I went to the opening of Today's Man at John Connelly Presents. Due to the fact that the MTA decided to shut down the L-train from Eighth Avenue to Lorimer Street(!) the crowd took a while to assemble, which meant those of us arriving near 6 could actually see the work, a rather unusual occurrence at his openings.
It's a very good show, with about 50 works by male artists on male subjects. As James pointed out, there isn't a lot of nudity, as you might expect at such a show. The link above on Douglas Kelley's web site lists all of the artists, so I'll only mention the works that struck me:
- A dark oil painting of a boy on a windowsill by Tim Lokiec
- A drawing by Paul P.
- A collage by Tony Feher that included a sexy ass shot of someone, a coffee cup lid, an cigarette butt, and a prescription label -- hey, he and James have the same doctor!
- A beautiful drawing (on vellum?) by Assume Vivid Astro Focus/Eli Sudbrack
- A drawing of a boy in a rowboat about to be attacked by a tentacled monster by Hernan Bas
- A collage by Christian Holstad
- A delicate drawing by Nick Mauss
- A painting by Michael Wetzel -- I really like his work the more I see it
Speaking of Paul P, check out the nice review he got from Holland Cotter. Knowing that Paul loves Whistler, getting compared to Whistler and Caravaggio's "punk angels" is a good thing. He was down from Toronto for the opening.
On the subject of reviews, in a week when even the troglodyte Michael Kimmelman reviews this sort of work (see the Holland Cotter link above), it shocked me to see New York Data Probe's dismissive comments on the John Connelly show. There is a fine line between amusing Gawker-esque snarkiness and being a philistine. I think NYDP has crossed that line. Quote:
John Connelly Presents presents its second opening in two weeks, for the show "Today's Man," with 49 artists, not many of them artists by career....
Lucky for me that this is basically a rerun of the last opening, because I can't be there--I'm going to the Hamptons.
What does "not many of them artists by career" mean? I've seen most of them in galleries whose taste I respect. Are they not "by career" unless they're making a good living at it like Ross Bleckner or Annie Leibovitz? Ugh.
It's also poor journalism to say "a rerun of the last opening" when there isn't that much overlap. I assume he is referring to the work that John is showing at D'Amelio Terras, and not the last show in his space with Dearraindrop.
What's the point of having an art blog if your writing is even more sloppy than the print journalists? I'm no Tyler Greene or Tom Moody, but I would be embarassed to write such a thing without some air quotes.
