I had heard tonight's guest lecturer was an independent curator, which I could only assume meant she would be lecturing on techniques or concerns of someone in her position. After listening to her speak, it seems to me that anyone familiar with artists and galleries in New York could have given this lecture.
The title of the lecture was the most interesting part. Before even knowing what the Lower East Side was, I thought the pun "LES is More" would provide an interesting outlook on how contemporary American art might speculate on the influx of consumerism. I think too drastically did she jump right into her lecture. Some sort of introduction of what her goal was and what she was going to be talking about was absolutely necessary. It seemed as if she assumed that just because New York is renowned for being fresh on the art scene that we are already aware of what has been happening there. The need to seek out a new area to transform into a gallery environment is interesting in that the new area exists in relation to the old area. Therefore, new binaries are created: old vs. new, traditional vs. innovative, expensive vs. affordable all excite me in the fact that now people have the choice of what kind of art they want to go see. Unfortunately, the lecturer did not really express any of her knowledge or education on anything really. She basically went through a number of these new galleries that have sprung up in the Lower East Side and she showed slides of different artists' work that inhabit these galleries. She gave us names, locations, and titles but no insight on the area that I couldn't hear from some snooty art punk in some New York coffee shop.
Not only was the content very bland, unrehearsed, and uninteresting, but she delivered her lecture as if she had never seen a modern-aged microphone. The entire time, her head was cocked over the mike so her enunciated syllables rang abruptly and her lisp even more emphasized. At one point, she was able to arouse any snoozers by repeatedly knocking the base of the microphone with her glasses she unknowingly continued to twirl around at points. While the photos of art in the galleries were the only part of the lecture that provided the audience with any reason not leave, there were some images included that were of extremely low resolution and completely pointless to the presentation at all.
Despite the fact that I was required to attend this lecture for a couple of different classes, I have respect for this woman because I understand that she is very connected and well-versed in the tremendous art world of New York. Yet overall, her presentation seemed very unplanned and unprofessional, and although I did learn about the galleries of New York (only because I had no prior knowledge on the subject at all) I do not feel like she provided us with enough to equal the amount of money the school surely had to pay her.
No comments:
Post a Comment