Really Rad in the Windy City

Lloyd Dobler Gallery is pleased to present 'Really Rad Videos', a curated
screening of work by Nathan Baker, Lew Baldwin, Justin Berry, Lucas
Brunelle, Julia Hechtman, Greg Stimac, Jeremy Somer, H. David Waddell,
Ryan Fenchel, Diego Leclery and many others.

'Really Rad Videos' will take place this Friday, June 22nd, there will be
two identical hour-long screenings at 8pm and 10pm at Lloyd Dobler
Gallery. The work focuses on an array of intriguing, thought provoking
and just plain awesome videos by emerging and established artists from
all over the country. Content ranging from bike culture, music videos,
turning disco balls, sculpture documentation, your favorite video game
characters and obtrusive clay penises.

Teacher's Pets, Gavin Brown @ Passerby group show curated by Rob Pruitt

opening reception June 2nd from 6-8

Bradley Chriss
Thomas deBari
Becca Johnson
Max Kuller
David Waddell

Congratulations Ellen Ann! New Art Examined reception this Friday

photo: Ellen Gallup with Waddell's Helen Mirren Villa in New Orleans


NEW ART EXAMINED III
June 5 - July 21, 2007
Reception: Friday, June 8, 6 - 9 pm

Artists: Milana Braslavsky, Kelly Egan, Ellen Ann Gallup, Steven
Michael Hadley II, Ronald J. Longsdorf, Richard Sawka,
Nanda Soderberg, Chad States, David Waddell, Elizabeth
Wade

Arlington Arts Center's third annual overview of new talent selected from submissions by recent Master of Fine Arts graduates from universities in Virginia,
Maryland, District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Delaware presents the work of ten new artists. If the past repeats itself, some of the artists in this exhibition will become familiar names.

Milana Braslavsky's photographic images of friends and family caught up
in eccentric poses in a Baltimore home trick the eye and find humor in the human condition - with a nod to the drama queens among us, whereas Chad States' large scale digital archival prints investigate definitions of the term "masculine". Using portraiture, he attempts to democratize notions of masculinity by inviting anyone who identifies with being masculine to pose for a portrait. Through listings

on internet sites and flyers posted in public places, he began by simply asking the question "Are you masculine?"

Kelly Egan's photographs examine the acceleration of culture and information. Showing a rapidly shifting landscape, the images create fleeting glimpses of form as the artist uses speed to reconfigure the image.

The quirky installation of Ellen Ann Gallup incorporates everyday objects and materials as diverse as plants (Pink Love Plants), crayons, painted wooden hearts,
garden hose, balloons, plastic and clay pots and dishes.



Ronald J. Longdorf's sculptural installation We Could Have Been Happy takes
a serious look at human communication and interaction and features an altered,
oversized table and chairs, unfired clay, surveillance camera, speakers, wire and audio.



David Waddell's iPod stop-motion animation, iPleasure for Commuters,
Bird Games and Who's My Daddy? examines his personal history and that of his
parents and grandparents with an emphasis on the issue of adoption.

The serigraphs and videos of Steven Michael Hadley II continue the focus on failures of communication. His video, My Postmodern Breakdown, chronicles the professional as an anti-hero and a contradiction and addresses violence as a symbol for immediate, and in correlation to death, a drastic change. Although the artist handles his material in what at first seems to be a humorous manner, the viewer is soon chilled as similarities to recent tragic shootings start to surface.
This piece will be difficult for some viewers to watch and parents should exercise discretion here.

Richard Sawka's oversize fabric constructions, Nanda Soderberg's fresh found and altered glassworks, and Elizabeth Wade's bold acrylic on canvas painting round out NEW ART EXAMINED III.

Gallery hours: Tuesday - Saturday, 11 am - 5 pm
Location: Arlington Arts Center, 3550 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA
(AAC is located one block from the Virginia Square Metro
Station on the Orange Line)

If anyone is visiting Delaware...

May 18th thru September 9th
Mid Atlantic MFA Biennial

includes
Virginia Commonwealth
American University
George Washington University
MICA
University of Deleware
Towson
Tyler School of the Arts
University of the Arts

Now On View

MFA Thesis Exhibit on the Third Floor
Katzen Arts Center

Marty Weishaar
Jenny Walton
David Waddell
Kelly Ulcak
Max Kuller
Rebecca Johnson
Ellen Ann Gallup
Thomas DeBari
Graham Childs

*reception held on May 5, 6-9pm

Favorite Sculpture 2006: Petah Coyne, Mindy Shapero, Andrea Cohen

David Waddell

Funny, Not Funny
Part I- Crafted and Crafted Clunk, A Look at Coyne, Shapero, and Cohen

...instead of ranting, here are my raves for my favorite sculpture of 2006. They all made me laugh, smile and left me in awe and wonderment. Some resonated longer, as they took a turn from funny to not funny. Often, what is perceived to be light-hearted has a darker side. That is their power.

The artists and exhibitions include Greg Smith at Susan Inglett, Petah Coyne at Albright-Knox Art Gallery and, The Uncertainty of Objects at the Hirshhorn. I am particularly drawn to the work of Andrea Cohen and Mindy Shapero. Shapero simultaneously showed at CRG Gallery in New York.

Petah Coyne

I saw Petah Coyne at Buffalo’s Albright-Knox this summer, taking the trip twice. Each time, I walked through on my own and then, with an audio guide. Coyne discussed her work in a clear, articulate manner. Her soothing voice enriched my experience.

MIT Peacocks-Untitled #820 captures the magic. Dripping in white wax, time is standing still. As Coyne points out, this chandelier will never actually be stagnant. This pendulum will shift ever so slightly, even if we cannot catch it. My love for this piece could be my projected literary attachment. I have recollections of C.S. Lewis’ The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I am transported into a snowy forest where flying birds are frozen. MIT Peacocks hangs over my head, acting as a canopy. The chicken wire, the armature, is within eyesight as one stands underneath the work. Suddenly, you become aware of the scale of this massive, welded iron piece that could possibly fall on you. It looks like a giant, white chocolate-covered pretzel that could kill. The silence of the space becomes magnified, you can hear your breathing, and maybe, just maybe, you see the slight swaying.

Untitled #927 (BZ-CD-Put-Put) was another work that tugged at my heart. Coyne created a family tree out of horsehair provided by Ann Hamilton. The braided hair is frazzled at the ends. Flattened and attached to the wall, the dark hair is in flight while eloquently resembling roots. The piece has a parenthesized title that refers to Coyne’s siblings. Another reference to literature, this work could have been out of a John Irving novel such as Hotel New Hampshire or Salinger’s Franny and Zoe. BZ-CD-Put-Put is about the untimely death of her brother. It is a sad, remembrance of childhood and having to carry on as an adult and as a creative entity.

Wonder and awe comes from Coyne’s high craft. The level of fine craft elevates silk flowers, taxidermied birds, feathers, hair and wax. Anyone can use absurd, clichéd materials but it takes someone like Coyne to catch you off guard and leave you breathless.

In Daphane, she catches the viewer off guard. The rose composed figure can be read as a stump or a woman in a dress. An unexpected, tiny face glares into the corner. People shriek when they discover this surprise. Coyne is a knowledgable, well-read artist. She intertwines mythology, world history with autobiography to create experiences.


Andrea Cohen and Mindy Shapero

I appreciate Andrea Cohen. More precisely, I love Andrea Cohen. Not only is she clever with her in-depth investigation and usage of materials, she acknowledges those who dismiss her work.

When I saw this work, I was jealous and amazed. I had all of the same materials in my studio. In my own practice, I recycle materials until it ‘works.’ I had yet to find my answer and then I witnessed the perfect solution for Floam, pool toys, rafts, twigs, wallpaper, and Great Stuff. I wish I was Andrea Cohen. She has taught me to let things sit, and evolve. Fiddling and manipulating objects is not a waste of time when sculpture this poetic, playful and beautiful can form.

Painting justifies itself through painting. So sure, Cohen makes references to Brice Marden, Chinese scrolls, landscape painting and Jonathan Lasker. But she also reminds me that I don’t have to gouge my eyes out with a paintbrush to make something noteworthy.

Far from revolutionary but still highly praiseworthy, Anne Ellegood curates a spectacular exhibition that allows this conservative town dip their feet and test the waters of contemporary sculpture. This is the state of sculpture.

There is a clunky, playful edge to art today. It is evident in the Vitamin P which emphasizes trends. And while, I am undecided if it is suitable for painting, I think CLUNKY is golden for sculpture. Let objects be objects, either elevate them or pronounce how pathetic they are.

Mindy Shapero is crafted clunk. Unlike most of the sculpture in the Uncertainty of Objects, Shapero’s work are creatures with souls. They are sad, pathetic animals, made of paint chips and cardstock. I empathize with these rigid furballs. One resembles an emu. My favorite work is a burnt out rainbow. It is hilariously sad.

More on Mindy, Greg Smith in Part II

Role of Criticism Today, Panel Discussion at the Provisions Library

by David Waddell

In the spirit of this conversation, I have written this in a blog style. That is, I sat down and wrote it. Most of our works through ARTifice are written as papers rather than letting it all fly, unedited in a stream-of-conscious act.

I attended the panel discussion, the state of criticism in the arts, hosted by Transformer Gallery at the Provisions Library in Dupont Circle.

Ryan Hill from the Hirshhorn mediated the event. The panel consisted of Kriston Capps of Washington City Paper, Glen Dixon from the Washington Post Express, editor of Sculpture Magazine Glenn Harper, Rachel Beckman at the Washington Post and Andy Grundberg of the New York Times.

To summarize this lively conversation, I will quote Glenn Harper concluding the discussion to Ryan Hill, "That wasn't too depressing, was it?" Well, Glenn, I didn't think the conversation was any more depressing than life usually is. The topic for the panel discussion could have been, 'Complaining About Your Job: Part One, Editors and Critics.'

Hands down, the whiniest and most disgruntled critic was Glen Dixon. Glen Dixon described his background as if he did not have a choice to become an art critic. He made it sound like either it was a complete accident or that a gun was pointed at the back of his head. Everytime he spoke, vomit spewed from his mouth. My question to him would be, is there anything that you do not have a problem with? Are you happy with anything? He complained about everything! In fact, I could list his complaints in order of which he spoke:

1. The Post general audience cannot understand art. (See 8)
2. As a writer, you have to follow rules and censors. You can't say things like "Shotgunning a beer" or "infamous massacre" (See 3)
3. The Washington Post has shackles.
4. There is too much information in the world. Overload. (See 5&6)
5. Zines suck.
6. Blogs suck.
7. It sucks to travel everywhere you could possibly want to go and see all of the shows you ever wanted to see. It seems ideal but in reality one cannot absorb all that information. It is like you saw nothing at all. So why waste the time?
8. Readers are tone deaf and illiterate (when asked, why do critics only describe rather than criticize?)

Glen Dixon loves himself but is mad that he is writing blurbs for the Washington Post Express. He has fallen short of his own goals and dreams. To compensate, he took every turn he could to speak. And each time, it was negative. Just because you cannot land your dream job does not mean that you have to insult your audience. I was offended just listening to him and I consider myself in his target audience for 'his ideal writing situation.' I am an educated person. In fact, his current audience which he insists on trashing (Metro commuters riding to Capitol Hill) are probably literate as well. What makes Glen Dixon so special that he is more literate and less tone deaf than the normal person?

Glen Harper, the editor of Sculpture, was much more eloquent and articulate about explaining the situation and role of the critic in today's world. He says that those pitching articles must know the overall scope of the field. Problematic pitches for him are those that do not contribute to the goal of his publication. A large portion of proposed articles are written by people who have never read Sculpture magazine. On the flipside, he explains that successful critics, such as Lucy Lippard, struggle with maintaining their original voice after an editor has chopped up their work for publication.

A discussion point of the evening was: where is the future of print and the future of critique? Harper points out that the 80's were hot for non-profit magazines. Since the collapse, however, only ART Lies exists. Capps adds other critical outlets to the dialogue. Web-based Glasstire and its contributors such as Chris French fill the void for alternative voices . Students and artists who are motivated and interested also voluntarily fill the gap. Austin based Okay Mountain is an example.

Hill suggested that the internet has brought writing to an informal and pedestrian level. Grundberg agrees, stating that blogs are unedited streams of consciousness that fulfill a grassroots function. The Post or Times would never tread in these areas.

Later, Grundberg questions blog authors. Why would anyone want to write if they were not being paid? It is not very economical. I thought this was a strange comment. I wonder if any members of the panel have a love for art or for writing. Maybe the joy and love was taken out of it by having a 9-5 job. Once you get paid to do something, the fun stops. I think that people who maintain a blog have a compassion for whatever they write about. That is the beauty of this type of writing. You do not have deadlines. You do not have to be forced to write about art which you feel indifferent about.

Overall, the panel was very hesitant to promote the blog. Harper maintains that the print version has a certain aura and documentation quality. If an artist is featured on Sculpture magazine's website rather than their printed magazine, the sculptor is usually angry. Material still dominates, adds Hill. Or does it? Dixon polls the panel audience. Who even reads blogs? 80% of the group raises their hands. Dissatisfied he emphasizes, but who reads ART blogs? 75% He is gonna prove his point somehow. But who revisits those same sites? 50% Then an older woman behind me screams "Get with the times!"

Harper references 18th century salons and Boudelaire's Triumph of Art for Public. He states that criticism is about the public. Blogs are pretty much for the public. What a great way to hold a forum for the public...if only someone would listen.

The last hot topic was in the Q&A session. What do you have to say about critics being more descriptive than critical? All agreed that, in fact, they were critical in their describing. I found their answers to be frustrating and beside the point.

Grundberg: How is describing not critical?
Beckman: We are not critical out of fear that we will run into the artist at the grocery store. (Later, she was questioned about that answer, in which she answers, 'well, actually, I am not a critic. I put myself in a hypothetical situation).
Dixon: Readers are tone deaf and illiterate.

It is amazing how writers could not answer this question without blaming the audience or the artist. My final question was, where is the actual artist in all of this? The critic was central to the conversation. However, the artist and art was at the furthest periphery.

Out of all of this, I have a list of sources to look at:
Bad at Sports Podcast
ArtsJournal.com
James Elkins
Peter Plagens

Also, I would advise checking out the Provisions Library at 1611 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington DC
It is a great source which our city has. I just learned about it and will take advantage of its existence.

- "Just spell my name right." Warhol

-"Be passionate, partisan, and political" Baudelaire

-The most money being spent in art right now is contemporary art, artists that are alive and currently making work.

Douglas Gordon at the Hirshhorn

written by David Waddell

I had high expectations for Anne Ellegood’s follow-up show to the Uncertainty of Objects at the Hirshhorn. However, Refract, Reflect, Project: Light Works from the Collection was exactly that, a survey show with work from the collection. It was another brief tour of art. Regulars such as Dan Flavin, James Turrell and Robert Irwin appear to educate the masses. Stand out pieces include Olafur Eliasson’s Round Rainbow and Douglass Gordon’s Play Dead, Real Time. I tried giving Turrell a chance but it proved to be a stressful experience.

I barely adjusted my vision to see the Turrell piece without bumping into other guests as a security guard turned on his flashlight to guide me away from the piece. I was too close. I apologized and told him that I could not see. Another man in the room snorted and said “Yeah, me neither.” That was the end of that Turrell experience for me. I recommend the Quaker House in Houston. It is an amazing experience and surpasses the Cy Twombly gallery at the Menil Collection as my new favorite place in Texas.

Meanwhile, at the Hirshhorn, disappointment had already set in when I encountered two large screens and a television set that shows an Indian elephant rolling on the ground, standing up and laying on its side. My gloom lifted off me, as though I were a child at a circus (taking into account that I was ignoring animal rights). The camera pans around an elephant in a white room. The camera constantly spins around this beast, even when the animal is motionless. The ground beneath the subject appeared to be moving. It is disorienting as this giant becomes weightless.

Another dizzying factor is the relation of the screen to the viewer. Standing next to the screen, the top of my head reaches the horizon line. Everything below this point is legible reflection. Where the screen meets the floor, a second reflection merely captures light rather than image.

Visitors walk between the projected light and screen. The projector is mounted to the ceiling at an angle and casts silhouettes of those who pass through. Viewers on the other side of the screen witness heads floating at the bottom of the screen. It becomes a surreal, puppet show.

By including the viewer’s ‘interaction’, constant camera movement on the large screens and a static camera on the television, Gordon shows us his devices. He is reveling his tricks and magnifying his medium.

The camera inspects this animal from a mechanical viewpoint. But the audience can see this pachyderm as a soulful animal. On the television set, Gordon begins by panning slowly across his face and into the eyes. When the elephant playfully rolls around, he seems so compact, like a ball. These acts almost diminish his large stature. He seems like a pet, a cat.

We are reminded of the elephant’s ancestors. His wrinkles, oversized skull and tree stump legs are queues to dinosaurs. These ancient creatures roam this earth. Instead of letting them live in peace, we treat them as a sideshow. It is interesting that Douglas uses the most recent technology to capture one of the oldest creatures who have been abused for various reasons for so long.

In the end, Gordon is making a statement about human control and taming wild animals for transportation and entertainment purposes. And just like the circus, we ignore the protestors outside. We devour cotton candy while enjoying the spectacle. I couldn’t bother to feel sad at the moment of watching in amazement the beauty and grace of this animal. I was seduced by the medium of film and brilliance of light. Gordon is successful at mesmerizing the audience to then overlay a meaningful message.

Embedded at Conner Contemporary

reviewed by David Waddell

I visited the Maria Friberg exhibition at Conner Contemporary the other day. This Swedish video artist and photographer has had three solo shows at Conner in the past six years. This one is titled ‘Embedded,’ which features one video triptych and four photographs. While I did not pay as much attention to the photography, the video completely mesmerized me. Two of the three screens were packed for PULSE art fair, but I still enjoyed the experience on the single screen. It made gallery hopping worthwhile.

The video fits into a range of categories. It reflects nature, fashion photography, advertisements, landscape and subjects of masculinity and feminism.

Due to the pace of the video, one primarily associates the work with nature. Four men dressed in black, slowly emerge from the center of a mattress which is luxuriously draped in white sheets. Some compare the action in the video to the cycle of a caterpillar transforming in a cocoon. My immediate thoughts were that of a rose bud opening its petals. The figures are born from the center and creep towards the parameters of the screen. A horizonless background allows the viewer to dismiss scale. It might as well be the center of a flower.

I had wondered if Friberg incorporated stop-motion animation. Norm McClaren shot frame-by-frame to capture humans performing impossible tasks. I suspected that the movement was altered and slowed down as well. Friberg states that the work was done in real time. While I gasp at the thought of a person having to perform this excruciatingly slow act, she explains that dancers were no good at the assigned task. Rather, those who used meditation were successful.

It makes sense that Friberg uses men who meditate. The work is about isolation and the mental and physical boundaries of the body. It is about the individual that is so much smaller than the scope of the world. We never can escape ourselves and pull out to see ‘the bigger picture.’ Even those in the same bed are not in communication. They are silent bed partners and separate entities. The bed acts as a cloud, an island, a raft and an iceberg.

When listening to the discussion between Friberg and Julee Holcombe on feminism, I thought, “Yes, these men are the muse.” The woman is stands behind the camera as a director and in control. The men seem limp and without control at all. Contrary to the visuals, this is a real act and these men are in complete control of their movement. Their minds are in tune with their bodies through meditation. Friberg is documenter in this instance.

The aesthetics of the work emasculates these men as they slide off this bed, in a flaccid manner. They are arched back, stretched out and beautified. I associate these men with the backup dancers for this one Shania Twain video. Twain is dressed in a suit as a man. She has the microphone and is in control. She is surrounded by men with shaved heads and red fishnet shirts. They play fake guitars and are merely present as eye candy in this gender role reversal.

I also associate these men with a skin commercial due to the black-and-white color schematics and costuming. The exposed body parts are central locations for lotion: the hands, feet and face. In the commercial, a leathery alligator waddles through a minimal stage towards someone who needs lotion. I feel the same deliberate staging in this work.

I find this work so appealing because it falls into the realm of good photography, advertising, and staged fashion. Friberg has an acute sense of color and compostion because she was a trained painter. This is evident in the video as well as her photography.

Friberg got into this line of work because she did not want to be isolated in the studio. And yet she makes work about isolation. When viewing ‘Embedded’ I felt like I was alone in the gallery having an intimate moment with the video screen.

Tim Doud at Priska C. Juschka Fine Art by David Waddell

Tim Doud’s show titled Materiality explores the language of symbols. Doud’s use of clothing and accessories reinforces society’s artificial state of how one remains an individual while participating in society through labeling, logos, patterning and colors of cloth, application of lipsticks, the psychology of glasses and hairdos.

We question authenticity of factors that compose the sitter. The line between advertisement and humanity is questioned. The sitter seems animalistic or like a specimen. This is evident in the short depth of field which Doud presents his subjects.

Applying lipstick is a human characteristic. Animals have particular striking markings, which would sexually attract a mate. It is a human choice to physically alter oneself. Considering this point, when I see Angie, she looks less human with lipstick. Doud paints the lips in a flat manner, emphasizing that Angie is wearing a mask of cosmetics. Her lips and hair sit on top of the surface. This is most evident in Lady Dangerous. The paintings are awkward. There is not much space between Angie and the wall, and then Angie and the viewer. She stares out at us like a deer caught in headlights. She does not have a blank expression but one of understanding that she is under the scrutiny of the painter’s eye.

The act of Angie changing clothes to accommodate various make-up shades emphasizes the artifice of painting. The difference between Angie coloring her face with cosmetics and Doud painting Angie’s painted face are similar acts with different social receptions and implications.

Portrait painting originated to commemorate and remember the diseased. Royalty and government officials have their portraits placed in public viewing. People wear lockets and carry pictures in their wallets to remember loved ones. To own or have a portrait of a person is not entirely self-indulgent. In contrast, hiding ones blemishes and flaws through make-up is self-centered. We have to ask why one would paint Angie in costumed situations. Is it to remember that time Angie wore crazy hats and hot pink? No, it is to declare a statement, not just a momentary thought or passing. That is for the photograph. To paint about paint, about pigment is to make a statement. Colors decorate and enhance the world whether it is through painting, cosmetics, advertisements, or clothing.

Doud hints at the pop world’s fascination with advertisement, the billboard, repetition and flat shapes. Doud brushes against but not fully divulges in Katz. He may subscribe to Alex Katz eyes and lips but he must differentiate the visuals when concerning the rest of the body, the skin, the background in order to make a statement on the place of the real and artificial. It is the costume versus the sitter’s aura.

He touched on Warhol with twelve tiled paintings of himself. The heads and faces are subtly different. I could imagine Doud being a factory unto himself, painting twelve floating heads on a blank canvas and then applying different apparell. He too, looks uncomfortable. He is under the scrutiny of his own eye and more importantly, his own thoughts and decisions as a painter.

The sitters who appear more comfortable are from larger works, Haulin Ass and Bobcat. These are from a series where Doud’s sitters dress in clothes worn for a special event. In Haulin Ass, a man faces us frontally without pants. The image is cropped at the tip of his exposed penis. He stares out indifferently. There is no difference between his favorite cotton shirt and the breeze between his legs. It is comfort with material (the cotton of our lives) and comfort with body.

I witnessed two guys realizing that the sitter was not wearing pants. They stepped back, laughing at themselves and their delayed discovery. This is what the composition is set up to look passed assumptions. And it worked.

Bobcat presents a man equally comfortable with himself and his fur-adorned jacket over his shirtless body. He wears a hood over a hat. His clothing choices are geared towards absurd fashion, not function. It could be that he is high. His eyes are red and bloodshot.

I remain neutral about Doud’s backgrounds because I cannot imagine them a differently. The sitters are loaded and work within these emptied spaces. Nitpicking, the depictions of veins bother me when they resemble yarn rather than a passageway for blood. I also question the placement of The Florist on the wall. I do not know if the canvas is placed at the height of this man’s head, but I find it hokey.

I heard some comments about the work being derivative of Alice Neel, but I think that is incorrect and a disservice to Doud’s intentions and comments about society. We live in different times, more conceptual times than Neel. These are more than portraits. They discuss the role of paint, clothing and societal ideas that form us as individuals.

Louise Bourgeois Eats A Truffle, David Waddell discusses the Artist's Salon

I read about Louise Bourgeois’s Sunday Salon in the June ’06 ArtNews. I was excited by the thought of a salon. Salon is romanticized. Art students desire to emulate the aura of Paris, the Dada movement, Surrealism and de Kooning’s drinking days at the Tavern. This seemed like a worthwhile trip. The salon was touted as being an opportunity for feedback from art royalty.

My anticipation differed from my experience. I question the positioning and morality of how the salon is currently run. The salon has been in session for 30 years, since Bourgeois was 64. The woman I hold in contention is the documentary filmmaker, Pouran Esrafily. She has been filming the salon for the past 12 years, since Bourgeois was 82 years old. Pouran quickly volunteered her own name without me catching it; rather I figured it out through reading Devine’s article.

The experience was not an adventure into the art giant’s world but a painful visit to grandma’s house… a reminder of the fragility of life and the diminishing of a powerhouse and a force in her prime. For what purpose does this salon still exist? I question the choice of people who surround this aging artist in her final days. These issues must be examined. ArtNews was descriptively accurate without tackling the issues of control and critique of the salon. It could be that on the day I was present, Ersafily was running the show rather than Jerry Gorovoy, who facilitated during Devine’s visit.

We wait for Bourgeois to enter the room. A muffled noise comes from the other room. It is Louise small voice. Pouran Esrafily demands that we sit. She requests that we act delighted to see Bourgeois. We should not glare as Bourgeois maneuvers with her walker through the room. Everyone holds her breath until the grand act of walking and then sitting is a success.

Bourgeois’s wardrobe resembles the black-and-white animation of Steamboat Willie whistling while steering the steamboat. Bourgeois’s ensemble includes a white silk shirt, and black slip/shorts with suspenders constructed out of yarn. I might have imagined two white large buttons where the pants meet the suspenders.

Once situated, each artist was to present their work in the designated area that would frame Louise Bourgeois appearing to view artwork. Then the work is turned to Esrafily’s camera. Louise Bourgeois’ has three phrases, “Yes, yes.” “I see.” and “Verrry goot.” When asked a direct question, she would shake her head no, and say, “I don’t remember” or “I don’t know them.”

Ersafily was very demanding as how to approach and engage Louise. A generous curator came with a box of truffles as a gift. Ersafily insists that she would not indulge in even a single piece. We should open the gift before Bourgeois arrives. I wanted to place a bet on this act of eating a truffle. Bourgeois eats the truffle and proves Ersafily wrong.

What does Bourgeois want? She wanted a truffle. But, does she enjoy the presence of strangers in her house? Or is this what Esrafily wants? Like any family, there are protective members who are in denial about a loved one aging. These same people often oppose a certain individual’s management over the elderly. In this instance, I am the grandchild who does not get a sincere vibe from Ersafily. But, I could have been rubbed the wrong way.

Bourgeois is certainly present and conscious. She had strong opinions about her environment. Bourgeois’s most vocal point of the day is when she insists that the living room doors are shut and barred from the outside. It was an important and urgent request. People volunteer to close the door, but Ersafily quickly notes that she is the only one who knows how to properly seal the door shut. Later, Bourgeois complains about light. A small desk lamp facing a wall is the only source of light. But it is too bright for her.

I am sure she would indicate if she did not want to receive guests. But does she want to look at work? She would glance, and then doze. She had a peaceful presence. However, there was no true critique from her. There was thoughtful discussion among the twelve artists in the room. The salon could have been held elsewhere.

Ersafily was demeaning towards women her own age. She announced that Louise was excited about young artists. Ersafily decides the pecking line. The older women suspiciously went last. And contrary to Ersafily’s remarks, Bourgeois perks up to listen to these women.

Ersafily also disregarded those with curatorial powers. An ex-curator from the Brooklyn museum insisted that an ICA.Boston curator speak. Ersafily begrudgingly allows the woman to have a few words.

Louise Bourgeois is a device in this situation. Ersafily could be riding her famed coattails to promote her documentary. She clearly feels threatened by those that she perceives to be in the know and hopes that her own status can be elevated through association with Bourgeois for a younger generation. I recommend reading Robert Storr’s biography that will be released in the future rather than watching this documentary.

I signed a release form which I regret. And I felt awful after I left. The same kind of awful feeling when you leave a retirement community and you pass by the intensive care unit.