Comments on: Art Fag City at Frieze Magazine: The Art Gallery of Ontario Gets A Facelift

By: L.M.

L.M. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:38:58 +0000

That might be the result of small acquisition budgets. You can’t afford to buy to soon, and risk half a collection that never gets out of storage and if you are too late, you can’t afford the major pieces. (I guess I’m concurring with your statement, I’ve also heard from a few artists that even though their work was purchased years ago, it’s never made it out of storage)

The other issue is that thing we can call the “director’s wish list”, that list of names that every institution now feels they have to have represented in their collection. Got to be a player in the big museum monoculture. I’m not ready to pin blame on the curatorial staff for this one. I know that some sales to the AGO can seem to move at a glacial pace, with all the levels of approval needed. (one artist told me that even though they are slow to decide, once they do decide, they sure do pay fast.)

By: Art Fag City

Art Fag City — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:11:57 +0000

Yeah, it’s really remarkable how many second rate works they have from big name artists. It sounds uncharitable, but there were times when it seemed like the goal was just to have a work from that artist, regardless of quality.

By: L.M.

L.M. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:53:01 +0000

I’m with you Paddy, there were some major clunkers in the curatorial. Those are things that can change easily if the curatorial staff is prodded enough. But, unfortunately, over the years, there has been some less than smart shopping and too often I found myself asking why the hell did they purchased this piece?

By: Art Fag City

Art Fag City — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 06:05:56 +0000

I thought the themes were a really bad idea. Postmodernism was given a small 15 x 15 cube of space, and it seemed basically an excuse to throw a bunch of stuff together with Jeff Wall. With that size of space there’s no hope in putting together a show that does the theme or the art justice so there’s no point.

Like you, I was very confused by the multiple interpretive themes and the single interpretive theme on the 3rd floor. There has to be better way to arrange those galleries.

By: Leah Sandals

Leah Sandals — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 03:21:22 +0000

It is great to read your assessment, Paddy. I especially appreciate your note on the percentage of space given over to donated work.

I didn’t mind the haphazardness of the contemporary galleries as much, but I’m not as much of a spatial thinker as I probably should be. I did feel confused by the multiple interpretive themes on the top two floors and the single interpretive theme (memory) on the 3rd floor, which overall seemed a bit of a grab bag save for those more focused spaces like the Group of Seven and Toronto in the 70s areas.

I also agree it is more “spectacular” from the inside than out–not contributing a ton to the streetscape, really.