Getting rid of the backlog (again) The CBC version
Howdy!
It looked like the end of June was a good month for the Visual Arts on the CBC's website:
June 16 - an article on Jean Paul Lemieux by Alec Scott.
June 22 - an article on Micah Lexier by Alison Gillmor.
June 22 - an article on drawing by Sascha Hastings.
July 7 - the previously discussed article on Sam Borenstein by Matthew Hays.
But since then, nada, nothing, zilch.
While we're here and talking about them Ms. Hastings gets an A+ for his article. Meaty, beaty, big and bouncy, it is absolutely everything I think an article about art in the mainstream media should be. Serious shout-outs and props. If their is anybody out there looking for an arts writer, I recommend her highly.
Ms. Gillmor gets a C+, for everything great that Mr. Hastings got right, Ms. Gillmor gets wrong. Her lines like
Mr. Scott's article falls between the two, getting a B. More like an Canadian Art History chapter than a review of a show. He avoids the artspeak that I hate, which is a good thing. However, doesn't voice his personal opinion, which is a bad thing.
Since I forgot to give Mr. Hays a grade when I first wrote about his article, I'll mend that now. C+ losing points for a lack of opinion, relying on the artist's daughter to explain the significance of a painting (sorta like asking Maria Shriver to explain the significance and importance of the films of Arnold Schwarzenegger.) He would have been better off reviewing Ms. Borenstein's film as a film.
[update: August 11, 2005: I waqs told in no uncertain terms that Ms. Hastings, is in fact a she, much to my chagrin. It has been corrected, and apologies made.]
It looked like the end of June was a good month for the Visual Arts on the CBC's website:
June 16 - an article on Jean Paul Lemieux by Alec Scott.
June 22 - an article on Micah Lexier by Alison Gillmor.
June 22 - an article on drawing by Sascha Hastings.
July 7 - the previously discussed article on Sam Borenstein by Matthew Hays.
But since then, nada, nothing, zilch.
While we're here and talking about them Ms. Hastings gets an A+ for his article. Meaty, beaty, big and bouncy, it is absolutely everything I think an article about art in the mainstream media should be. Serious shout-outs and props. If their is anybody out there looking for an arts writer, I recommend her highly.
Ms. Gillmor gets a C+, for everything great that Mr. Hastings got right, Ms. Gillmor gets wrong. Her lines like
The Davids thus became an oblique kind of self-portrait, part of Lexier's compulsion to explore time, memory, measurement and mortality, and the way these issues are bound up together in the aging processand the fact that she reference two images that aren't reproduced (and three that are not referenced are reproduced) makes me wince in pain and wish that whoever is her friend at CBC would stop asking her to do field reports about the arts in New York City.
Mr. Scott's article falls between the two, getting a B. More like an Canadian Art History chapter than a review of a show. He avoids the artspeak that I hate, which is a good thing. However, doesn't voice his personal opinion, which is a bad thing.
Since I forgot to give Mr. Hays a grade when I first wrote about his article, I'll mend that now. C+ losing points for a lack of opinion, relying on the artist's daughter to explain the significance of a painting (sorta like asking Maria Shriver to explain the significance and importance of the films of Arnold Schwarzenegger.) He would have been better off reviewing Ms. Borenstein's film as a film.
[update: August 11, 2005: I waqs told in no uncertain terms that Ms. Hastings, is in fact a she, much to my chagrin. It has been corrected, and apologies made.]
posted by Zeke's, the Montreal Art Gallery on 14.7.05
<< Home