okay enough with the pithy initialisms.
I think I may have opined erroneously (as has been known to happen). I said that when group exhibs are bad they can still be reasonably good. (like sex or pizza). Case in point
UNclassified @Dianne Tanzer. unfortunately, its bad, (DT is usually excellent) and it seems that the curators decided that their theme would be to have no theme (how very highschool). Which could work but it doesnt. The coolest work there, Roy Ananda's
Untitled, is clearly about classification. hmm.
Which got me thinking not so much about the work that curators do, but that it is up to the viewer to make connections.
UNclassified gives us nothing to work with, and while that may have been what they were going for... meh. Yet
Networks @ MUMA was all about, well networks. Within each work and across rooms. A culturally poignant theme that the artists could also work with, its broad but not too broad. Unlike
The Naked Face at NGV. woah. slow down NGV, we know you own a lot of works but do you have to smack us around the head with it all? (and who decided to put the very dark, very shiny Rembrandt, near the only window in the joint?). Theres a few brilliant works here but sometimes less is more...
If you try to be everything to everyone you end up being nothing to no one. The whole thing reminded me of the menu at La Porchetta: Some new favourites, some big hits, but way too much cheese and well... just way too much of everything. A bit like William Shatner.
P.S. aforementioned Ananda writes and interesting article on (co)authorship that I touched on in my last post.
http://www.craftsouth.org.au/readingroom/ananda_authorship.html. read it if you wanna find out more.... or if youre having touble sleeping.
