A History of Violence

Missy Ensler needs to stop thinking with her c**t. To irresponsibly suggest (as she did in this article) that the rape epidemic in the Congo is on par with: "...anywhere in the United States, South Africa, Britain, Egypt, India, Philippines, most college campuses in America..." is like comparing the Holocaust to Abu Ghraib! and all this from a woman who -in her one hit wonder the V monologues- sanctions the rape of a minor (as long as the abuse is committed by an adult female via a young girl)!...She has also rocked rough and stuff by referring to her puff as a firearm...it's amazing how this delusional fact bender is still shooting blanks after all these years!

Sorry this had to be a quickie Eve, but it's really all you are worth old gal.
So in closing (although I do understand that you are not a fan of closure) Here is another fruit from the tree of life that you can gnaw on: While most of us get the concept that ALL rape is violent, there are levels. I now ask you to imagine for instance, a lesbian "date" rape committed by a senior anthropology major against a confused freshman in some college dorm somewhere in Britain as compared to the gang rape of an infant committed by a group of ape-like, pseudo-militants in the Congo that involves cutting off the victim's genitals in front of her family! In your naive assessment of rape (in which all is equal) there then should be no elevated level of punishment in the far more severe cases of rape that involve say torture or dismemberment.

Boy! They must LOVE you over there in the The Democratic Republic of the Congo...keep it simple.

Ensler article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eve-ensler/todd-akin-rape_b_1812930.html?icid=hp_politics_art_related

It's not rocket science

Who landed first?...

(left image) MTV video still cir. 1981

(right image) We the undersigned hereby certify this to be an original Andy Warhol work of art bearing a stamped signature of the artist Print #: Frederick Hughes Executor Andy Warhol Estate Rupert Jasen Smith Master Printer. (Posthumously stamped in black on verso, Certificate of Authenticity Moonwalk © Andy Warhol 1987)

A Common Voice

Edward Winkleman (FB post): 

"If you need to keep reminding the world (and yourself) how "exceptional" your country is, it probably isn't. True exceptionalism has the confidence to let that speak for itself."

So how to quantify this statement?...Who is Winkleman referring to when he writes "You" (and yourself)? and the weird idea that if a certain number of people are vocalizing patriotism, this act is then an indicator that the "exceptionalism" of the said country "probably isn't" the case ...even if this was true in some alternate universe then what of the silent majority offsetting the patriotic voices?...would that number then push the meter back towards exceptionalism?
Eddie, a social scientist you are not...in fact, a competent art dealer you are not for that matter. Let's now apply Edward Winkleman's logic to his gallery: "If you need to keep reminding the world (and yourself) how "exceptional" your artists are, they probably aren't. True exceptionalism has the confidence to let that speak for itself."
Eddie, I speak for the rest of us... you are a putz

The Word Works in Mysterious Ways

The idea of "legitimate" rape is ludicrous. We all know that was a poor choice of words from an illegitimate politician. Something Brother Farrakhan would (and has) implied...remember the support for rapist Mike Tyson from that community?!! Now, that being said, there are levels of rape as set forth in our legal system. In regards to the victim's body shutting down to prevent pregnancy...amazing!!! I guess women are the superior sex! Just think, If the rapist's body could do that, then the primary physical evidence could be absent.
I got into the idea of categories of rape with a young lady on the "Elitist Liberal Scum" FB page recently. (A lovely pack of people) Some of these defenders of the secular faith were calling for Todd Akins to be ass raped himself etc. but at any rate, this woman Pam balked at my question of whether of not female sexual assault against males was legitimate rape. I gave an example by way of a link to the Big list (the most comprehensive account on the internet of women predators on campus) This is a list of some 300+ female sexual predators (most pedophiles) all in a position of authority...this is incidentally on a conservative site. Well...Pam was vindicated! she wrote:

"Oh...I just noticed the WND site....well done, Justin....you just negated anything that you say brilliantly!!!"

...Before I could respond, I was blocked from the site but not before another person posted:

"Oh, so Patty you do subscribe to the idea of "legitimate rape"! Seeing that the 370 documented female on boy rapes are not legitimate simply because it was framed on a conservative site. Boy, you are a fucking genius. an the site manager here seems like a real A-type douche that would certainly rape anyone (lisa for example) who opposed him, as well as suppress the evidence! Check yourselves assholes.  I think you guys are really right wing nuts in disguise."

So I guess unclear thinking and the wrong choice of words are in no shortage from both sides of the fence, difference is that our camp (liberals) have less excuse, not because we are smarter but because we are not hindered by a rigid thought process that must incorporate antiquated religious dogma into our contemporary political dealings.

The Munk Shuffle

Loren Munk via FB post:
"...all I ask for is a certain level of civility. (I am getting tired of some of the nutty political rants) And no stalkers. Besides, this ain't the real world."


WHAT? no stalkers?! Munk is the KING OF STALKERS! while with all his unwanted creeping around the nooks and crannies of galleries for years as well as tracking and transcribing scores of artists names and their addresses onto his canvases! ...PLEASE!!!...(and do we need to mention his anti-OWS video series?) political rants indeed....this guy is killing me. lol

The word TROLL has been tossed around for years now, usually when someone doesn't agree with the position another person is taking during online discourse. 
People, when someone disagrees with you it does not warrant the label of Troll... so think it through and try to find another defense word when your lame views are being dismantled by a formidable opponent.

Kalm Down

...and a big thanks to yet another FB friend who sent me this exchange between Loren Munk and herself:
 
Loren Munk:

As the share value of facebook stock plummets like a rock on Wall Street, its value is peaking in Troll World.

Loren Munk:
I don't have to defend or explain my actions on this page. All I ask for is a certain level of civility. (I am getting tired of some of the nutty political rants) And no stalkers. Besides, this ain't the real world.

Loren Munk:
I try to keep things as open as possible, but some folks just can't resist pushing abusiveness to the limits. Do they actually think anyone in the art world is paying attention? Troll Hunter the movie:


Lisa Codwell:
• pushing abusiveness to the limits? Loren, if you are referring to Justin T then you are pushing the definition of abuse to the limit. We can all read the posts above. Seems like other friends of yours were doing the abusing! lame. and YES everyone is listening to everything by the way. very sad fascist indeed!


Loren Munk:
I don't have to justify anything I do on this page to you dear Lisa. This isn't an open public forum, it's my little salon in a garage. If some visitors get on my nerves I'll show 'em the door. "YES everyone is listening to everything by the way. very sad fascist indeed!". Please, Lisa (or whoever you really are) you're taking yourself way too seriously.


Lisa Codwell:
• Loren, you really seem to be getting too big for your shoes since the NYtimes article thing. I was a fan and I am just a person in the art world that you don't know believe it or not big shot. Your double standards and intolerance is sad...and "whoever I am?" what a paranoid creep. good riddance. [blocked]


...Note: Mr. Munk (if that is his real name) seems just a bit paranoid and obsessed and for someone who claims to not have to explain himself, well, the above speaks volumes. It seems that James Kalm has inbibed a good tactic from the OWS group he despises; and that is the idea of not needing to answer the test questions...oh well, Munk is a highly territorial regionalist and I never did like those ridiculous pseudo-historical, bloated candy-land maps much anyways. Carry on Kalm!

Smoke Bomb in the Viper Den

My good friend Wellington just alerted me that there was some pretty crappy talk behind by back on Loren Munk's page from my old pal Todd (the terrible) Levin and his defender Pam (the pimp) Willoughby:

Todd Levin: And I gotta say - I've blocked that Town person. Not for their opinions (which are, well, exactly what they are), but because they won't be honest about who they actually are.
Everyone else I know on fb is honest about there opinions, like it or lump it - insofar as standing up for them. Why would anyone hide behind a veil of anonymity? I think so that they can troll anonymously. And that's just pathetic.

Wellington Hersh: Hey Todd, you and I have been at this before. You were yucking it up with Town for months before the fallout and you were aware right along that he was working under a pseudonym. As I recall he challenged you concerning Saltz and you got pissed. So my question is - does the dishonesty that falls under anonymity in your book extend to privacy settings on most of our pages? or how about your blocking of Town? Isn't that lack of full disclosure? Loren removed Pamela's belligerent comment that set this off...is that dishonest? It seems you think that posting what you eat every day is some kind of openness. ha! Neither yourself or most of us are living up to these ideals of transparency. There are MANY things you do not reveal about your dealings! Besides, Many writers have worked under a pseudonym. Your beef with town was concerning ego. your ego.
and btw, You can add William Powhida and Paddy Johnson to the list of art writers that used a pseudonym.

(...Thanks for the defense Wells!)
Interestingly enough, Pam removed ALL of her belligerent posts and Todd blocked Wellington!...so much for transparency.)
I've said it before and I'll say it again...Levin and his cronies are snakes...beware!

...for those collectors who like easy art that is in the compositionally banal style of Parker, Slonem and Britto; go for someone who knows color...try a John Grillo!...at least the man studied under Hofmann.

Erik Parker and Hubert Neumann 2012.

Good ole Hubert's family collection would remain legendary if he didn't pollute it with all of those godawful Tom Sanfords, Erik Parkers and the like! JEEEZUS!!! What a waste of capital!

Images (left to right): Erik Parker, Hunt Slonem, Romero Britto 

Erik Parker's work is a wonderful example of truly "bad art" that has managed to receive the bogus blessing and brawny backing of certain power figures in the art world. Add Hunt Slonem's hotel art and Romero Britto's airport art to this sorry lot!... and some of you dared to rally against Kinkade!?!! 
Note: Parker is represented by Kasmin gallery and Slonem is represented by Marlborough gallery...$$$

Pleasure Principal

Here is yet another recent post from Jerry Saltz emasculating the West:

Jerry Saltz: 1. In Western art there is a prohibition against pleasure.
2. In Asian art the depiction of pleasure is common.
3. In African art the depiction of pleasure is common.

Again, this is one of our "elected" voices. Has Jerry missed the entire cannon of Western Erotic art?!!...and if we are speaking contemporary erotic pleasure prohibition, there are countries like say CHINA and NORTH KOREA that are as culturally asexual as it gets; frigidity as a policy.
...and what about African art?...the sexuality that is found is visually one dimensional and cliche like much tribal art...hardly sexy. Saltz needs to (re-?)read (review) some Bataille, Miller, Freud, Balthus, Bellmer, Tom of Findland, R. Crumb, Grosz, Fellini, Victorian era erotica, erotic art from ancient Greece, erotic art from ancient Rome etc. just for starters before he opens his anti-male/anti western pie hole.

...and in regards to prohibition, remember, the more you abstain the more powerful the release. Not to mention innovative (creative) circumventive measures that make the forbidden fruit far more sexy!

Above image: Le Poitevin's diableries circa 1830

He has fallen and he can't get up!...

Listen, if Schimmel refuses to even extend the courtesy of a fucking comment regarding the MOCA debacle then screw him!

At Close Range

Winkleman is back again and packing some heat...

"Went to a shooting range in Ohio with my Dad this past weekend. No, it doesn't mean I support the ownership of assault weapons by average citizens, or criminals having easy access to guns, or mass murders having easy access, or any of the other charges that I've had hurdled at me for not agreeing to a complete abolition of any gun ownership at any level. All it means is that my Dad and I had a great time shooting paper targets with circles on them, and I enjoyed meeting the other, super, super nice people at the range who struck me as only about 1000 times kinder and gentler than some of the anti-gun people I know. 
The gun issue gets complicated when you talk with the goodhearted, careful, and responsible Americans who believe in gun ownership. I still believe in outlawing handguns (or any guns really) in NYC, but in other places, I'm not so sure this is as cut and dry an issue as many of my leftist friends do." -Edward Winkleman (gallerist)

Well my old pal Eddie is caught in the crossfire on this one; the only thing that hasn't changed is his inability to think the issue through before stating his position.
My advice to Mr. Winkleman as he moves headfirst into the line of fire coming from our trigger happy art world: Don't shoot till you see the whites of their eyes.

Miles off the mark

60 Minutes interview with Miles Davis yields this piece of coal...  

Quote: "White musicians seem to lag behind the beat..."

Oh Miles, you silly black man (sigh)...
OK then, so white musicians seem to lag behind the beat?!? Well, which beat would that be? lol, and which white musicians?..., did he mean musicians like John McLaughlin (his featured guitarist on Bitches Brew)?, or Dave Holland whom Miles hand picked for inclusion into his band to replace (African American) Ron Carter? or what about the unrelated Buddy Rich who possessed a "beat" of which would certainly have left poor old Miles behind in the dust and sucking wind?! These are just three examples...I could list for days. C'mon man...what an ignorant, bigoted comment. Note: Miles went on to cheese out for a decade before his death.
...well I know one thing, that white NYC cop who busted Miles up in between sets at the Birdland club back in 59' didn't lag behind the beat either! lol

Saltz on Hughes...sort of

Jerry Saltz FB post:

RIP Robert Hughes.
I do not write this to speak ill of the dead.
I was never a fan of Mr. Hughes.
I thought of his writing as showy; his taste as middlebrow; his opinions more or less negligable; a presenter more than a critic.
I also think that he was one of the most homophobic critics of our time...

I respect all you who laud him so. These are only my quasi-informed opinions.

Read him on Warhol...

Read him on his favorite artist: John Alexander - who he claimed the art world could not stomach becase of Alexander's great "heterosexuality."

My work may be no good.

I simply don't have any use for Mr. Huges's - his criticism or his books.

I am sure he would say the same about me... -Jerry Saltz

[Sure Saltz, Hughes was about as Homophobic as Hemingway, Miles Davis, Norman Mailer, Sigmund Freud or Martin Luther King Jr. for that matter. Those guys were a product of their Heterosexual dominate generations.]
‎...and here is how much of a scum-bag, back-peddler Jerry Saltz is:
 

Jerry Saltz:

"I posted something about Robert Hughes a few minutes ago.

I see that it could stir up bad blood. At the wrong time.

I apologize. I have deleted my comment."

[Well Jerry, at least Hughes had balls to stand by his convictions in the face of pressure] 

Side note: On Saltz's page, Todd Levin made the point that the art world had no problem jumping on Thomas Kinkade before the man was even buried, so why hold back now? Levin is a snake, but he is also a fan of Hughes...otherwise he would NEVER have pointed out Saltz's flip flopping.

Haber's Saber Slew Hughes

• 
  
  

  • John Haber review -
    

    http://www.haberarts.com/2012/08/the-shock-of-the-old/

    
    

    
    

    Facebook fun:
  • • 
      

      Justin Town 
      

      You might despise male posturing in writing but remember there is plenty of that in artists like Julian Schnabel, Jeff Koons or Damien Hirst (all of which Hughes did not get behind). So at least it wasn’t a boy’s club thing unlike critics Jerry Saltz and Roberta Smith’s “Girls Club” agenda. Speaking of, I hope also that you do corral Saltz into that mix of “gatekeeper” critics of which you could also add the popularizer tag.
      

      Let’s get back to the man of the hour though - It seems that you are suggesting that Hughes was a fan of Warhol. Hughes disliked Warhol and once even said “Ronald Reagan and Andy Warhol were meant for each other: the twin, winsomely coiffed sovereigns of the realm of the deeply shallow.” And Note: Hughes was a fan of both Kiefer and Richter (post Warhol). If I misinterpreted your sentence then disregard the aforementioned.
      Lastly, sure Hughes played up the rough edges thing but then again so does Hickey in is own way. And name calling? Look at Finch!, well, uhm…who cares about finch? but speaking of name calling, albeit indirectly, what is with the right-wing insinuations in your piece?

      54 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber Let's see. You make a few points. It's true that the artists you name are men and posturers. I just don't think that Hughes is the solution. And note that I did say I dislike them (and have written against them) myself. So I hope it's quite clear what I mean.

      21 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber Second, you note that Hughes was harsh on Warhol. He qualified that a bit, which is natural as Warhol is a major artist and influence as well as at times a purveyor of junk or a bad influence. I decided to leave "since" ambiguous. (Does a boundary fall in the area on either side?) It seemed a poor use of this occasion to be discussing the particulars there. But he does seem a cutoff point in yers.

      19 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber You mention Richter and Kiefer. Well, ok, they're younger, but not exactly contemporary. They broke through in, what, 1976?

      19 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town still, very much post Warhol...

      18 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town and I don't think there NEEDS to be a solution to any style of criticism...even Saltz's brand

      17 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber Finally, you mention some other critics like Hickey as flawed in the same way. Well, so what? I think Hickey is dreadful and devoted a whole article to saying so. He sure as heck isn't my model. I mentioned Jed Perl and Hilton Kramer, because of their overt values. But if I listed every moron I'm breaking from in setting my standards, I'd be dead by the end.

      17 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber I am just trying to explain why Hughes is an overrated jerk and what criticism can and should be, while according him his due as a stylist, educator, and judge of particulars. I do not take back a single word. Would you like to be on my list of those, er, morons? I could add you.

      16 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town not flawed, similar...oh, and you have standards as well? good, you have something in common with Hughes then lol

      15 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town oh, god yes! It would be an honor!!!

      14 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber 
      

      BTW, I linked in that post to the name Koons, so that one who bothers to make an effort can see what I thought of him. Since Hirst didn't come up, here's a link. The most scathing part is no doubt the review at the end of it of the dot paintings.  But it's interesting that I share the sincerity idea with Hughes, in paragraph 2. This isn't about personal grudges or defense of bad artist. But then it is to you, because you think criticism is all about snap judgments, and that's exactly what I say is garbage.
      

      
      

      
      

      Haber's Art Reviews: Damien Hirst

      www.haberarts.com
      

      Review by John Haber of Damien Hirst, comparing his Neo-Dada of 2000 at Gagosian
      

      gallery and his paintings on themes of medicine and mortality from 2005

      11 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town I think criticism is all about snap judgments?... that was snap of you...may I be excused now? lol

      9 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      EditDelete

      Justin Town I do hate an unfair fight, I have compassion John.

      8 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town Tell you what. I'm going to post your Hirst review link onto my page as a peace offering of sorts...so there will be no grudges.

      6 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      John Haber 
      

      I don't want to say my goal is to educate and motivate people, since that sounds condescending, much as I despise in Hughes. But it's about enabling people, though matters of background and interest, to go where they hadn't before and to form their own snap judgments, if you will. These, like mine, may often agree with Hughes, but not necessarily, and it'd be sad if they did, since that'd close off most art history and all contemporary art.

      6 minutes ago · 
    • 
      

      Justin Town there you go. ok, it's been fun. ciao

      5 minutes ago · 
  •