I have decided that I am the Dawn Weiner of conference-goers. Maybe I’m Ugly Betty (who is decidedly nicer than Dawn, but still out of sync). I am the CAA attendee that all the serious panelists hate: I walk in an out of panels, I type on my laptop when in the audience, I walk hurriedly down the halls, my nose in the conference program, nearly running into everyone my path. I am proud to say, however, that my cell phone has not gone off once during the entire conference. More than I can say for a surprising amount of other attendees. What is up with that? Have we not learned to turn phones off during public presentations?? Still? (more…)
Adam Overton does great things with performance, sound, collaboration, and more. You will no doubt enjoy this, if you’re still in town: (more…)
Responding to Beth and Steven’s excellent proposal, (”Couldn’t we rethink this a bit?”) though not, lamentably, in the form of a comment — the idea of expanding the conference format via modern technology is exciting and full of promise…
Coinciding with the much-discussed LACMA exhibition (see below; eventually traveling to Nuremberg and Berlin), curator Stephanie Barron and Lutz Koepnick chaired a session on Art of the Two Germanys/Cold War Cultures…
I’m kicking myself this morning for walking into yesterday’s “Queering Craft” session late, as the Q & A was one of the most spirited, funny, and collegial that I’ve seen all week. Predictably, most of the panel participants were under 30, and most moved beyond the footsore discussions of authenticity that bog down similar panels (though there aren’t many of those around - discussant Julia Bryan-Wilson is a CAA repeat offender on matters of craft, but a welcome one). Yale newcomer Jenni Sorkin assembled a fine assortment of mostly artists, including San Franciscan Lacey Jane Roberts. Roberts’ quip after being asked about the communal nature of queer craft was, “I think there’s something to be said for queer isolation… and shame, and humiliation, and…” (Cue laughter from the room.) Lacey, if you’re reading this, send me the text of your presentation so that I don’t have to just comment on your lightning wit in the face of contrived questions. Queer Caucus for Art, I expect more good things from you next year.
Why do they have one barista working the espresso machine at Starbucks, when there is an interminable line at any time of day? Maybe next year they should offer the Starbucks ‘fast pass’, like they do at Disneyland. Those who pay more, in advance, can just cut to the front of the line for their latte (which is even MORE expensive due to convention center surcharges - which are equivalent to airport surcharges, apparently)
Why are there no benches along the walls, where throngs of blazer donning historians crouch to plug in their laptops as they eagerly check our blog posts?
Why are there so many presenters at the conference who seem to be presentation veterans (evidenced by their meticulous paper structure), but who have apparently never plugged a laptop into a projector, or used power point on someone else’s computer? And, how is it that a building and staff that exists to host conferences is not somehow more tech savvy, in order to help when problems arise?
When someone’s cell phone rings in the middle of a paper, why do they let it continue to ring as they rush out the door? They do have off buttons on those things you know…
Why aren’t there any ashtrays outside along ‘the Smoker’s Wall’, since anyone who does smoke is certainly going to be especially likely to do so after attending a session or two.
Here is some parking information that should be included in the Conference literature next year:
There is free, all-day parking on the streets 2 blocks west of the convention center.
Parking in the lots nearby the convention center costs $3 in the morning, $10 by midday, and $20 by evening.
The parking lot at the Convention Center rivals the Bonaventure in its Postmodernity. Once inside, it is nearly impossible to tell which way to go, which way is out, and when you’ll ever see daylight again. It reminded me a bit of the parking garage in the Wiz (which, if you’ve never seen, you should Netflix it today!)
Actually the debate does not continue, at least according to the mood of the panel on Los Angeles Art Schools. The panelists were not only predominately either against or had reservations, but actually the most any of them would go in favor of an artist PhD was Jeremy Gilbert-Rolfe’s “I prefer to keep an open mind.” Rolfe added that he worried that the thesis work of a Phd would impede studio practices for artists. Russell Ferguson from UCLA warned that if the creditional became a criteria for employment for artists, it would be dangerous indeed, and observed that UCLA, his own top tier program, does not require an MFA to be a faculty member. Artist Roy Dowell, teacher at Otis, thought that the money for the new programs would be better spent on existant, underfunded programs.
This was a great panel, and I was ashamed to arrive so late. Apparently, I missed quite a bit of history and hopes for the future. I particularly enjoyed Dowell’s comment (when asked about technology’s impact on art schools) that his students “want to make things with their hands.” I like that.
It’s always commendable when people try to efface or challenge the monolithic professional rigor of CAA. Even when those challenging presentations amount to nothing more than a recursive “Let me show you just how wrong your practice is by practicing that practice in front of you” joke by imitation, I commend people for doing it. I like to see the business of art history made fun of beyond gentle insular chiding. That’s the context for my reaction to Our Literal Speed, a group of artists presented as a “media pop opera” who do self-referential art historical performances (this is the content that I divined from skimming their website - mocking professional mandates of the field, pedagogy, etc etc) and who presented the last “paper” at Katy Siegel’s panel this morning, “An Age of Extremes.” (more…)
So the parking was better this morning, but the little convenience only made me miss the spirit of yesterday, of all those immigrants moments away from becoming citizens, of the end of long, painful journies. The stories of the hall yesterday gave the conference a vitality that it lacks today.
Congratulations New Citizens!!! We are happy you can join us.
That said, however, there was a sort of spirit this morning. I witnessed a couple of great talks that really cheered me up. Matthew Biro from the University of Michigan’s talk on the Bechers and Andreas Gursky was stellar, pointing out the changes in how the Bechers approached their work over time and how Gursky is a logical extension of their teaching. What a clear, well put together presentation, my notes on the talk unfolded like an outline and then were pulled tight at the end. We all could take a lesson from this guy. (more…)
