The article discusses the initial funding strategies for the new GRAM, which mentions the

more than $20 million donated by Peter Wege - who also steered them to build 'green'. The rest of the article, as well as the entire Museum section, continues to focus on development and dollar amounts. The NY Times evens goes as far to provide online readers with an interactive map of museum expansion across the country.

Just a few days after this article ran, Michigan Governor, Jennifer Granholm, announced a moratorium on all state funding for arts and cultural organizations [see: Grand Rapids Press article]. The freeze on this funding will remain for the rest of the fiscal year which ends September 30th. This reactionary move by the state of Michigan is in response to the state's budget crisis, which is undoubtedly related to Michigan's new ranking as the state with highest unemployment rate. Michigan surpassed Alabama and South Carolina, with an employment rate of 6.9% [see: U.S. Dept. of Labor report, March 8, 2007].

What really seems to be the focus here? How is it possible that between $60 and $75 million is being dropped on a building to house art, when people who make art can't even receive a mere fraction of this money? Grand Rapids realizes the wonderful things that Peter Wege has done and continues to do for the city of Grand Rapids, the state of Michigan and the environment - but sustainability goes beyond the architecture of a building. If populations interested in frequenting buildings like the GRAM, or even producing objects to be housed there, can't survive - what is the point in creating something sustainable and long lasting?

LAMB calls for Peter Wege and other philanthropists interested in the arts to actively create an endowment dedicated to arts production in the city of Grand Rapids. Those interested please contact: LAMB.

by Kevin Buist

From February to March 2007, Khora, the Calvin College art gallery at 106 S. Division, presented Crossing the River, a solo show by Eugene Dening. The opening was accompanied by a performance by Peter J. Brant of Ben and Bruno. The collection of drawings and paintings suggested a loose narrative, exploring ideas of coming-of-age, transcendent encounters with nature, and male sexual identity. I recently spoke with Eugene about the show.

Kevin Buist: I want to start by asking you about the show, and how Crossing the River came about.

Eugene Dening: Well, I’ve been interested in ideas of coming-of-age, specifically American coming-of-age films. I’ve been looking at that and noticing a lot of recurring imagery. And so I wanted to take a lot of that imagery and sort of insert myself into that type of story, maybe as a way to look at my own coming of age, or even just to look at that genre of story telling and why we have these recurring images.

KB: Any specific films you were looking at?

ED: I was looking at a lot of them, like Stand By Me, obviously, Undertow, which is a more recent one, Days of Heaven, Mean Creek…there’s a lot of them, there are so many coming of age movies, but I think those are some of the most important ones. Ones where a landscape played an important role.

KB: Yeah, I was just going to say, it seems like with a lot of those films, and with the work, there’s an attention to a wilderness landscape, a forest, where there’s a sojourn into a wild area.

ED: Yeah, and one of the most important images that kept recurring in these movies was a river, as something that people would maybe walk down, or cross, as maybe a metaphor for a journey, or coming of age itself. And a lot of times there was a death in a river at the end of these movies, or a death in a river as a catalyst for more violence or for a journey. Like in Stand By Me there was a death in a river, and in Undertow the pursuer of these kids dies in a river, and in Days of Heaven also, and Mean Creek is another one where someone was killed in a river. Another movie that was really influential was Palindromes. And with a lot of these more recent movies I think that the filmmakers are really intentional about using that sort of imagery, or tapping into that sort of archetype, so I was interested in doing something similar to that.

ED: Yeah, I was thinking about it as maybe an establishing shot, or in graphic novels there’s sometimes just a frame, just a landscape,

so you can maybe take a breath or to set the scene, and so I was interested in that idea. And then also how it forces more of an interaction between the two pieces.

KB: So you’re from Western Canada, right? Did you grow up in an environment like that?

ED: Yeah, I grew up in the country and it was fairly isolated. And so a lot of the imagery comes from that, but at the same time this isn’t autobiographical, in some areas it vaguely is, but it’s mostly an invention. A lot of the imagery, the landscape, and definitely the animals, that exist in the area…

KB: Speaking of the animals, it seems like with your work, especially this group of work, there’s this set of icons, like these little characters that keep recurring. There’s these birds that are usually tethered by the mouth somehow, cowboys, teenage boys in parkas, elk, moose, the embryo, motocross, tree forts…

How did some of those things come about? And do you want those things to represent specific meanings, or are they just supposed to be evocative of…?

ED: I don’t know, I’ve been struggling with that, how concrete to make the imagery, or the symbols, because for some things it’s maybe a bit more explicit. I didn’t want to…make a list of all the images: so this means this and this means this… I wanted to approach it more intuitively and work through these ideas through drawing. Because if I was going to just write out everything and make it really clear and then paint that, then it probably should have just stayed as this essay or whatever it was. So, I wanted to work through things just through drawing, and I think that for me that meant that it wasn’t going to be always entirely clear-cut. But as I’ve worked through it I’ve been noticing a lot of this recurring imagery, and playing with it, and sort of discovering exactly what it meant as I went along.

KB: Bearing in mind that you decided not to nail down concrete meanings for the different symbols and recurring themes, I still can’t help but look at the images, especially the ones with the character/narrative elements, and be reminded of certain children’s books. Just like a certain sense of young people interacting with animals, and with an environment, and there does seem to be an element of a journey, and with those more traditional mediums, and even some of those films you mentioned, there is a sense of a moral, the completion of the journey and things learned along the way. Do you want the viewer to come away from the work with a moral? Or would you rather just leave that open?

ED: I think I would like to leave it open, but yeah, it sort of starts with a birth and ends with the final scene in the river, which was sort of the final event in a lot of these movies. But I think it’s still quite open, I don’t have a specific moral I want people to come away with.

KB: Part of the installation is this wall where you’ve made these painted letters of scripture [when I was a child i spoke like a child i understood as a child I thought as a child but when I became a man I put childish things behind me]. What is that passage and how does it play into the show? More specifically, I was wondering is it a foundation on which this narrative takes place, or is it meant to be read as a juxtaposition or in opposition with the other content of the show?

ED: I guess I was thinking about it as another piece. That passage interested me because it relates really well to these ideas. But I guess it’s more me working through that idea, and I don’t have a real concrete idea of what it means. One of the things I was doing with that, by doing the pink bubble letters, in a way kind of saying it in a stupid voice, you know? And maybe saying it a little sarcastically, but at the same time maybe I am kind of sincere about that idea. But I am definitely questioning that idea or trying to see how that happens, this transition that this verse talks about. But I think it definitely works to frame the exhibition, to help people to know how to look at the images.

KB: It’s interesting because, theologians could argue about whether or not it’s intentional, but the passage is phrased with a definite level of gender-specificity about becoming a man. There seems to be a lot of images that probe masculine identity and culture, like obviously the cowboy is a big theme, and you say in your artist’s statement that in some images the issue of same-sex attraction comes up. So I was wondering, are you seeking to take an idea of masculinity and expand it? Or are you seeking to directly confront, or tear down and rebuild, an established idea of masculinity, like that cowboy idea of masculinity?

ED: I guess maybe what I’m more interested in is trying to understand how that process happens, how you go from being a child to becoming this man. And I think that idea of what a man is was really pervasive where I grew up, and for some reason I’m not like that, and I’m curious why not. I don’t really like being confrontational. I don’t think the imagery is confrontational, maybe it is. Maybe it’s a bit passive aggressive, or trying to pull it apart through irony.

KB: I think some certain questions, just in the event of them being asked, can seem confrontational to certain viewers. But the work doesn’t seem intentionally confrontational to me, but I think it could be read that way, depending on who’s seeing it.

One of the themes of the imagery is there’s these tree fort like structures, and there’s a certain care-free, childlike element of play, and how does that play into the work and the making of the work?

ED: Well with the tree forts, and I think it happens a couple of times, the idea of building and looking upwards…that comes from an interest in transcendence or looking for a spiritual presence. But also I was thinking about how making art is for me an optimistic and joyful experience. So I want my art to be joyful, and to help people find maybe love, grace, and maybe help people live more joyful lives. And I don’t know if that’s successful, because that’s something I’ve been thinking about more recently, but that’s an area that I am more interested in, about playfulness, or just having fun, and taking pleasure in the world, and humor, also, which is really important to this show.

KB: There’s a passage in your artist’s statement where you talk about the “moment where beauty gives way to melancholy.” I was wondering if you could expand on that idea a little more.

ED: There’s sort of these moments of violence, but I never show the violence, it’s sort of the moment before that happens. A lot of people, when they look at the imagery, especially the one of the birds and the trees, they think it’s really beautiful and playful, but when they start to look closer at it or maybe hear the story behind it, they may be a little bit repelled or repulsed because of what is actually happening. So maybe that tension between something that’s beautiful, but if it were to happen a couple seconds later it would be grotesque. So that transition, of when does something that’s beautiful become ugly?

KB: In the artist’s statement, you talk about the beauty that gives way to melancholy, then you list certain things like violence and tragedy, then you also list the issue of same-sex attraction. How does that play into that tension of beauty and melancholy?

ED: That’s a complicated question. With the same-sex attraction, I don’t see it as being something that’s very explicit, but it’s something that I’ve been consistently thinking about with all the pieces. That was a really difficult one, because I wanted to think about it, but I didn’t want to do it explicitly.

KB: Well I think there is certainly one aspect of masculinization that’s a collective sense among men about what is beautiful. That has a lot to do with objectifying women in a lot of ways, and there’s like the cheesy stereotypical rec-room painting scene, with a moose, and a tree line, and mountains in the background, which echoes some of your imagery as well. So there does seem to be a twisting, there’s a bit of a flip there when some of those masculine ideas of what’s beautiful get turned on their ear.

ED: And I think it relates to something about shame. Or something that could be beautiful, but is almost always melancholy.

KB: I think you’re on to something with the shame aspect, because there’s a tension between what people find beautiful personally, and what’s acceptable to find beautiful according to everyone else.

ED: Right. Like what I’m allowed to think is beautiful because of my personal identity or my gender identity, or what I’m allowed to find pleasure in.

As abstract expressionism began to take hold as the innovative style in the U.S. in the 1950s, there were some that felt otherwise. In Grand Rapids, a group of young artists began working together to maintain their realistic style of painting. William Kubiak, Reynold "Rey" Weidenaar, Thomas Hoover, Carl Forslund and Armand Merizon formed the Grand Valley Artists group and have been working together since with the association now reaching over 250 artists.

"Artists work alone. It's a cocoon-like existence," said Forslund, who still attends monthly GVA critiques after all these years. "This group gives us the opportunity to interrelate, work together (and find) camaraderie." (Grand Rapids Press, 2/18/07)

GVA will be celebrating their 50 years on April 27 at their new space located at 1120 Monroe Ave. NW

GRAM announces opening date

After minor delays, and waiting with anticipation - the Grand Rapids Art Museum has now announced an official opening date of October 5, 2007. If you haven't heard this a hundred times already, the GRAM will be the first and only art museum in the world to have its entire facilities LEED certified.

Impromtu collaboration at Mexicains Sans Frontieres; Jonathan Harnum, Johnny Unicorn and Hugo Claudin

by Hugo Claudin

I have been living in Grand Rapids for 26 years. In that time I have collaborated extensively with other artists in the area, why? Because I wanted to create an artistic community. Since I arrived in Grand Rapids people have asked me why I don't move to Chicago or New York? Why would an artist of your talent stay here where there is no so called "art scene"? And my answer was always "Exactly"...

Four years ago I went to Baja for an extended sabbatical and worked with Mexican printmaker Angel Flores he introduced me to a very hard selling method he employed to sell his work which was basically carrying his portfolio under his arm at all times and stopping people on the street and saying "Hey, would you like to see my work?" Angel always had money.

Upon returning from Mexico I ran into dancer-choreographer Rachel Finan and proposed to her the idea of creating a gesamtkunstwerk , that is an all encompassing work of art using art, poetry, music and dance in one show. We took Federico Garcia Lorca's Blood Wedding and put an add for bilingual actors. The night before auditions I talked to Rachel and told her, "If more than three people show I'm in, otherwise I'm going home to read my new Artforum." 30 people showed up for the first audition and 20 more for the second. Blood Wedding was presented at Urban Institute of Contemporary Art and played four nights straight with a bigger crowd each time. I was amazed. The first bilingual play to appear in Grand Rapids. This collaborating partnership went on to do many other projects including shows that incorporate butoh with free jazz, plays, and even a rather successful burlesque show.

Part 2:
It was around 1989 that I picked up a job by the Gerald R Ford airport. I was studying at Kendall College and working in a factory, between the two I would stop at a bookstore on 28th St called Schuler Books. A slight man occupied the counter, his names was Jeff Boughner. I remember how exciting it was to me to find this little gem only blocks from the megamall, there was this little sanctuary where one could browse through the books and magazines without being shoo'ed away. A couple of years later I began working at Schuler's as a sales clerk, I wanted to do the Art section but a bearded man had that post already and he held it another ten years. So I happily took the poetry section as long as I did the pop psych section as well. I became friends with Jeff Boughner and slowly discovered that this shy man who was the floor manager but had tons of music running through his veins.

Jeff Boughner. Date, unknown

There was hardly a topic about music or art that Jeff was not hip to. After a few years of working together the Schuler-ites decided there was enough talent in the store to put a show together with music, poetry and we got permission to do a night of bohemia. That was how Haje Nebula was born, this group later was renamed Blue Nebula. Jeff was an amazing guitar player and had the chops and ear to improvise beautifully. Jeff Boughner, Al Thayer and myself got a loft in a warehouse on Front street that became the Jesus Free Zone, my first studio in Grand Rapids. Several seminal bands rehearsed here including Mommy Wont Wake Up, C3, Little Miss Wintakaitis, Knunk, Better Disease and others I cant remember. Jeff was open to the idea of mixing jazz, noise, art. Anything. The Haje Nebula added John Corrigan on drumkit and I did hand percussion, we also added another conga player named Luis Merced. This ensemble played locally at venues like Arco Iris where on several occasions local poets jumped right in and read their poetry over the sounds of the band. I don't know many musicians in town who would put up with this, but Jeff just smiled and enjoyed the moment.

Jeff [far right] with Blue Nebula

Through March 18, you can check out new work from two local printmakers, Scott Travis and Evan Chamberlin. In most prints,the plate is largely forgotten. This is in spite of the inherent beauty that many artists find in the worked copper. The prints currently hanging up at the Division Ave Arts Cooperative [DAAC] subtly allude to the trace of process,being as conceptually important for both artists as the final work, though in different ways and in different contexts.

Scott Travis regards the plate as a sculptural object,and evokes a physicality in the print through an embossing. The emboss allows light to create a compositional boundary between figures in the image,while creating a push and pull between the window effect of the two dimensional with the objecthood of the print itself. There is no frame to give it added preciousness or distinction from its viewers, just a sheet of plexi to help it survive potential moshing or milling about at the DAAC.

The imagery is a combination of human, animal,and plant forms,all drawn from memory, rather than from any references. It is a means of drawing from the inherent perception and memory of these things.The result is somewhat surreal, without the Freudian hang-ups, and reminiscent of the completely immersed illustrations of the 1970’s, without the halucinatory hang-ups. The work itself is meditative for the artist, evidenced by meticulous line work and hatched texture in his dreamy depictions. His major influences are the writings of Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell, with their heavy emphasis on collective unconsciousness and myths that cross time and cultural boundaries. These ideas have Scott seeking out archetypes and ubiquitous human experiences through his work.

In Evan Chamberlin’s prints, a solitary figure on a ground plane stand to the
fore of a square of mottled and suggestive ink. There is a dichotomy of an immediate and silly iconography, gleaned from Google image searches for self-improvement, with the more indelible square indicative of the printmaker’s process. Evan appreciates the history of a marked up plate, and even uses the “wrong”side of the copper. (Copper comes with a protective piece of plastic on one side that allows for an unblemished surface for the potential artwork.) The soft metal takes on serendipitous etching marks from traveling, in process, between home and studio space. Therein the mottled ink is imbued with markings of a passage of time, upon a shared map with the artist. When he is working with the material and the process,he can stop worrying whether he should be more manly and strong,or more sensitive like a little girl, or more free spirited like a bird. His work is largely about the material and the mixing of the ink – he feels that there is something more truthful in this studio practice than the silly little characters representing the sorts of things that he feels other people expect of him.

Theories of the Collective Unconscious: A Printmaking Exhibitions, is on view at the DAAC until March 18th. Gallery hours are:

Tuesday's 9:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m.
Friday's 11:00 a.m.- 3:00 p.m.

In this month's Art in America, Frank Lloyd Gallery in Santa Monica. CA featured John Mason's sculpture entitled Grand Rapids in their advertisement. This piece was created for the 1973 Grand Rapids exhibition entitled Sculpture off the Pedestal which was organized by the Womens' Committee of the Grand Rapids Art Museum.

This exhibition also produced works such as Mark di Suvero's Motu Viget and Robert Morris' X, as well as works by 11 other artists.

Back on September 25, 2006, LAMB blogged about about an intervention that took place at Frederik Meijer Gardens called Paleta Grande [ read: old post}.
We emailed the staff at the Meijer Gardens Sculpture Park to verify if this was actually true. Today, 5 months later, we have the truth:

Officially for the record, rumors of Paletta Grande returning to Meijer
Gardens on its March 16, 6-month anniversary are untrue. Rumors are true
however that Paletta Grande was quickly sold to a private collector. Waste
Management of West Michigan secured the sculpture at private auction for an
undisclosed amount. Yes, even Meijer Gardens can have a sense of humor.

Recently the individual responsible for the exhibit was found to be one of
our own. Disciplinary action was swift and appropriately measured to deter
copy-cats. Increased security measures have since been enacted throughout
the park to protect Meijer Gardens exhibits and other interests against
theft, vandalism and Ashton Kutcher look-alikes.

Meijer Gardens thanks LAMB for their support of the gardens and the arts
and requests that readers refrain from contacting the park with inquiries
concerning Paletta Grande.

Dr. Joseph Becherer, Ph.D
Curator of Sculpture
Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park

His most recent show at Rowland Contemporary, Color, received a positive review in Feb. 2007's issue of Art Forum.

"Dane has long been interested in the chromatic effects of various combinations of color. Painting on both aluminum and wood panel, he creates sometimes thick and sometimes thin bands of highly saturated color in both vertical and horizontal alignment. Both matte and glossy, these oil paintings construct formal relationships that reach beyond the surface and address superficiality and the politics of ambivalence through their insouciant qualities. As David Batchelor stated in his book "Chromophobia", color is "...a false addition to a surface and the truth beneath that surface.""

"Newcomer Rowley Kennerk has unlocked the vaults of private collections for the third exhibition at his gallery, filling his diminutive space with gems by Sam Durant, Robert Heinecken, Lee Lozano, Cady Noland, and Richard Prince. Much of the art riffs on the cultural climate of the '60s....

These regurgitated pop-culture images of flower-child counterculture, sexual revolution, and the pathologies of everyday life adeptly expose the collective perversions that lead to social upheaval, and set an interesting precedent for the gallery’s program."

Read the enitre review here. Visit the Rowley Kennerk Gallery online.

In his article Invisible States: Europe in the Capital Failure, Brian Holmes describes a Europe divided into three divisions; Core Europe, New Europe and Edge Europe; New Europe being the recent accession of 10 new to the EU in 2004 [and two more in 2007], Edge Europe being the non-member bordering periphery and Core being the original members of the EU. This integration of new members in the EU has created a fertile hinterland for transnational corporations, making it difficult to differentiate between citizens of actual nations and those of capitalist entrepreneurial systems. In 2005, the International Artists Studio Program (IASPIS) and the European Institute for Progressive Cultural Policies (EIPCP) collaborated to produce a document for the Frieze art fair – European Cultural Policies 2015: A Report with Scenarios on the Future of Public Funding for Contemporary Art in Europe. This report is more than just a projection - it is an accurate reading of the current climate in much of Europe, specifically ‘New Europe.’ These forecasts are basically exaggerations of the present; increased difficulty in distinguishing the private from the public and the commercial from the non-commercial, focus shifting from the centers to the peripheries, increased Private Public Partnerships [PPPs], and museums and galleries becoming second to the art fair. A visit to Riga, Latvia has led me to empathize with Holmes’ somewhat pessimistic outlook for these new EU nations, who seem to naively believe they can finally establish a post-soviet national identity. These issues, specifically private versus public and those of national identity, are currently unfolding in a collaboration between foreign corporate investors and the national government in Latvia. This project, known as Riga Port City, is laden with contradiction and a closer examination may afford some clarity.

Koolhaas also was afforded the opportunity by JAU to develop a master plan for Riga Port City, which has already begun being implemented. This plan is being executed by JAU with the assistance of newly formed Latvian governmental agency called New Three Brothers [J3B], its name referencing its function as the overseer of three new “cultural constructions”; Latvian National Library, National Concert Hall, and Museum of Contemporary Art.

“New Europe, whose political privileges have been substantively weakened by the loss of economic control over their industries … and whose territories and resources are wide open to exploitation by transnational corporations can be curtailed arbitrarily.”
- Brian Holmes

In the case of the Baltic states, this may not seem that different from Soviet rule. Specifically in terms of Riga, this is befitting of its history of a city plagued by occupations; Germans, Swedish, Russians, Soviets – and now, transnational corporations. Prior to 1991, Latvia [and the city of Riga] had only seen just over 20 years of independence in 800 years of existence, from 1920 to 1941. Since 1991, the country seems to have forgotten the 50 years it was under Soviet rule. Wolfgang Becker’s 2004 film, Good Bye Lenin! – set in East Berlin, revolves around the Alex Kerner protecting his mother from having a second heart attack; her first one happened October of 1989 followed by a coma which she woke from in the spring of 1990. The doctor warns that any excitement could trigger a second episode. In hopes to not have this happen, Alex must protect his mother from the fact that the Berlin wall no longer exists and communism is on the outs. Just the opposite of Alex, the Latvian Ministry of Culture attempts to hide the fact that Soviet rule ever existed through initiatives like its limited cultural policy upholding “national heritage” as its pinnacle and keeping foreign investors from having any “heart attacks.” Helena Demakova, Latvian Minister of Culture, is not timid when it comes to working with private money and foreign businessmen to secure funds for the Ministry’s projects. This could be the reason that they may have overlooked the fact that the government will be building their National Museum of Contemporary Art on land owned by foreign investors. Is this an oversight? Is this blurring of private and public no longer problematic within the EU context? Is the development of Riga Port City another occupation of foreign interests or exploitation by foreign corporations? Is this Latvia’s attempt at creating a regional identity, legitimizing itself in comparison to Core Europe? Has Latvia joined, what Hardt and Negri refer to as, "universal rule of capital without a center”?

“In 2015 art is almost completely instrumentalised [sic] in the economic sense, regardless of whether financing is private or public. Art then services either national or European interests that wish to construct a certain identity: it is a desirable marketable commercial good for private ownership and it contributes to regional development and provides society with new creative employment opportunities.”
- Maria Lind

What Lind describes is unconcealed in JAU and J3B’s approach to Riga Port City. JAU has invited artists and other creative people to move into this area of future development for the next two years, a process described by the office of J3B as “invited gentrification.” The language and theories being employed by those involved in this development reek of Richard Florida. The idea that a creative class, defined by Florida as “people who add economic value through their creativity,” is not new, but in a former Soviet-state pregnant with potential commodifiable real estate, it is complete gold. Currently, Andrejsala has not seen any new construction – only limited restoration to existing structures by its temporary inhabitants. The current residents of Andrejsala appear to have made a concerted effort to make it the center of a growing vibrant young contemporary art and music scene. One group of three artists spent time converting the former Customs house on the island into apartments and a hostel. Completed in the spring of 2006, Singalong Hostel offers both local and international artists a place to stay among like-minded people to work on projects and artworks. Each room is decorated and themed with found-objects from around Andrejsala such as the “map room” and the “Lenin room.” The exterior of the building is somewhat telling of what it holds, boasting a giant magenta diagonal line on its facade.

According to the organizers, “the line is a symbol of the positive processes that have taken place on the industrially [sic.] looking island of Andrejsala during the previous half a year – thanks to artists, cultural activists, skaters and others, these buildings dating back to the Soviet times gain a new breath and context.” Through conversations with the organizers it’s obvious that they are more than happy to be working on this project. When asked how they felt about being “kicked out” of Andrejsala in two years they had no complaints – “We know that we were only going to be here for two years and who wants to work on a project for longer than that anyways,” was just one of the personal responses.
Personally, I wish I were able to take such an optimistic stance on such an opportunity, but knowing the sum of this equation – it is impossible. These artists are being used as catalysts to create an identity for an area that will profit millions of dollars and there is no sign or intention of them being compensated. In fact, according to the “Concept of Development of Riga Port City, “the plan provides that apartments are to make up 65% of the whole development area, 20% of the area shall be offices and hotels, shopping centers, restaurants, cafes etc. Commercial area will make up to 10%, and cultural and entertainment objects up to 5% of the area.”

A conference held by the EIPCP in Helsinki Sept 2006 offered multiple critiques and alternatives to Floridian gentrification and Creative Industries. Gerard Raunig presented, “Creative Industries as Mass Deception,” looking back at Adorno and Horkheimer’s Dialectics of Enlightenment. Raunig argued that “contemporary Creative Industries can be understood as a form of self-deception of the producers working in Creative Industries. Both forms of subjectivation [sic] use the desire of the subject in order to integrate her in the economic system.” It may be unclear as to what leads to this “self-deception,” in the case of Andrejsala, but it is evident, as well as the artists integration into economic terms. This story is more than predictable. But what alternatives are there?

“When artists begin to explore the operations of capital, and point directly to instances of capital failure, they are participating with their own expressive methods in a complex response to the gradual installation of the competition regime. The process of exploring and interpellating these currently invisible states is one aspect of the broader effort to constitute social formations that might act in common, having not only shared objective interests but potentially interest in one another.”

Holmes continues to explore this possibility, but realizes that for such conditions to exist the contemporary art museum’s reliance on corporate funding and sponsorship, whether minor or obvious, will have to diminish. Though, for obvious reasons, this is not a simple task – “Hyperindividualization and the capitalization of everything seems to be the breakdown for solidarities.” This was evident in Riga where people were relishing in the new luxuries of capitalism and willing to pay the price.

It is important to consistently push both the boundaries of curatorial practice and consider different ways to navigate both the institutionalized world, as well as those worlds which are developing [or will never develop, but always exist].

There are many different ways to approach this, whether it be like Nato Thompson, who calls for an alternative, or "radical," infrastructure to support work and ideas that may be too tactile for Museum or are counter to institutional frameworks, or Brian Holmes, who leans towards re-thinking and re-working existing structures. Lastly, there is the approach of Chris Gilbert - abandon the institutions and the murderous country that supports them.

Gilbert’s resignation is filled with classic socialist rhetoric that shows no hope or mercy for the Museum, “One should have no illusions: until capitalism and imperialism are brought down, cultural institutions will go on being, in their primary role, lapdogs of a system that spreads misery and death to people everywhere on the planet. The fight to abolish that system completely and build one based on socialism must remain our exclusive and constant focus.” These statements are precluded by claims that contemporary art of the last 30 years that has been legitimized by institutions is nothing more than the, “cultural arm of the upper-middle class.” With these extreme views, why was Gilbert working within the art world at all? Is the role of the arts administrator that of passiveness or passion? If passion, then how far can the limits of curatorial rhetoric be pushed?

Through an examination of this specific exhibition and the events and discussions surrounding it, “Now-Time Venezuela” will be discussed in terms of the role of the Museum and that of a passionate curator, as well as a catalyst to understand the effectiveness of this exhibition dealing with politically and socially charged work and the need for a local scope.

Now-Time Venezuela:

The Now Time Venezuela: Media Along the Path of the Bolivarian Process [NT] exhibition series aimed to be a yearlong cycle of shows concerning the process of the Bolivarian revolution that began in Venezuela in 1998 under the leadership of Hugo Chavez. The goal of the series was to present material that both documents the Bolivarian process and also contributes to it. “Now Time Venezuela Part 1,” which exhibited from 3-26-2006 through 5-28-2006, consisted of five documentary films by the German artist Dario Azzellini and the Austrian artist Oliver Ressler, entitled 5 Factories – Worker Controlled in Venezuela . The films documented the climate of worker-controlled factories after, “withdrawal of transnational corporations, [now] worker occupations and resulting cooperative or co-management schemes have become an important feature of Venezuela’s new social and political landscape.” “Now Time Venezuela, Part 2: Revolutionary Television in Catia,” which exhibited 5-14-2006 through 7-16-2006, consisted of work produced by Catia TVe. Catia TVe is an activist broadcasting network that operates out of Catia, one of Caracas’ oldest barrios. The station’s name derives from a pun on the third-person conjugation of the Spanish word “to see,” which is “Ve”. Loosely translated, the phrase means “Catia sees you.” The exhibition consisted of samples from the station’s archive as well as two newly commissioned works made especially for the exhibition: a self-reflexive piece describing Catia TVe's working methods, and a series of messages for the people of the United States from the Catia barrio.

According to Gilbert, these exhibitions were not meant to merely be a set of works for contemplation, but as agents of the Bolivarian process and its “strong international dimension” . In his resignation letter he makes it evident that his position is one that, “is about commitment, support, and alignment – in brief, taking sides with and promoting revolution.” Gilbert’s goals were not necessarily to present work that should be considered within the boundaries of the museum, or to even present “art” for that matter. Though, Gilbert does mention, “on a secondary level, too, the Now-Time cycle contributes to a theory about art and its relation to political activism.” His position becomes more apparent in a letter written in the November 2006 issue of ArtForum, “revolutionary struggles are not primarily cultural ones, that cultural institutions (such as museums and ArtForum) are part of a deeply corrupt bourgeois representational context, but to target them as them as the primary site of struggle is not radical in that it does not go to the root of the problem.” If then, according to Gilbert, cultural institutions cannot advance these values he has aligned himself with, then why did he continue to work within the Museum? The fact is Gilbert did present this exhibition within an art museum, so then we must consider what the Museum means for the role of passionate (activist) curator or arts administrator.

The Museum and the Curator:

In a response to Gilbert’s resignation letter, Liam Gillick states, “Whether you feel he is overstating the obvious or else coming to a conclusion that for many people is the starting point, there is an increasing call for Gilbert to return to Berkeley and continue pressing at the limits of curatorial rhetoric in a context in which it might be possible to shift the terms of engagement.” In a letter written by both Gilbert and his long time partner Cira Pascual Marquina, they make it obvious they have no intentions of so, “the reworking or replacing or elimination of these “major” institutions is not a key task of the revolution. That will come in due time: as the revolution goes forward on the economic, educational, military, and political fronts that are actually at its center.” For those of us that are not willing to abandon culture, only for it to be determined by politics and the economy – what is our role?

In the title essay of Art and its Institutions, Nina Montman begins by bringing up the sometimes, especially in this case, contentious expectations of the art institution. While most other institutions, such as civil services, are expected to take a specific political stance and often act upon it, the art institution is often expected to be merely a reflection of what is happening “outside.” In these times of social and political friction and an art market that is making history with record sales, it is important to try and understand what the role of an art administrator or curator should be. Not many people can empathize with Gilbert and Pasal Marquina with their anti-U.S. extremes, but that is not to say their concerns are invalid. Then, what are the options for a passionate curator or art administrator who hopes to engage the contemporary art world, political issues and social issues simultaneously?

In an essay entitled, Contributions to a Resistant Visual Culture Glossary, Nato Thompson suggests formation of a “radial infrastructure” of venues and publications outside of the “major” institutions in order to perpetuate the productions of resistant visual culture by giving it a place to be presented without, “running the risk of being read as tokens of [major] institutions.” It appears as though now is a time of transition, slowly, resistant art, as well as curatorial practices, are being legitimized by larger institutions such as the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art. This seems due, in part, to the personal values held by passionate curators, as well as the increased importance and visibility given to the curator. This is not to say that market forces do not still drive art production for the most part, but that the possibilities for a more democratic climate is possible. Brian Holmes holds a similar viewpoint suggesting that if we want to really live within a democracy we must re-imagine, derail and deconstruct our institutional frameworks, while at the same time building new ones and re-adapting old ones. “Shall we then abandon the museums? They can be occupied like any other distribution mechanism within the communication society – and should be occupied, to generate decisive conflict over the kind of society they help produce.”

Gilbert’s lack of patience and urge to speed up organic processes [read: revolution], cannot be used as a viable model working within institutions. Gillick’s suggestion is a much more workable model, that of pushing and challenging the boundaries of curatorial practice, as well as models suggested by Holmes and Thompson of working both inside and outside the Museum simultaneously. But most importantly continue a positive discussion of the “left,” in terms of designing supportive infrastructures, instead of a constant masochistic approach evident in Gilbert’s recent letter in the November issue of ArtForum.

Critique of Now-Time Venezuela:

In a recent interview Brian Holmes offered this position, "[The] illusion that a single, globalized, or "networked" logic could account for the diversity of conditions across the world has come to its close. We must go back to making careful judgments that assess our own local situation with respect to very different ones." As Miwon Kwon points out in her book One Place After Another: Site Specific and Locational Identity, terms such as “site-determined, site referenced, site conscious, site-related,” and most recently the word “place,” have only surfaced within contemporary art practice over the last 10 years. Kwon claims the reason for this is a reaction to the ways in which “site specificity,” whether the physical, geographic or social site, have haphazardly been adopted as just another genre of art by institutions. These new artists hope to reconsider the relationship between an artwork and its site, yet distinguish themselves from their predecessors . These terms that once signified “criticality” and “progressivity” have become so ubiquitous that they have lost almost all association with anti-market mentalities and institutional critique.

“This argument would insist that if the aesthetic and political efficacy of site specific art has become insignificant or innocuous in recent years, it is because it has been weakened and redirected by institutional and market forces.”

Kwon’s statement holds true, yet there seems to be other reasons as to why ‘site specific’ art has lost its political efficacy. In her book, The Lure of the Local, Lucy Lippard makes the observation that, “While the notion of place in art has become more broadly interesting to artists and institutions in the last few years, it is applied so generally as to become locally meaningless.” It is because of my own similar observation that I make the correlation between the aesthetic and political [and social] inefficacy of contemporary art exhibitions and their lack of local scope. Terms such as “site,” “location,” and “place” should no longer be abstracted as simply the generic “borders, boundaries, margins, peripheries, migrations and centers,” but used to reaffirm and reclaim the importance of actual location in terms of the physical, social, political and geographical local in reaction to a globalized [art] world. Not only does allow for empathy, but often a conflation of center and periphery within an art world.
Upon first observation of the “Now Time Venezuela” exhibition, its lack of this local scope was my largest criticism. The fact that the content of the work in the show was removed from any sort of local or regional context made for something autonomous from the majority of the viewers, only able to sympathize with the situation "down there.” If the intention of the show was to "establish lateral connections with other struggles," then where was that connection? Haven't guerilla-style media outlets been prevalent in Berkeley for the last 30 plus years? Why weren't they included in the show?
It was not until later that I learned that Gilbert did indeed organize events and meetings in hopes to establish lateral connections with local struggles, but on much different terms than one would expect. Through a chance conversation with Pascual Marquina via the internet, she noted that, “together with Azzellini and Ressler, Chris carried out interviews with local media -- specifically on KPFA’s labor show -- met with members of the local San Francisco longshoremen’s union prior to the opening; then he, Azzellini, and Ressler gave talks to New College students and to a largely Latino community in Monterey -- all of which the museum did not know about; done, as we say, “quietly.”” The fact that both Gilbert and Pascual Marquina felt the need to operate outside BAM, who was fully supportive of the “Now Time Venezuela” series, is interesting to note. Pascual Marquina offered this insight as to why this decision was made, “by the time of the Now-Time shows Chris and I had both become aware of how systematically museums work to “capture” and make a spectacle of any community-based component of a project, capitalizing on them through advertising or cocktail party conversation with funders. For both of us this led to developing programs outside of the museum -- parallel to what was actually in the gallery. In Chris’s case this led to his pursuit of a representational, socialist realist aesthetic in the gallery spaces and parallel programming that was largely invisible to the museum.” Upon contacting the Museum to try and better understand this tension due, this response was offered, “My personal view is that I don't think Chris ever fully realized or appreciated how hard so many of the staff here at BAM/PFA were working to help him realize his exhibitions. It's a real shame that, to him, that relationship was apparently always an adversary one.”

Chris Gilbert’s actions and resignation has called into question the past, present and future role of the curator. Though, his ideologies and actions may be extreme, it is important to not let them go unnoticed. Though, this situation brings up many issues in the context of the contemporary cultural institutions in the United States, as well as most of the Western world, the ability of an arts administrator to be able to navigate institutions in order to push the boundaries of curatorial practice is of most importance. It is in my opinion, that Gilbert’s actions and weighty rhetoric were ineffective in doing such, though his noticing the need to address the local and “establish lateral connections with other struggles,” should have not gone unnoticed. Gilbert’s claim that everything but culture “matters,” is one that is surely false – as, according to Kwon, “art is able to deal with pre-existing social systems and to carry on a dialogue with the public,” which leaves room for other possibilities.

Works cited:

Gilbert, Chris. "Chris Gilbert's resignation over Venezeulan Exhibition." Mute Beta. http://www.metamute.org/en/node/7834 (31 May 2006). Appendix A.
"NOW-TIME VENEZUELA, PART 1: WORKER-CONTROLLED FACTORIES." BAM/PFA Exhibitions. http://www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/exhibits/nowtime/index.html (26 March 2006).
Ibid.
J, Leary P. Z, 14 April 2004.
"NOW-TIME VENEZUELA, PART 2: REVOLUTIONARY TELEVISION IN CATIA." BAM/PFA Exhibitions. http://www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/exhibits/nowtime/index.html (14 May 2006).
Schaafsma, Benjamin J. Center for Working Things Out. http://www.g-rad.org/benner/archives/2006/11/now_time_chris.php#comments (14 November 2006)/ Appendix B.
"NOW-TIME VENEZUELA, PART 1: WORKER-CONTROLLED FACTORIES." (26 March 2006).
Gillick, Liam . "Yes we are still Mute/Metamute, or Liam Gillick on Chris Gilbert's resignation." Mute Beta. http://www.metamute.org/en/node8396 (12 September 2006).
Gilbert, Chris , and Cira Pascual Marquina. Letter from Caracas: State of the Arts, No Magic Bullets. http://www.joaap.org/webonly/ciragilbert.htm.
Montmann, Nina , ed. Art and its Institutions. London: Black Dog Publishing, 2006.
Kwon, Miwon. One Place After Another: Site Specific Art and Locational Identity. Boston: MIT Press, 2002. 88.
Holmes, Brian . "Artistic Autonomy: And the Communication Society." utangente. http://ut.yt.t0.at.
Herbst, Robby. "Hinting at Ways to Work in Current Contexts: An Interview with Brian Holmes." Journal of Aesthetics and Protest 1, no. 4 (2006): 2-17.
Kwon, Miwon. One Place After Another: Site Specific Art and Locational Identity. Boston: MIT Press, 2002. 88.
ibid.
Lippard, Lucy . Lure of the Local. New York , N.Y.: The New Press, 1997. 277.
"NOW-TIME VENEZUELA, PART 1: WORKER-CONTROLLED FACTORIES." (26 March 2006).
Schaafsma, Benjamin J. Center for Working Things Out. http://www.g-rad.org/benner/archives/2006/11/now_time_chris.php#comments (14 November 2006)/ Appendix B.
Ibid.

Gilbert's replacement has been announced, Elizabeth Thomas a graduate of MA Art History program at the School of the Art Institute - Chicago.

Not able to make the opening? The show will be up until January 28th.

In 1969, the citizens of Grand Rapids dedicated a gigantic red stabile by Alexander Calder as the heart of an ambitious urban renewal effort. Designed to announce a new, spirited civic center, the sculpture embodies notions of the public sphere that are under much critical pressure today. Contemporary art historians often suggest that public sculptures of this type are passé, but how have citizen experiences with and responses to La Grande Vitesse developed over time? How do ordinary citizens define, use, and produce this arguably still quite prototypical public art work?

The researcher, Jennifer Geigel Mikulay, is a Ph.D. candidate in visual culture at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is writing her dissertation about public art in Grand Rapids, and she teaches visual culture at the Milwaukee Institute of Art & Design.

Furthermore, the press release goes something like this:

GVSU students participating in a course called Civic Studio seek photographs of Alexander Calder’s Grand Rapids stabile. According to associate professor of art Paul Wittenbraker, “Civic Studio aims to document a full range of experiences with the Calder, from 1969 to the present.” The public is invited to contribute photographs that may be old or new, everyday or special occasion, print or digital, black/white or color. The project, entitled “Big Red Thing” after a common nickname for Calder’s sculpture, is part of a research project coordinated by University of Wisconsin graduate student Jenny Mikulay. Civic Studio will collect photographs between October 15 and November 15, 2006.

Civic Studio, a course that investigates the role of artists in their community, is led by Wittenbraker. Students Zyra Castillo, Jennifer Dunbar, Dean Foster, Giles Hefferan, and Sara Wassenaar are coordinating the photo drive in collaboration with Mikulay.

"I’ll be back. Don’t worry."

My first memories of art in Grand Rapids were from elementary school field trips to the art museum. I barely remember the small cramped gallery spaces and docents who explained the work of Dutch painters. Those days I was pretty distracted with dreams of becoming a superhero comic book artist. High school tuned me in to a little academic art history but it wasn’t until college that I was exposed to any actual living, breathing art world.

After graduating from Calvin College in the fall, David Prinsen and Brett Budde founded the Dynamite Gallery Project in a small storefront at 609 Lyon Street. For the most part, the shows were presented in a familiar exhibition format, but the work they brought in was of the same caliber (chic pow) as what I’d seen in art magazines and Chicago and New York Galleries (at the time this seemed to be a good standard for relevant art). I remember Jeffery Valance’s investigation of the Shroud of Turin linking it clown faces "The Four Clowns of Turin," Gregory Greene’s Torah encased pipe bomb and Patrick Collier’s show where he invited a few students to help create a mosaic of tiddlywinks and collect hoods from children’s jackets. I also remember the Patrick Collier show because the artist lecture was hosted down the street at the first manifestation of Paul Wittenbraker’s Civic Studio.

Knowing Dave and Brett and the effort they put in to making Dynamite happen made it seem like there was something at stake – not merely the cash in their pocketbooks, but adding breadth to a rather thin Grand Rapids art scene. So it was a no brainer when Dave and Brian Deyong (who hopped on board for the second year and intended to continue on with us) approached me, Matt Poole, Phil Orr and Jessica Getchell about taking control over Dynamite.

The first year of running Dynamite brought a number of changes to what Dave and Brett started. We got a new space after the pipes froze and broke in 609 Lyon during the winter of 2001 and the name was changed to Dynamite Space Project since we doubted our allegiance to a the ideals of galleryhood. Our college professor and mentor, Conrad Bakker offered us his extremely rough and extremely cheap space next door (613 Lyon) and we eventually agreed it was an awesome home for Dynamite. That first year still seems magical and we all reminisce about how effortlessly and dynamically our first few exhibitions came together. Since the majority of us were just finishing art school when we took over we began with three promotional shows featuring our own work (somehow it wasn’t a faux pas, as the shows helped us hype for things to come).

After a summer break we started our season with a group show of work created for a theme we prescribed (opposite of the usual curatorial approach of collecting things already created). Auto Show contained a number of standout pieces and overall was well-received but after the opening, the magic died. The next couple weeks our gallery hours were sparsely attended and the fact that we were basically babysitting a room of dead objects became very clear. From that point on we made a conscious effort to have the space consistently active and engaging.

Patchwork was basically a sewing workshop for two months. We invited a number of people, regardless of skill level, to participate as sewers. In addition, we invited the public to submit clothing to be altered or modified. The closing event featured the creations of our sewing squad (including customized and commissioned pieces), the band The Sewing Terroists and a video, all in a retail setting. With the success of Patchwork we attempted (with varied success) to include some sort of participatory component in every project. In February our show, Be Mine, offered an alternative to the hyper-commodified culture of Valentine’s Day. The public was invited to create valentines from materials we provided as well as add to our “Shrine to Lost Love.” Somewhere in here we also gained Katie Bonner as a member.

After a few shows we were invited by the UICA to do something there and we took this chance to focus on creating work and staging events as a collaborative, no longer solely concerned with programming a space. For the exhibit, entitled Carnival by the UICA, we created a 4 times normal sized ping-pong table and offered 4 Atari Pong stations for individuals to compete against each other in two forms of ping pong. We capped the show with a tournament for teams of four for which many teams made uniforms and fought viciously for a trophy and a heap of glory.

Dynamite changed personnel a bit after that first year (2001-2002) losing Jessica and Katie and gaining Miriam VanderKooy. We continued to do work as a collaborative and that year worked with Art Works at the UICA creating lego versions of Grand Rapids landmarks all to scale. Every show was different. It was exciting and tiring. Every step was marked with redefinition and new challenges. After a few shows Miriam left as well and it was all dudes: Phil, Brian, Josh and Matt.

The summer of 2003 Phil, Matt and I left for the east coast to visit other collaborative groups in Toronto, Boston, Providence, New York and Philadelphia to build friendships and trade tap water. This collection became GR Tap upon our return for which we had a tap water tasting as part of one of the first Free Radical events on Wealthy. Matt followed this by returning to Philly to work with Basekamp, one of our new friends in the world of collaborative art. Shortly after that he headed to Eastern Europe with another art group from Portland called Red76. In the Fall of 2003 Ryan Thompson finished up at Calvin and he became the last new Dynamite family member.

The GR art scene was changing somewhere in this timeline and the Free Radical events, along with Lo-Fi Project Site (which was showing work in a Southwest side warehouse as early as 2002) became welcome additions to the still-meager local scene. Brian splintered off from Dynamite to form a new endeavor on Division called Swim with Chris Filipini and Nina Franz. It was fashioned to be a cross between a boutique and a gallery and it sold small affordable things and actually brought in a little money. Each month featured a new batch of themed multiples. In the same space (the Elite Restaurant building), Ben Schaafsma and others were booking bands to play in the basement, which eventually became the DAAC.

By this time I decided to go to graduate school, following our professor Conrad Bakker and Dynamite founder Dave Prinsen down to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. For a time Dynamite continued making connections with other artist groups and collaboratives traveling to Chicago for Version Fest’s Nfo Xpo fair in 2004 and 2005 bringing Grand Rapids stuff like Mini Grand Vitesse sculptures and GR band compilation CDs to a new audience. We hosted a few events at the Lyon Street space but it became more a hangout, studio and headquarters. Along side my graduate work and occasional Dynamite activities I became involved in OPENSOURCE Art, a space in Champaign accommodating a variety of non-traditional, community-based projects. I also formed another art group called Hideous Beast with my friend Charlie Roderick and we hosted projects in Urbana-Champaign. One, the Mini-Movie fest (highlighting people’s movies made on digital cameras and camera phones) was a great success and was hosted in partnership with Dynamite in Grand Rapids, Chicago and Portland.

Back in Grand Rapids the DAAC was running full steam and the G-RAD website had begun to solidify. G-RAD continues to bring together the cultural community in Grand Rapids across school affiliation and even age to some degree. This has given birth to NEST and LAMB, which now has filled Dynamite’s old home at 613 Lyon (609 Lyon became home to Kay Courtney Realtors and is now vacant again). We like to think it was kept in the family.

I’m now living in Chicago and it’s strange, wonderful and sometimes awkward to return to Grand Rapids and see how things have changed and continued on without me. It’s encouraging to see the traces of a history I’ve participated in that I am sure many current art students have no clue about. I am sure there is stuff we didn’t know about that set us up for what we did. I can’t wait to see what else is in store for Lyon Street and a city that has more options for alternative arts than it ever has.

Josh Ippel recently completed his MFA from U of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. A graduate of Calvin College and member of Dynamite Family, Josh has been a staple in GR since the late 70s.