EXTREME MATERIALS II and MORE MAG

Yesterday I toured “Extreme Materials II” at Memorial Art Gallery. Putting words to intuition is my challenge and frankly, my intuition after this viewing was “ho hum, you really can’t go home again.” I remember writing a rave review of the first “Extreme,” a show that revealed a light-hearted soul. For the most part, the current show just tries too hard – and mostly fails.

There are the usual pieces trying to shock - a dress made out of condoms, a cake made out of tampons, a “drawing” made with blood. Sorry. Been there/seen that. The single piece that did move me was a pearl bonnet made from millions of corsage pins. Angela Ellsworth, its creator, grew up a Mormon, and WOW! Does this piece ever speak loud and clear about the restraints of women, particularly in that society.

Mostly, after reading the art review in City Newspaper, I really wanted to see Jennifer Angus’ installation “Creature Comforts.” This installation fills the entire Lockhart Gallery space with wall drawings (note: drawing medium: dead bugs.) The City reviewer wondered how people could voice such outrage over Otterness’ misstep (see previous blog entry) but casually accept this dead bug creation. Are puppies more important than bugs? Is there a hierarchy that dictates which killing is acceptable and why?

WELL!! This does illicit some soul searching! How do we feel about killing … anything?

I admit that without so much as a qualm, I swat flies, mosquitoes, and set traps for mice in my attic. These guys are fine in their own space but not in mine. I’ve recently given up eating meat products, not because of some enlightened political awareness of the cruelty being inflicted in this industry but because I’ve become convinced that my own health will improve with a “green diet.”

As for Jennifer Angus’ bugs, her effort leaves me dismally unmoved. I cannot call it art. Maybe it illustrates a certain craftsmanship like stenciling or beadwork or…something. Pinning bugs to a background is hardly new; Victorians did it all the time. Visit any natural museum to come away awed by the beauty and variety of insects.

So I’m back to the original question: because Angus’ installation is NOT art but simply arrangement and Otterness did his dirty deed in the name of ART (CAPITAL LETTERS), it seems to me that yes, there is a difference. Is this dishonest? Am I just moving the rules around? These thoughts flew around my brain at 3 o’clock this morning.

And then, PRESTO FIXO, ten minutes ago, an email came to me with these Otterness images of some of his current work and I know what it is about him that disturbs me most: I just don’t believe he regrets shooting that dog!

Call it whatever you want, meanness and torture in the name of art is still meanness and torture.

Is This a Fight Worth Taking On?

Tom Otterness adopted a puppy from an animal shelter, tied it to a fence and shot it. He called it performance art and filmed the entire episode for gallery viewing.

Shocking? Today, he would face prosecution – certainly public condemnation. I can’t imagine any art gallery or museum condoning such extravagant lack of moral integrity. But back in 1977 when this event took place, few people ever heard of PETA. Football star Michael Vick had not been jailed for promoting dog fighting. The ASPCA maintained a near invisible profile and newspapers rarely ran stories of starving farmyard animals.

Now, thirty years later, Otterness is one of the country’s top “go-to” guys for public art. He’s established a successful career making big, comfy bronze sculptures of cute animals and marshmellowy people. Most recently, Rochester’s Memorial Art Gallery awarded him nearly a million dollars to produce two sculptures for their re-configured University Avenue entrance.

The fun begins! The Democrat & Chronicle ran a piece exposing Otterness’ controversial history on September 29, 2011, but before that, PETA members began making some noise and several MAG members cancelled their museum membership in protest.

Rochester is late coming to this party. Otterness lost several BIG commissions in 2008 when this became news and San Francisco cancelled their contracts with him. Otterness apparently said “I’m sorry…I was young” or something equally inconsequential and continued making pieces for schools, parks, and subway stations in New York City. With this history, the selection committee at MAG selected this artist for one of our cities largest, richest art commissions. Not only is this artwork among the highest price Rochester has arguably ever spent on art (and that’s a sad story right there), it announces our collective value-taste by it’s position at the entrance to our art suppository.

How could they? Didn’t they see this coming?

First, the popularity of this artist speaks volumes about where we’ve gone collectively with public art. Selection committees do NOT WANT SERIOUS ART. They want “likable art,” that doesn’t rattle patrons nor whisper of any controversy. Please! No ideas! Gentle fun is called for and if it appeals to children especially, the artist has hit a home run! One might think that the campus of an art museum could be safe from the slings and arrows of art conservatives, that this is the singular place for challenging, thought provoking work. Obviously, in Rochester, NY, this would be a wrong assessment. Our beloved institution proves yet again that it will always take the middle road, erring on the lower side when necessary.

As for Otterness, setting aside the lack of artistry in his work – he is a very good equipment designer and his timing seems inspired! – he must be one of the more intellectually challenged artist I’ve heard of recently. A serious question: does youth ever erase the act of cruelty? I know lots of mothers who begin instilling the opposite message in their children at earliest ages. But having “done the deed” and been called out on it, wouldn’t you think Otterness might come up with a way to public ally atone for his misstep? A significant public gift to a zoo, establishing a foundation to aid the fight for animal rights, endowing a prize for beginner sculptors – any of these might be a start. A simple verbal “I’m sorry” will not do the trick.