This Week in Comments Part Two: Powhida!

by Art Fag City on March 12, 2010 · 125 comments

POST BY PADDY JOHNSON

William Powhida, Hooverville, 2010

Following today’s earlier post on comments around the web, part two of our post tracks artist William Powhida’s latest shit storm of attention. Let’s go back a week and work our way forward:

Lindsay Pollock notes Powhida’s 20×200 edition of 200 sold out in less than a day.

A few days later, Time Out’s senior art critic Howard Halle says over Facebook, “Personally, I don’t what the big deal is with William Powhida. Like working the outsider game is such a new or brave thing? It’s an old trick they teach you at the Ivies: Insult your betters to get their attention.” The following conversation occurs:

Andrea Schwan
outsiders who promote themselves aggressively as such = insiders

Howard Halle
exactly. and when all it takes is making a drive-reference in one of drawings to Jerry Saltz to get Jerry to say “Give that guy a show at the New Museum,” you know it’s an insider game being played very shrewdly.

Paddy Johnson
Being an outsider implies a lack of knowledge about the inside. Powhida does a pretty good job at “insulting your betters” because he’s been very thorough and thus knowledgeable about the inside. Still, this kind of art making has limitations. I suspect it’s more in vogue than it has been because social networking makes sharing dirt publicly a little more sexy than it’s been in the past. Everyone wants more transparency in their networks, and Powhida creates this for people, even if he does so through a persona. I personally don’t see the need for the character.

Lisa Beck
court jester

Howard Halle
right. I get it. he’s tapping into some kind of art-world equivalent of tea-party rage. there’s a lot young artists out there who were promised superstar careers in art school, and now, thanks to the shitty economy, they’ve got bubkis. they are networked however, and I guess his work gives them the illusion of power or connection. still, I’ve seen this sort of thing before—this ain’t my first art-world recession—calls to the barricades, blah, blah, blah, and then it’s back to business as usual. The art world is in need of deep reform and has been for a long time. it would be nice of artists really addressed that, mainly I think, by working for themselves first. I don’t see that happening in Powhida’s work.

Paddy Johnson
I follow you up until the last bit. What is it about Powhida’s work that’s not working for himself first?

Sean Capone
I never thought of Powhida as an “outsider”; he seems to have a deep working inner knowledge of art world persons and politics which he gets from I-don’t-know-where. His comics are for a really specific inside audience. Problem is will this work even make sense to anyone 10 years from now, or to anyone outside the inner circle… questions which are obviously besides the point.

Howard Halle:
First Sean: Yes, you’re right; obviously, Powhida is working from a deep knowledge of the art world’s inner workings, but what I was trying to convey by the term “outsider game” was the pose of speaking truth to power, when it’s really not. I mean, when you preface a shot at someone like Jerry Saltz with “I love you Jerry but”¦” of course, the target is going to be flattered. That’s holding up a mirror in the wrong sort of way. And I agree that this approach has a short shelf life, but I wouldn’t say that the issue is besides the point; it is the point, which takes me to Paddy’s question. “Working for yourself first” means just that: Working through an idea that maybe nobody understands except you, until they do understand it. And yes, this could likely mean not until well after you are dead. What we’ve had over the past 30-35 years isn’t art so much as formula of one sort or the next. Meeting other people’s expectations while giving them some sort of cover of novelty and/or line of theoretical bullshit—which is bullshit. We all know terrific artists who, absent the right connections or right last name, labor for years in obscurity until one day their work surfaces somehow, and everybody goes, Wow, that’s amazing! Conversely, we’ve all seen the work of artists who were huge in their time in a museum somewhere, and immediately wondered, What were people thinking? Neither situation obtains all the time, but enough of the time to make you realize that being an artist is not suppose to be easy. It’s suppose to be hard. It’s almost like the difference between being on a desert island, tossing messages in a bottle into the ocean, and commandeering the giant TV screens at Madison Square Garden. No doubt the latter makes the bigger impression, but does it spark the same sense of wonderment as finding that bottle on the beach? It’s a tough choice, but I don’t think Powhida is making it.

Sean Capone
I just wrote on Jazz’ photo wall that under no circumstances, even in satire, do I like the casting of death-spells on another person (Saltz in question, in the ‘Hooverville’ piece), even if it’s under the guise of working “through a character”. Starts to reek of cynicism; the court jester who envies the emperor instead of pointing out that he has no clothes.

But I may not have all the facts here.

To describe Powhida’s work another way, the drawings are a visual manifestation of media whoring, which unlike years past, is quite socially acceptable these days. I find Sean Capone’s question about its longevity the most challenging to the artist’s practice. Like most people, I put my faith art I think will matter twenty years down the road. Powhida’s an interesting media phenomenon, but I just don’t see enough evidence indicating that his work will have any lasting importance.

Over in Jerry Saltz land, the New York Magazine senior art critic then professes his love of Powhida’s lastest masterpiece at Pulse, Hooverville. This isn’t much of a surprise. Saltz is known to have an affinity for art either about or pertaining to the art world. Being featured in the work probably doesn’t hurt (disclaimer I’m in it too); the piece depicts the five million art world personalities at Art Basel Miami this year. Saltz notes over facebook that he didn’t even attend.

The most amusing response I’ve read to this story comes from Hrag Vartanian (@Hragv) who teases Mr. Powhida (@powhida) over Twitter by saying: Sorry to be crude, but I wonder if you took a dump on Jerry’s head if he’d applaud at this point? Powhida tells Vartanian he’d have to charge for the service.

Meanwhile, artnet’s Walter Robinson moves from harassing bloggers over email to issuing death threats over facebook.  He left the following comment on Jerry Saltz’s facebook page:

I can’t believe all you people like that fucken Powhida. I hate him and am going to kill him when I see him for that caricature of me, if only I knew what the little dweeb looks like. It’s ARTNET MAGAZINE editor, you dweeb, not Artnet.com editor. Stupid twerp. He tried to write for me once or twice but he’s so fucken nondescript I wouldn’t recognize him in one of his own stupid drawings. And he couldn’t write worth shit. Never gave me any of his fucken caricatures, either, the drip.

Hmm. That’s a sensible argument.

Abstract Animated Lines! The Whitney’s New Logo, and Other Applications Revisiting “10 Myths of Internet Art” TG-30: Body by Body’s Tales from Deep Inside the Internet [NSFW]

Powered by Facebook Comments

  • http://www.coagula.com Mat Gleason

    I thought Walter Robinson is a blogger.

  • http://www.coagula.com Mat Gleason

    I thought Walter Robinson is a blogger.

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    Wow. Obviously the fact that so many people are talking about Powhida and his work means that there is some kind of critique that pinches a nerve. Many people in the art world feel uncomfortable with exposure and mirror turning which the persona of Powhida relishes and does very well. William did not just arrive on the scene, he has been working away for years, writing art criticism and producing work that not only deals with the art world but with politics, the film and music industry, pop culture..etc. As an emerging artist he has been telling Jerry and Roberta to fuck off for years in his work…along with major dealers and collectors. This could have been the end of his career but in reality it was only getting started. He is not a media whore, they came to him because he was brave enough to say things we all feel but do not have the balls to say. I first met him when he was writing art criticism which was brilliant and insightful. He is no longer an outsider, this is true. His work sells and he has critical attention but he can see into both worlds. There is nothing wrong with that. He has never labeled himself an outsider, other people did that for him……namely the New York Times. Powhida has a lot to say and the art world will always need a mirror. Do painters make work wondering if it will be relevant in 10 years? Who the fuck knows what will be? All I know is that his work is brave, hysterical and smart. It is not often an artists work makes me think and double over with laughter at the same time. Im sick of yoga balls or a 2 x 4 with a found polaroid and a can of peas stuck on it being considered art. Bravo Powhida, keep it coming!

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    Wow. Obviously the fact that so many people are talking about Powhida and his work means that there is some kind of critique that pinches a nerve. Many people in the art world feel uncomfortable with exposure and mirror turning which the persona of Powhida relishes and does very well. William did not just arrive on the scene, he has been working away for years, writing art criticism and producing work that not only deals with the art world but with politics, the film and music industry, pop culture..etc. As an emerging artist he has been telling Jerry and Roberta to fuck off for years in his work…along with major dealers and collectors. This could have been the end of his career but in reality it was only getting started. He is not a media whore, they came to him because he was brave enough to say things we all feel but do not have the balls to say. I first met him when he was writing art criticism which was brilliant and insightful. He is no longer an outsider, this is true. His work sells and he has critical attention but he can see into both worlds. There is nothing wrong with that. He has never labeled himself an outsider, other people did that for him……namely the New York Times. Powhida has a lot to say and the art world will always need a mirror. Do painters make work wondering if it will be relevant in 10 years? Who the fuck knows what will be? All I know is that his work is brave, hysterical and smart. It is not often an artists work makes me think and double over with laughter at the same time. Im sick of yoga balls or a 2 x 4 with a found polaroid and a can of peas stuck on it being considered art. Bravo Powhida, keep it coming!

  • noname

    This is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

    dumb.

  • noname

    This is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

    dumb.

  • Sean

    The only thing I can say is: it all keeps getting weirder, and more puzzling, and will soon disappear right up its own butthole.

    “That fucken Powhida”!

  • Sean

    The only thing I can say is: it all keeps getting weirder, and more puzzling, and will soon disappear right up its own butthole.

    “That fucken Powhida”!

  • Sara Jo Romero

    Yeah, this is dumb, noname.

    and….

    I tip my hat to Powhida.

  • Sara Jo Romero

    Yeah, this is dumb, noname.

    and….

    I tip my hat to Powhida.

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    Sean

    Why does it get weirder or more puzzling? Sorry but this will not disappear or go away…..as much as you would like it to.

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    Sean

    Why does it get weirder or more puzzling? Sorry but this will not disappear or go away…..as much as you would like it to.

  • the dude

    Powhida’s work is not so much “dumb” as it literally correct. There’s no bone to the meat. I think of him as the Blink 182 of the art world.

  • the dude

    Powhida’s work is not so much “dumb” as it literally correct. There’s no bone to the meat. I think of him as the Blink 182 of the art world.

  • http://www.zacharyadamcohen.com/ Zachary Adam Cohen

    Paddy

    I think you miss one thing in your commentary. And it speaks to the idea of a kinetic vs a static worldview. In a static worldview, which I will assign to you, yes powhida’s work as it is now, can’t really go anywhere. No one is going to look at Hooverville in 20 years and go, oh that was a seminal piece, a transformative moment. It lives in this moment. But doesn’t attach itself to a long lasting art historical tradition.

    But that fails to account for how Bill’s work might evolve. If anything, Powhida’s work has shown an ability to speak to the moment. So who is to say, that as the conversation progresses, so too will Bill’s insight into those moments, and that the technique and virtuosity of his work may progress.

    That to me seems like something that you’ve overlooked.

  • http://www.zacharyadamcohen.com/ Zachary Adam Cohen

    Paddy

    I think you miss one thing in your commentary. And it speaks to the idea of a kinetic vs a static worldview. In a static worldview, which I will assign to you, yes powhida’s work as it is now, can’t really go anywhere. No one is going to look at Hooverville in 20 years and go, oh that was a seminal piece, a transformative moment. It lives in this moment. But doesn’t attach itself to a long lasting art historical tradition.

    But that fails to account for how Bill’s work might evolve. If anything, Powhida’s work has shown an ability to speak to the moment. So who is to say, that as the conversation progresses, so too will Bill’s insight into those moments, and that the technique and virtuosity of his work may progress.

    That to me seems like something that you’ve overlooked.

  • http://www.zacharyadamcohen.com/ Zachary Adam Cohen

    I may as well comment on the outsider vs insider aspect of the above comments . Powhida has said publicly that he is an insider. He is an artist working in NYC, engaged in the conversation. He may feel like an Outsider, particularly in recent years as colleagues and peers rocketed up the art world hierarchy while his own career failed to ignite with the same velocity, but he’s never been shy about being on the inside. The #class exhibition that he is staging with Jen Dalton is taking place WITHIN a gallery, something that is crucial to the project. This is criticism and rejuvenation from within.

  • http://www.zacharyadamcohen.com/ Zachary Adam Cohen

    I may as well comment on the outsider vs insider aspect of the above comments . Powhida has said publicly that he is an insider. He is an artist working in NYC, engaged in the conversation. He may feel like an Outsider, particularly in recent years as colleagues and peers rocketed up the art world hierarchy while his own career failed to ignite with the same velocity, but he’s never been shy about being on the inside. The #class exhibition that he is staging with Jen Dalton is taking place WITHIN a gallery, something that is crucial to the project. This is criticism and rejuvenation from within.

  • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

    @Zachary “Overlooking” something suggests a fact that was willfully omitted, but what you’re talking about is a given in the work. Powhida’s art will evolve and of course his commentary will respond with the time. So what?

    Speaking specifically to Hooverville: I think it’s a reasonable piece, but I personally like the more discrete works better. At his best, Powhida offers concise cutting commentary about the art world, and contrary to what I’ve said above, I do wonder if some of that has the potential to be remembered. That stronger stuff though, gets lost in the web of these larger works.

  • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

    @Zachary “Overlooking” something suggests a fact that was willfully omitted, but what you’re talking about is a given in the work. Powhida’s art will evolve and of course his commentary will respond with the time. So what?

    Speaking specifically to Hooverville: I think it’s a reasonable piece, but I personally like the more discrete works better. At his best, Powhida offers concise cutting commentary about the art world, and contrary to what I’ve said above, I do wonder if some of that has the potential to be remembered. That stronger stuff though, gets lost in the web of these larger works.

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    Powhida has only had two solo shows in New York at Schroeder Romero. So I disagree Zach, his career ignited pretty quickly. His career went from 0 to 100 instantly. His career did not start with the #class show.

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    Powhida has only had two solo shows in New York at Schroeder Romero. So I disagree Zach, his career ignited pretty quickly. His career went from 0 to 100 instantly. His career did not start with the #class show.

  • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

    Also: @lisas I disagree re media whoring. I use the term loosely, in the same way I used to see internet personalities use the term to describe their daily activities. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible to spend as much time on twitter as Powhida does without there being an element of media whoring to the work. It’s not a bad thing. In fact, I think it’s necessary part of building the art.

  • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

    Also: @lisas I disagree re media whoring. I use the term loosely, in the same way I used to see internet personalities use the term to describe their daily activities. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible to spend as much time on twitter as Powhida does without there being an element of media whoring to the work. It’s not a bad thing. In fact, I think it’s necessary part of building the art.

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    “Speaking specifically to Hooverville: I think it’s a reasonable piece, but I personally like the more discrete works better.” Which pieces are more discrete Paddy?

  • http://schroederromero.com Lisa S

    “Speaking specifically to Hooverville: I think it’s a reasonable piece, but I personally like the more discrete works better.” Which pieces are more discrete Paddy?

  • Chris Walker

    I’ve met Powhida, and seriously, these people need to not take this shit so seriously. It’s art, not fucking astrophysics. He’s being poigniant and funny, and just because it pisses people off it gets written about and the credibility of the work comes into question because no one wants to step on toes. He isn’t promoting himself as an outsider; he knows what he’s doing, and if by giving into the gallery system he’s somehow an insider, then so what? No one else is making work that mocks the world that supports it right now. If he were more self deprecating and self-obsessed rather than projecting his interpretations of the art world, would he then be more appreciated by these critics and writers? At that, his work is super timely, and I’ve asked him before how he thinks it will transcend its own time. It’s a question no one can answer, but the fact that he has the gaul to carry through with it, that THIS is what he has to do seems to mean a lot more to me than making something else and just tailoring it to the market. If we look back at this time in 50 years, we’ll all probably remark the boom of the art world at the time, as well as the bubble bursting, so I don’t see how this caricaturing of the world, despite its personal specificities wouldn’t be relevant, at least as a social study of the climate.

  • Chris Walker

    I’ve met Powhida, and seriously, these people need to not take this shit so seriously. It’s art, not fucking astrophysics. He’s being poigniant and funny, and just because it pisses people off it gets written about and the credibility of the work comes into question because no one wants to step on toes. He isn’t promoting himself as an outsider; he knows what he’s doing, and if by giving into the gallery system he’s somehow an insider, then so what? No one else is making work that mocks the world that supports it right now. If he were more self deprecating and self-obsessed rather than projecting his interpretations of the art world, would he then be more appreciated by these critics and writers? At that, his work is super timely, and I’ve asked him before how he thinks it will transcend its own time. It’s a question no one can answer, but the fact that he has the gaul to carry through with it, that THIS is what he has to do seems to mean a lot more to me than making something else and just tailoring it to the market. If we look back at this time in 50 years, we’ll all probably remark the boom of the art world at the time, as well as the bubble bursting, so I don’t see how this caricaturing of the world, despite its personal specificities wouldn’t be relevant, at least as a social study of the climate.

  • Sara Jo Romero

    I think William is brave to put himself out there.

    To talk about shit that no one else will. To criticize – gasp – collectors, critics, institutions. The very people he parodies and mirrors are the ones who collect and write about his work.

    He gets beaten up for this all the time. He does have a heart deep down in there, you know. Like we all do.

    People get angry when they’re not included in one of his drawing tirades and when they are…guess what. They love it. Even if they don’t admit it.

  • Sara Jo Romero

    I think William is brave to put himself out there.

    To talk about shit that no one else will. To criticize – gasp – collectors, critics, institutions. The very people he parodies and mirrors are the ones who collect and write about his work.

    He gets beaten up for this all the time. He does have a heart deep down in there, you know. Like we all do.

    People get angry when they’re not included in one of his drawing tirades and when they are…guess what. They love it. Even if they don’t admit it.

  • pedrovel

    NY has homework to do, look outside your island and somehow contextualize all of this:

    In 2003, at Locust Projects in Miami, collective Law Office and Pedro Velez went after Rosa de la Cruz, Pierre Huyghe and Phillipe Pareno. It was all over the news…similar case to the Powhida thing, but we never avoided responsibility or used false names. We actually talked to Rosa for an hour, long story short… she promised we would never work again in the art world. Locust did a series of panels on the issue, etc…it was a hit.

    In ’05 at NADA fair we did a similar project, this time Bonami and Maurizio Cattelan were the subject. Back then Jerry saw the work and thought it was a bore. In ’08, same thing, we did a piece on Koons, Yablonsky and Joannou– before your big NuMu hoopla– and it went unnoticed in NY. Now you see a poster here and there in Chelsea an go all berzerk, like the Tea Party at a Democratic convention.

    You can even go before these dates I just gave you and find a whole bunch of other projects that were way “hardcorer.” We never played the pseudo activist/ socially conscious card. Not to say we don’t believe in anything, we do, but the idea in the end is to make art, not illustrations.

    My point is not to say that we did it first or any of that. Haacke, Wojnarowics, Gonzalez -Torres, Ferrer, all of 60′s Brazil did it first, that’s not the issue here. My point is that unless it’s not made in NY or all the victims are NYCers, you just don’t want to see it and that’s a bit unfair towards a bunch of people that have been there before. If you guys investigate a little bit more you’ll figure out very easily if that gossipy thing you got going there with Powhida, and all those Facebook comments used out of context, is relevant or not. From the outside–thank god for social media and blogs– it has the feel of a henhouse…too regional. Where is the substance? We want substance?

    My take is that Jerry and his review won the argument against Powhida, he killed it, he neutralized the issue. And that Robinson rant was pure satire thrown back at Powhida…he shouldn’t be surprised, after all that’s what he wants, right?

    PV

  • pedrovel

    NY has homework to do, look outside your island and somehow contextualize all of this:

    In 2003, at Locust Projects in Miami, collective Law Office and Pedro Velez went after Rosa de la Cruz, Pierre Huyghe and Phillipe Pareno. It was all over the news…similar case to the Powhida thing, but we never avoided responsibility or used false names. We actually talked to Rosa for an hour, long story short… she promised we would never work again in the art world. Locust did a series of panels on the issue, etc…it was a hit.

    In ’05 at NADA fair we did a similar project, this time Bonami and Maurizio Cattelan were the subject. Back then Jerry saw the work and thought it was a bore. In ’08, same thing, we did a piece on Koons, Yablonsky and Joannou– before your big NuMu hoopla– and it went unnoticed in NY. Now you see a poster here and there in Chelsea an go all berzerk, like the Tea Party at a Democratic convention.

    You can even go before these dates I just gave you and find a whole bunch of other projects that were way “hardcorer.” We never played the pseudo activist/ socially conscious card. Not to say we don’t believe in anything, we do, but the idea in the end is to make art, not illustrations.

    My point is not to say that we did it first or any of that. Haacke, Wojnarowics, Gonzalez -Torres, Ferrer, all of 60′s Brazil did it first, that’s not the issue here. My point is that unless it’s not made in NY or all the victims are NYCers, you just don’t want to see it and that’s a bit unfair towards a bunch of people that have been there before. If you guys investigate a little bit more you’ll figure out very easily if that gossipy thing you got going there with Powhida, and all those Facebook comments used out of context, is relevant or not. From the outside–thank god for social media and blogs– it has the feel of a henhouse…too regional. Where is the substance? We want substance?

    My take is that Jerry and his review won the argument against Powhida, he killed it, he neutralized the issue. And that Robinson rant was pure satire thrown back at Powhida…he shouldn’t be surprised, after all that’s what he wants, right?

    PV

  • http://www.evangeline.com.au evangeline

    I don’t think it’s Powhida’s artwork itself that’s important. What I think is important is that it seems to be igniting a flame within the art community in the spirit of revolution and change in the art world. We don’t like the system but we don’t know how to change it. Artists have lost creative freedom and control and handed it over to gallerists, critics, art marketing and the pursuit of the ‘art persona’. We’ve got no balls left!

    Powhida is kind of the whistle-blower, and our reaction to him is only going to increase the importance of his work over time. He’s posing questions and although the solutions are not there yet, he’s got the ball rolling. I for one commend him on speaking out. Sure there’s a bit of whoring going on, but so what? I’m all for whoring if it’s giving back control to the artist.

    As an outsider I’m loving hearing gossip about art people I’m ignorant about. It’s fascinating how a small group of people on the ‘inside’ can influence contemporary art. What a power trip.

  • http://www.evangeline.com.au evangeline

    I don’t think it’s Powhida’s artwork itself that’s important. What I think is important is that it seems to be igniting a flame within the art community in the spirit of revolution and change in the art world. We don’t like the system but we don’t know how to change it. Artists have lost creative freedom and control and handed it over to gallerists, critics, art marketing and the pursuit of the ‘art persona’. We’ve got no balls left!

    Powhida is kind of the whistle-blower, and our reaction to him is only going to increase the importance of his work over time. He’s posing questions and although the solutions are not there yet, he’s got the ball rolling. I for one commend him on speaking out. Sure there’s a bit of whoring going on, but so what? I’m all for whoring if it’s giving back control to the artist.

    As an outsider I’m loving hearing gossip about art people I’m ignorant about. It’s fascinating how a small group of people on the ‘inside’ can influence contemporary art. What a power trip.

  • http://dks.thing.net Douglas Kelley

    Jesus? I kind of think some of you are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees? “Is he a feckless, ruthless self promoter, insulting his betters to get their attentions, or vengeful talentless hack?” It’s satire. Most of this criticism seems like envy? William, for better or worse, is an equal opportunity offender, an art satirist whose drawings and repertoire draw their entertainment from art politics, which I hate to say, too often run to the parochial. I enjoy art, and I regale in it’s subversive intent, especially when it has been politically incorrect or forbidden for a spell? If Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog, couldn’t draw (like William Powhida) he too would probably be able to sell out a limited edition tableau vivant called, “I poop on your Art History and Contemporary Art Institutions.” And if Triumph’s work was as reasonably well rendered as William’s, his drawings would probably be very popular too, because people are at a very skeptical moment in time, or history, where their general creeping complete disillusionment with all manner of human institutions; governmental, academic, military, economic have been badly rattled, and, in doing so, many have been revealed to be so systemically corrupt, cracked, or plain broken, that’s lowered the general mood, (especially after a couple drinks) often leading to a cynically, passive nihilistic point of view, that they all might as well be destroyed, as reformed, because they’re all extremely suspect?! An impractical and destructive proposition, about as useful as breaking your fist punching a hole in the wall? But Art! Art is supposed to represent our dedication to the virtues? The apex of our social values? What? You can’t make fun of that? I think that, apart from some sore heads, who hate the unappealing way they been depicted, (or actually look) most of the sophisticated target connoisseurs of William’s work enjoy the succès de scandale, and can’t get enough of it? Jerry Saltz is almost too comfortable being satirically caricaturized, because he realizes that inexplicably he’s landed smack dab square in the center of the Nexus of a ridiculously complex, contradictory and often compromised system that nonetheless represents all of our best intentions. So, lighten up everybody. It’s double entendre, with a hint of protest and a pinch dissent, but it doesn’t presume to dare to hope to influence the agenda, it’s just commentary, (and protected as free speech.) His Art is a literary device, raisonneur drawings, mise en scène, that speak truth to power, and, all of this brouhaha, balderdash, cacaphony, endorsements and denunciations only add to the deliciousness of the spectacle. I was starting think art didn’t had a nerve left that could be touched? But he’s certainly touched something? So, I challenge thee, he or she, who is without sin, and/or never ever suspected that there ever was the least bit of collusion between museums, curators and major collectors, be the first to cast the rotten egg? (Play it safe and hit yourself in the forehead with it.)

  • http://dks.thing.net Douglas Kelley

    Jesus? I kind of think some of you are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees? “Is he a feckless, ruthless self promoter, insulting his betters to get their attentions, or vengeful talentless hack?” It’s satire. Most of this criticism seems like envy? William, for better or worse, is an equal opportunity offender, an art satirist whose drawings and repertoire draw their entertainment from art politics, which I hate to say, too often run to the parochial. I enjoy art, and I regale in it’s subversive intent, especially when it has been politically incorrect or forbidden for a spell? If Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog, couldn’t draw (like William Powhida) he too would probably be able to sell out a limited edition tableau vivant called, “I poop on your Art History and Contemporary Art Institutions.” And if Triumph’s work was as reasonably well rendered as William’s, his drawings would probably be very popular too, because people are at a very skeptical moment in time, or history, where their general creeping complete disillusionment with all manner of human institutions; governmental, academic, military, economic have been badly rattled, and, in doing so, many have been revealed to be so systemically corrupt, cracked, or plain broken, that’s lowered the general mood, (especially after a couple drinks) often leading to a cynically, passive nihilistic point of view, that they all might as well be destroyed, as reformed, because they’re all extremely suspect?! An impractical and destructive proposition, about as useful as breaking your fist punching a hole in the wall? But Art! Art is supposed to represent our dedication to the virtues? The apex of our social values? What? You can’t make fun of that? I think that, apart from some sore heads, who hate the unappealing way they been depicted, (or actually look) most of the sophisticated target connoisseurs of William’s work enjoy the succès de scandale, and can’t get enough of it? Jerry Saltz is almost too comfortable being satirically caricaturized, because he realizes that inexplicably he’s landed smack dab square in the center of the Nexus of a ridiculously complex, contradictory and often compromised system that nonetheless represents all of our best intentions. So, lighten up everybody. It’s double entendre, with a hint of protest and a pinch dissent, but it doesn’t presume to dare to hope to influence the agenda, it’s just commentary, (and protected as free speech.) His Art is a literary device, raisonneur drawings, mise en scène, that speak truth to power, and, all of this brouhaha, balderdash, cacaphony, endorsements and denunciations only add to the deliciousness of the spectacle. I was starting think art didn’t had a nerve left that could be touched? But he’s certainly touched something? So, I challenge thee, he or she, who is without sin, and/or never ever suspected that there ever was the least bit of collusion between museums, curators and major collectors, be the first to cast the rotten egg? (Play it safe and hit yourself in the forehead with it.)

  • http://andrewbirk.com andrew

    zach, unfortunately powhida’s work has not really evolved. the works are glorified lists, which is all they’ve ever been. maybe his train needs to switch to a new track. if william powhida was as “couragous” and “honest” as everyone romanticises, he would come out of the woodwork with a complete new treatment ala Guston. that’s being brave. instead, his art has worked itsself into a redundant lather. cheers.

  • http://andrewbirk.com andrew

    zach, unfortunately powhida’s work has not really evolved. the works are glorified lists, which is all they’ve ever been. maybe his train needs to switch to a new track. if william powhida was as “couragous” and “honest” as everyone romanticises, he would come out of the woodwork with a complete new treatment ala Guston. that’s being brave. instead, his art has worked itsself into a redundant lather. cheers.

  • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

    @Lisa Why does this feel like a test? I’m talking about the lists and the smaller drawings…the stuff where’s got a single issue he’s tackling. There’s a Where’s Waldo element to Hooverville that means people just end up looking for their friends or personalities, rather than really discussing the issues he’s tackling.

    Also, the word “brave” is being thrown around as though it’s a quality of the art that makes it better. That’s a quality of the artist, and frankly a dubious claim. He’s not saying anything that will get him expelled from the art world. In fact, if recent events are any indication, just the opposite has occurred. He’s probably creating situations for himself with art world personalities that will be awkward, but that’s the worst of it.

    To put a better spin on it, perhaps this is work Powhida feels so compelled to make it never occurred to him not to do so. This kind of compulsion tends to be the spark of unique vision.

  • http://www.artfagcity.com Art Fag City

    @Lisa Why does this feel like a test? I’m talking about the lists and the smaller drawings…the stuff where’s got a single issue he’s tackling. There’s a Where’s Waldo element to Hooverville that means people just end up looking for their friends or personalities, rather than really discussing the issues he’s tackling.

    Also, the word “brave” is being thrown around as though it’s a quality of the art that makes it better. That’s a quality of the artist, and frankly a dubious claim. He’s not saying anything that will get him expelled from the art world. In fact, if recent events are any indication, just the opposite has occurred. He’s probably creating situations for himself with art world personalities that will be awkward, but that’s the worst of it.

    To put a better spin on it, perhaps this is work Powhida feels so compelled to make it never occurred to him not to do so. This kind of compulsion tends to be the spark of unique vision.

  • Howard Halle

    @Douglas Kelley. Please, let’s not compare Powhida to a real genius like Rob Smigel (creator of Triumph the Insult Comic Dog); that’s just insulting everyone’s intelligence.

  • Howard Halle

    @Douglas Kelley. Please, let’s not compare Powhida to a real genius like Rob Smigel (creator of Triumph the Insult Comic Dog); that’s just insulting everyone’s intelligence.

  • Micah Ganske

    It was Ashley Bickerton who said something along the lines of,

    “Imagine if musicians just wrote about the politics at RCA records.”

    Sounds horrible doesn’t it?

  • Micah Ganske

    It was Ashley Bickerton who said something along the lines of,

    “Imagine if musicians just wrote about the politics at RCA records.”

    Sounds horrible doesn’t it?

  • Mead McLean

    Of course we don’t know how to change the art world’s system. Nobody is at the head of it, nobody has control of it, and nobody is at the tail end of it. The only point of resistance to all this is on a person-to-person level, and perhaps this is why Powhida’s work is creating this energy–because it’s personal (or at least it’s about people). We all know that timely art dies quickly, but if he lives a long time, maybe he’ll come around to the side of making more timeless work. Sometimes satirists do create a timeless piece because of the importance of who’s being made fun of; unfortunately, we’ll never know, in our time, who that is. Maybe Powhida will get lucky.

  • Mead McLean

    Of course we don’t know how to change the art world’s system. Nobody is at the head of it, nobody has control of it, and nobody is at the tail end of it. The only point of resistance to all this is on a person-to-person level, and perhaps this is why Powhida’s work is creating this energy–because it’s personal (or at least it’s about people). We all know that timely art dies quickly, but if he lives a long time, maybe he’ll come around to the side of making more timeless work. Sometimes satirists do create a timeless piece because of the importance of who’s being made fun of; unfortunately, we’ll never know, in our time, who that is. Maybe Powhida will get lucky.

  • Chris Walker

    God forbid we insult people’s intelligence. That’s totally part of the point of the work.

  • Chris Walker

    God forbid we insult people’s intelligence. That’s totally part of the point of the work.

  • mattf

    “Like most people, I put my faith art I think will matter twenty years down the road.”

    Is twenty the new two hundred?

  • mattf

    “Like most people, I put my faith art I think will matter twenty years down the road.”

    Is twenty the new two hundred?

Previous post:

Next post: