesy yveslaroche.com

It was nice to see that a bunch of the pieces had sold, I guess both M. Laroche and Mr. Mehaffey will be able to pay next month’s rent. The show itself is up for another two days, and while it isn’t going to change anyone’s life, it’s still a pretty show that can easily occupy 15 to 30 minutes of your time before or after having an espresso and cornetto at the Cornetteria across the street from the gallery.

Other  Lighting the Path , Mixed media on panel 61"x42", image coutesy yveslaroche.com
Other Lighting the Path , Mixed media on panel 61"x42", image coutesy yveslaroche.com

Riopelle – Séries graphiques at Centre d’Archives de Montréal

Howdy!

Poster for Riopelle – Séries graphiques by Philippe Legris Design.
Poster for Riopelle – Séries graphiques by Philippe Legris Design.

Last week I went to see a bunch of shows that I had on my to-do list. One of them was Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal. The Centre d’archives de Montréal are one of my favorite places to see exhibits. Primarily because there is never anyone there, and secondarily because, for the most part, they produce high quality, well researched exhibits.

Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.
Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.

This was no exception to either reason. It was so empty that I was in fact able to (illegally) take pictures. Apologies that the pictures aren’t so great and are not comprehensive. I was kind of trying to dodge the two cameras installed on the ceiling. The short version is that it is a very good show, well worth the time spent. A longer more nuanced opinion would go something like this: I’m familiar with a bunch of Jean-Paul Riopelle’s prints. They are nice enough and without getting into too much detail there are obviously going to be some that are better than others.

For the most part, I would strongly suggest not buying any if you come across them. From what I have been told, there is a large possibility that it might be forged. But they are still pretty to look at. Since I did not read the press release before going to see it, I figured that it would be a selection of prints made by Riopelle over the years, presented either chronologically or thematically. While it was presented chronologically, it wasn’t exactly a “selection” of prints.

What it was, was a didactic exhibit that went chronologically through Riopelle’s career presenting examples from all the shows he did (or at least I think it was all the show he did) that were of prints. Since the salle Gilles-Hocquart isn’t the largest room around, it’s technically impossible to exhibit all of Riopelle’s prints. But what the curator, André Hénault, has done is to find examples of the original posters made to publicize the exhibits and placed them side by side with the original prints from which they were based, along with some examples of either the other prints exhibited, the associated book, or other objects.

Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.
Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.

The wall tags, or panels, are very thorough in explaining the when, the where, the what and the how. Although as it was a glorious day when I went to go see, I did not concentrate all that much on what they said. I figured if I ever needed to know the chronology of Riopelle’s prints, I knew where to find the information. It’s tough to argue about Riopelle’s art. He is a very significant and influential Quebecois artist. Since he dies 10 years ago, it’s doesn’t make any sense to say that this particular print is good, and that one is not good.

Obviously, there are certain prints that are more important than others, there are prints that are better made than others, etc. But that’s the kind of stuff that M. Hénault is there for. Had I really been interested in things like that I probably would have read the wall tags. Next time.

Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.
Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.

While I quite like most of Riopelle’s work (I don’t think I’ve ever seen something by him that I thought was crap) seeing yet another exhibit of his work is kind of frustrating. It’s like seeing yet another Warhol show, or yet another Picasso show, or yet another Van Gogh show. While they are all fine and dandy, I can’t help but believing that there are other artists who are as deserving of an exhibit, but for whatever reasons are denied.

There are nine other people who signed the Refus Global who made two dimensional art who are way less known than Riopelle (personally I’d love to see a show of work by Madeleine Arbour or Louise Renaud) why they don’t get shown more frequently, I don’t know. While I understand the importance of maintaining the status quo, sometimes enough is enough.

Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.
Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.

But that’s complaining about stuff that has nothing to do with the art being shown and everything to do with the bureaucracy involved in mounting an exhibit. Two completely different things. Returning to focus on the show at hand, I got a kick out of seeing the original print juxtaposed next to the publicity poster. On one hand, it’s cool to be able to make the comparisons. Given that they are both being exhibited it also makes you kind of think about what is art, and what is historical artifact.

I‘m fairly certain, that there are lots of people who bought the Galerie Maeght publicity posters, framed them and stuck them on their walls, because they couldn’t afford the originals. Does the fact that an object is not unique or limited make it any less pretty or significant?

Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.
Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.

There are also examples of Derriere le mirroir, the magazine published by the Galerie Maeght, and there is a bunch of other material that is presented bound, as it was initially conceived (the problem with showing bound material is that you can only see one or two pages of a multi-page object – and while I am not exactly clear on who needs to be asked so you can see one, I’m 100% positive that it is possible). It’s exactly that sort of ephemera, or obscure material that helps to flesh out an exhibition and make it more enjoyable. As I’ve said many times, getting a sense of discovery when viewing a piece of art, or an exhibit is extremely important to me, and when the art objects themselves aren’t something fresh and new, as is the case with prints by Riopelle, adding other stuff that isn’t normally seen is a surefire way to bring it on in spades.

Beyond that, the show is a tad cramped, or if you prefer, dense. If you’re planning on reading all the wall tags, I’d suggest planning for at least an hour, and maybe two depending on your level of understanding of French.

Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.
Installation shot of Riopelle – Séries graphiques in the salle Gilles-Hocquart du Centre d’archives de Montréal.

Tom Wesselmann work as an advertisement

Howdy!

I presume that Metro got permission from the appropriate authorities, but it is still kind of jarring to see Tom Wesselmann’s work being used to shill for a grocery store.

Advertisement in the Musée des beaux-arts de Montréal's magazine M
Advertisement in the Musée des beaux-arts de Montréal's magazine M

Big Bang at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts

Howdy!

Like everyone, a museum gets the winter doldrums
Organizing an exhibit is better than twiddling one’s thumbs.
I can hear them now, “we’ve got two and a half months to fill.”
“Something local and cross-disciplinary would fit the bill!”

Let’s get some local vedettes, get them to choose something from our collection
Have them respond in kind with their art, kind of like making a connection.”
In theory and on paper the idea looked good if not great,
The sad truth of the matter, unfortunately was a bunch of art that was second rate.

The first pairing was Rodin with Michel Rabagliati
The cartoon and the sculpture were fine, but the incessant noise drove me batty.

Pierre Soulages and Roland Poulin
Brush strokes on canvas, brushed metal, sounds like a plan.

Jean Verville and Pierre Lapointe used Patrick Join’s C2 chair
Stacked plastic chairs and a ditty on a piano was what we were supposed to compare.
There was no info on the song, and I bet their stock came from Home Depot.
I can’t quite decide if they mailed it in, or if they just had a budget that was cheap-o.

Adad Hannah and Denys Arcand wanted to use Archizoom’s Safari Sofa
So they made a multi-channel video about a bunch of cocaine snorting loafers.
The sound track should have been disco but was more world beat
And there were other details that, for me, made it incomplete.

Renata Morales likes George Segal’s Woman Sitting on a Bed
She made something to represent everything in the woman’s head.
Birds and dolls made from cloth, a tad simplistic,
But from a clothing designer quite artistic.

Jennifer Alleyn and Nancy Huston used some drawings from Jennifer’s dad.
The technology failed and as a consequence this installation was both sad and bad.

Gilles Saucier used Composition 11 by Borduas
One shiny white wall, one shiny black wall, kind of blah.

Riopelle’s The Circus was used by Jeannot Painchaud
She took it kind of literally and her videos of circus performers fairly glowed.
Next time, I’d suggest instead of the title that she focus on the content
Making something that combines with the original, to augment.

Marie Chouinard was the most egregious
The pictures of her dancers were atrocious.
Looking at them, you couldn’t see the piece from the museum
Perfect definition of the word hokum.

Melissa Auf de Maur liked Hodler’s Halberdier,
Taking pictures of herself naked with old army gear.
How a panoramic camera becomes a weapon
I something that I can’t reckon.

En Masse used Penck’s Start of the Lion Hunt
As an excuse to paint a large room, left, right, back and front
Completely with cartoon like drawings in white and black
Their work is not a tough nut to crack.

Wadji Mouwad used a photograph by Catherine Opie
As a means to talk about childhood very aggressively.
But beyond the quote, I think all the art was made by Raymond Marius Boucher
He gets credit for “Art Direction” and probably can better make what Wadji wanted to convey.

Genvieve Cadieux compared her work to Tom Thomson’s Northern Lights
Marfa, Texas is not Northern Ontario, unless it’s history she rewrites.

Claude Cormier used a piece of 12th century religious art
And a wall of stuffed animals, probably thought he was being smart.

Jean Derome wasn’t content with just one.
27 paintings, and 72 pieces of music is just a little overdone.
It would have been nicer if he hadn’t relied so much on chance.
And if there was more light, viewing the paintings would have been enhanced.

Rita redid a Lawren Harris painting as couches
Stéphane Halmaï-Voisard and Karine Corbeil are no slouches.
Nice to end the exhibit on a high note.
Leaving with a smile is always good; quote, unquote.

John Currin at the DHC/ART Foundation

Howdy!

Fourth Floor

Big Hands, 2010
Big Hands, Big Breasts,
Small Head, shirt knot on her chest.

Big Hands by John Currin
Big Hands by John Currin

Deauville, 2007 & Rotterdam, 2006
I‘m not sure what Deauville has to do with Rotterdam
If the pictures were taken in a brothel, do royalties get paid to the Madam?
As long as I am asking questions I wonder if either one uses a diaphragm?
Quite possibly, the easiest way to explain “wham bam thank you ma’am.

Malmö, 2006
Malmö’s another brothel scene
The couple pictured doesn’t look older than eighteen.

The Dane, 2006
The second act of Hamlet would be easier to explain
To high school males if it was illustrated with “The Dane.”

Big breasted naked women with mismatched body parts
Apparently one of them is his sweetheart
Despite the fact that his brushwork is never roughshod
There’s something that always seems odd.

Patch and Pearl, 2007
Patch and Pearl gazing out in the distance
A complete understanding gives some resistance.

Patch and Pearl by John Currin
Patch and Pearl by John Currin

Third Floor

Thanksgiving, 2003
Singing for her supper or taking a taste?
The action in this painting is not snail-paced.
Not at all traditional, kind of quirky,
Take a gander at the size of the turkey.

Thanksgiving by John Currin
Thanksgiving by John Currin

Rachel in Fur, 2002
Currin as Kusiemski?
Would you disagree?
Given his porn paintings
It’s hard to see them abstaining.

Bent Lady, 2003
A Bent Lady with a bunch of roses
Damien Hirst Knowses.

Anna, 2004
Anna smiles sweetly behind a banana and a three branched candelabrum
No matter how hard I try, this isn’t abstract expressionism.

Anna by John Currin
Anna by John Currin

The Christian, 2005
Some woman with a melon as a breast,
I would hate to see how he paints her fesses.
I don’t understand all the fruit in a bowl
Does eating grapes help your soul?

The Christian by John Currin
The Christian by John Currin

Second Floor

The Old Guy, 1994
I like the skinny dude’s sweater
He’s an old guy, I hope he gets better.
Hanging out in the bathroom
Is he talking? And if so to whom?

The Berliner, 1994
Did Mr. Currin live in Berlin?
The paint on this one is not thin.
There’s still something weird
It might be the hair, it might be the beard.

The Invalids, 1997
It took a while for me to notice the wheelchair
Smack dab in the middle of the painting is a mighty big pair.
Add to that hand coming out of her head
And you can understand how I was misled.

Sno-bo, 1999
Santa’s little helper
Diaphanous skirts as it were.
The two don’t quite meld.
While I was looking at it parts of my body swelled.

Sno-bo by John Currin
Sno-bo by John Currin

Stamford after brunch, 2000
I wonder what the etiquette
is in Stamford, Connecticut?
Smoking cigars and drinking martinis,
I’m surprised that they’re not wearing bikinis!

Stamford  after Brunch by John Currin
Stamford after Brunch by John Currin

Honeymoon Nude, 1998
I wonder if Ms. Feinstein sculpted John
Or is showing her off naked, for him a turn on?

First Floor

The Neverending Story, 1994
Atreyu? Bastian Bux?
Is he thinking, “I wonder if she fucks?”

The Neverending Story by John Currin
The Neverending Story by John Currin

Girl in bed, 1993
Whose hand? And why’s she looking away?
Is she lost in her thoughts and far away?
Or is it bedtime and she’s about to hit the hay?

Mrs. Omni, 1993
You can never be too thin or too rich.
Mrs. Omni is a fairly standard issue portrait about which
There isn’t much I can say.
I can’t figure out why he chose her to portray.

Bea Arthur Naked, 1991
I wonder if Mr. Currin watched Maude
When he was growing up? And was awed
As I was by the television show.
Although I have to admit I dreamt about Adrienne Barbeau.

Old Couple, 1993
Two people painted on a background that’s beige
Despite, or maybe because of, their clothes, they look their age.

Brown Lady, 1991
What’s the opposite of brown?
While she’s smiling, I frown.
There’s something off, not quite right
I think it has to do with the background being very bright.

The Wizard, 1994
A wizard, a thaumaturge, a necromancer
Those breasts definitely enhance her.
I’m not certain I want to know what type of spell he will cast
This was the first painting in the show and it mirrors the last.

Apologies, I only realized too late that I had failed to recite these last four lines. When it comes time to release the “Director’s Cut” version, I will re-record it completely.