The Opposite of a Page Turner

Are you saying Deitch is an ex-con? Ok, I’m going to start that meme …

Are you saying Deitch is an ex-con? Ok, I’m going to start that meme …

Walter Robinson- and Jerry Saltz-style indifference is evolving into a sub-journalistic aesthetic.

Walter Robinson- and Jerry Saltz-style indifference is evolving into a sub-journalistic aesthetic.

maybe you just need to add a little pizazz: “Did Jeffrey Deitch orchestrate an earthquake half way around the world to detract from his questionable MOCA appointment?! Shocking photos after the jump.”

maybe you just need to add a little pizazz: “Did Jeffrey Deitch orchestrate an earthquake half way around the world to detract from his questionable MOCA appointment?! Shocking photos after the jump.”

Saying you’re suffering conflict of interest fatigue isn’t a sub-journalistic practice, nor is letting the AAMD do their job. I don’t see why you’re characterizing our difference of opinion as a professional failure on my part.

Saying you’re suffering conflict of interest fatigue isn’t a sub-journalistic practice, nor is letting the AAMD do their job. I don’t see why you’re characterizing our difference of opinion as a professional failure on my part.

I did not intend to characterize any potential difference of opinion as a professional failure on your part.

In fact, as recently as 48 hours ago, when tricky issues were apparently of greater interest, you pointed out an inconsistency in J. Deitch’s comments to me (that I had failed to catch) and I shared the word re: your catch.

I did not intend to characterize any potential difference of opinion as a professional failure on your part.

In fact, as recently as 48 hours ago, when tricky issues were apparently of greater interest, you pointed out an inconsistency in J. Deitch’s comments to me (that I had failed to catch) and I shared the word re: your catch.

I’m curious Tyler, why you seem so hellbent on being the Comstock of art criticism. Conflict of interest, as an old friend of mine used to say, is an oxymoron in the art world and has ever been thus. Vasari was a painter, and his writing was self-serving. Does that mean we don’t read Vasari? Of course not. It seems to me that it’s your journo-buddies covering politics in D.C. who could stand the scrutiny. They’re the ones flushing the republic down the toilet for fear of not being invited to the right cocktail parties.

I’m curious Tyler, why you seem so hellbent on being the Comstock of art criticism. Conflict of interest, as an old friend of mine used to say, is an oxymoron in the art world and has ever been thus. Vasari was a painter, and his writing was self-serving. Does that mean we don’t read Vasari? Of course not. It seems to me that it’s your journo-buddies covering politics in D.C. who could stand the scrutiny. They’re the ones flushing the republic down the toilet for fear of not being invited to the right cocktail parties.

The NuMu controversy had some credibility. The art world is a vortex of–shall we say–intersecting, as opposed to competing, private interests. In the case of a museum where a ‘public good’, propped up by taxpayer money or tax breaks, the issue of profiteering is a legit concern. However MOCA is already at the total subservience of private money: Eli Broad’s. Wagging a finger at Deitch for *this* reason is closing the stable door long after the horse has fled and by now is only a colorful splatter on the I-80.

Every unrecognized artist thinks every little thing they do is so important and get wound up into a knot if they are not part of the “dialogue”. The dialogue of art history is in the museums; the dialogue of museums is private money, private collections, private tastes. End of story.

Mr. Green, I did *not* get the deal with Viveros-Faune. Keep an eye on Deitch but the situation must be viewed in the extraordinary light that it is in.

The NuMu controversy had some credibility. The art world is a vortex of–shall we say–intersecting, as opposed to competing, private interests. In the case of a museum where a ‘public good’, propped up by taxpayer money or tax breaks, the issue of profiteering is a legit concern. However MOCA is already at the total subservience of private money: Eli Broad’s. Wagging a finger at Deitch for *this* reason is closing the stable door long after the horse has fled and by now is only a colorful splatter on the I-80.

Every unrecognized artist thinks every little thing they do is so important and get wound up into a knot if they are not part of the “dialogue”. The dialogue of art history is in the museums; the dialogue of museums is private money, private collections, private tastes. End of story.

Mr. Green, I did *not* get the deal with Viveros-Faune. Keep an eye on Deitch but the situation must be viewed in the extraordinary light that it is in.

“The dialogue of art history is in the museums; the dialogue of museums is private money, private collections, private tastes. End of story.”

I like the succinctness of this statement, and agree with it up to a point. Historically, ideologically, American museums were born out of the clash between private money/taste & patrician, puritanical efforts (see Howard’s “Comstock” reference above) towards moral/social “improvement”. This is *especially* true of art museums. You can see these ideas played out in the rivalry between the Boston MFA & the Met 150 years ago.

I don’t mean to reduce the Deitch controversy to a historical platitude, but it does illustrate old identity politics surrounding money/power/class/culture in a way that seems particular to museums in the States. Tyler certainly pitches for Team Social-Improvement when it comes to museum ideology, and it is a valid position, even though the snarky comment above undermines it.

Per Paddy’s point, I’d like to see how the AAM & AAMD hash this out.

(Just to disclose, I’m a MA candidate in Museum Studies.)

“The dialogue of art history is in the museums; the dialogue of museums is private money, private collections, private tastes. End of story.”

I like the succinctness of this statement, and agree with it up to a point. Historically, ideologically, American museums were born out of the clash between private money/taste & patrician, puritanical efforts (see Howard’s “Comstock” reference above) towards moral/social “improvement”. This is *especially* true of art museums. You can see these ideas played out in the rivalry between the Boston MFA & the Met 150 years ago.

I don’t mean to reduce the Deitch controversy to a historical platitude, but it does illustrate old identity politics surrounding money/power/class/culture in a way that seems particular to museums in the States. Tyler certainly pitches for Team Social-Improvement when it comes to museum ideology, and it is a valid position, even though the snarky comment above undermines it.

Per Paddy’s point, I’d like to see how the AAM & AAMD hash this out.

(Just to disclose, I’m a MA candidate in Museum Studies.)

Arguably, this “dialogue of art history”, which, as above, is implied to originate in the museums, as suggested by commentator Sean, is much broader than the canonical history or art itself. Instead, it begins with religion and, if one does not wish to consider museums as a sort of secular church, then the canonical history of art has clearly defined political and economic limitations. Mr. Green is entitled to his opinion. Yet, because his opinion may be different than yours, this does not mean we are forbidden to read what we wish.

Joel Smock

Arguably, this “dialogue of art history”, which, as above, is implied to originate in the museums, as suggested by commentator Sean, is much broader than the canonical history or art itself. Instead, it begins with religion and, if one does not wish to consider museums as a sort of secular church, then the canonical history of art has clearly defined political and economic limitations. Mr. Green is entitled to his opinion. Yet, because his opinion may be different than yours, this does not mean we are forbidden to read what we wish.

Joel Smock

It’s just Jeffrey Deitch.

It’s just Jeffrey Deitch.

Paddy, is this exhausting because it is irrelevant / redundant or because it’s complex / difficult?

I empathize with your fatigue; the appointment exposed a need to reassess the dialogue top-down. The fake veil of the sacrosanct and impartial museum has been lifted – it’s refreshingly honest and back to basics.

Deitch’s appointment is exciting & promising; the museum model needs shaking up – speaking as someone who founded an alternative gallery in the 1990’s for the same reason.

I really appreciate Tyler’s voice on these issues btw; I’m glad someone intelligent and thoughtful is willing to go aggressively into messy territory. Tyler is a major voice shaping this discussion and I believe he represents a lot of people’s thoughts well.

I hope Deitch causes a shitstorm and shakes things up and that other museums follow suit. As a big supporter of the Cooper Hewitt I am disappointed that their parallel appointment has taken a back seat. They will be of equal importance in assessing the success of this model. And the binary nature is striking; an east coaster going to a west coast institution and vice versa, art vs design, govt museum vs essentially private museum, impresario vs visionary thinker but both business people.

Paddy, is this exhausting because it is irrelevant / redundant or because it’s complex / difficult?

I empathize with your fatigue; the appointment exposed a need to reassess the dialogue top-down. The fake veil of the sacrosanct and impartial museum has been lifted – it’s refreshingly honest and back to basics.

Deitch’s appointment is exciting & promising; the museum model needs shaking up – speaking as someone who founded an alternative gallery in the 1990’s for the same reason.

I really appreciate Tyler’s voice on these issues btw; I’m glad someone intelligent and thoughtful is willing to go aggressively into messy territory. Tyler is a major voice shaping this discussion and I believe he represents a lot of people’s thoughts well.

I hope Deitch causes a shitstorm and shakes things up and that other museums follow suit. As a big supporter of the Cooper Hewitt I am disappointed that their parallel appointment has taken a back seat. They will be of equal importance in assessing the success of this model. And the binary nature is striking; an east coaster going to a west coast institution and vice versa, art vs design, govt museum vs essentially private museum, impresario vs visionary thinker but both business people.

@andrew I only get two choices? It’s irrelevant or too difficult — either way I throw in the towel?

I’m most interested in learning how the AAM & AAMD will handle the ethical issues at play here. We don’t know that yet, so a lot of this chatter seems premature and thus not particularly interesting.

@andrew I only get two choices? It’s irrelevant or too difficult — either way I throw in the towel?

I’m most interested in learning how the AAM & AAMD will handle the ethical issues at play here. We don’t know that yet, so a lot of this chatter seems premature and thus not particularly interesting.

I’m unsure how it’s premature to attempt to understand and anticipate the implications of this unusual appointment.

I’d agree it’s premature and uninteresting to attempt to paint Deitch as doomed to conflict of interest related failure.

I think the former is happening more than the latter even if fear of worst-case-scenarios is fueling the dialogue. The fears are legitimate and it’s good to proactively address them. But if you are suggesting we can be done with that part now, I’d also agree.

Now who do we talk to about getting invited to Deitch’s inauguration party??

I’m unsure how it’s premature to attempt to understand and anticipate the implications of this unusual appointment.

I’d agree it’s premature and uninteresting to attempt to paint Deitch as doomed to conflict of interest related failure.

I think the former is happening more than the latter even if fear of worst-case-scenarios is fueling the dialogue. The fears are legitimate and it’s good to proactively address them. But if you are suggesting we can be done with that part now, I’d also agree.

Now who do we talk to about getting invited to Deitch’s inauguration party??

Andrew and Liz raise excellent points about the complicated entanglements of the privately funded (but publicly bequeathed) aspects of most American art–to say nothing of educational–institutions. I also think Tyler plays an important role in giving voice to the socio-political implications these dealings inevitably carry.

One of the great disappointments I repeatedly experience in reading about contemporary art is that so much of its commentary is colored by a lens of faux cynicism and resignation, to say nothing of its inability to tease out and struggle with these kinds of difficult issues beyond the soundbite or talking point-style post.

Which leads us, again, to the real heart of the matter, which involves the aim and mission—not of these institutions—but of the conversations they generate. Major art institutions and their financial livelihoods have invariably relied upon money/donations that come from individuals whose politics are often dubious at best. I agree with Andrew that anticipating the implications that Deitch’s appointment might stir in the private/public debate is essential to how we understand MoCa’s future growth, and that we shouldn’t merely assume all’s well until the “authorities” tell us otherwise. Again, the claim of exhaustion seems, well, a little lazy and unengaged.

I appreciate this forum/thread and wish that it could have been developed more fully and without such air of defensiveness. If we can’t discuss the (possible and potential) conflicts of interest–at a cocktail party or otherwise–in the art world, what are we all going to talk about when we gather as a community?

Andrew and Liz raise excellent points about the complicated entanglements of the privately funded (but publicly bequeathed) aspects of most American art–to say nothing of educational–institutions. I also think Tyler plays an important role in giving voice to the socio-political implications these dealings inevitably carry.

One of the great disappointments I repeatedly experience in reading about contemporary art is that so much of its commentary is colored by a lens of faux cynicism and resignation, to say nothing of its inability to tease out and struggle with these kinds of difficult issues beyond the soundbite or talking point-style post.

Which leads us, again, to the real heart of the matter, which involves the aim and mission—not of these institutions—but of the conversations they generate. Major art institutions and their financial livelihoods have invariably relied upon money/donations that come from individuals whose politics are often dubious at best. I agree with Andrew that anticipating the implications that Deitch’s appointment might stir in the private/public debate is essential to how we understand MoCa’s future growth, and that we shouldn’t merely assume all’s well until the “authorities” tell us otherwise. Again, the claim of exhaustion seems, well, a little lazy and unengaged.

I appreciate this forum/thread and wish that it could have been developed more fully and without such air of defensiveness. If we can’t discuss the (possible and potential) conflicts of interest–at a cocktail party or otherwise–in the art world, what are we all going to talk about when we gather as a community?

We’ll see what happens. That’s all. Vanessa Beecroft and his art reality show are not my favorites, but we’ll have to wait and see. MOCA and LA have a great history of serious, experimental work and I hope he will be able to support it, not just the flashy fluff he has been showcasing at his gallery…he will certainly bring in the cash, which is what MOCA needs now…I really wonder what will happen to Deitch scene though. Only time will tell.

We’ll see what happens. That’s all. Vanessa Beecroft and his art reality show are not my favorites, but we’ll have to wait and see. MOCA and LA have a great history of serious, experimental work and I hope he will be able to support it, not just the flashy fluff he has been showcasing at his gallery…he will certainly bring in the cash, which is what MOCA needs now…I really wonder what will happen to Deitch scene though. Only time will tell.

@brian Why don’t we give the AAM & AAMD a chance to oversee the matter before we declared their efforts failed? I’m not saying conflict of interest discussions don’t have a place or that I hence forth refuse to engage them, I just think it’s unnecessary to be harboring suspicion about the matter prior to any wrong doing. That’s not about being lazy, it’s about treating people how you would like to be treated yourself.

@brian Why don’t we give the AAM & AAMD a chance to oversee the matter before we declared their efforts failed? I’m not saying conflict of interest discussions don’t have a place or that I hence forth refuse to engage them, I just think it’s unnecessary to be harboring suspicion about the matter prior to any wrong doing. That’s not about being lazy, it’s about treating people how you would like to be treated yourself.