worldwidereview now welcomes press releases, plus Summer Reviews

Tue, 2 Jun 2009 13:41:57 +0100

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C9E387.E5F52C30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello and happy Summer,

www.worldwidereview.com is now accepting press releases. Worldwidereview =
is one of the world's top web sites for art and culture reviews. In =
order to give our readers more information we are now accepting clearly =
marked press releases. We especially welcome press release from =
contemporary art galleries and spaces around the world whose shows may =
have been overlooked. Worldwidereview is a completely open submission =
dedicated to expanding art criticism.

go to http://www.worldwidereview.com/Reviews_artreviewswriters.htm and =
submit your press releases and reviews now.

Summer Bulletin (three jesters): Raqib Shaw, Michael Raedecker, Jerwood =
Painting
Raqib Shaw at White Cube London
From:art reviews

Raqib Shaw's paintings are the most spectacular and successful result of =
our recent gilded age (now=20
pronounced dead by credit crunch). The subject matter is standard Hoxton =
fantasy: monsters,=20
orifices, sloths. However with the sheer excess of decoration and detail =
in enamel and shiny stones=20
the whole things become more than the sum of their parts, glittering and =
beguiling in the low lit cube,=20
they have that certain madness of art. =20

(the upstairs sculpture is crep)

Re: Raqib Shaw at White Cube London - the absence of ideas

From:     D

If any paintings are a signifier of the over-priced, over-hyped froth & =
vacuity of contemporary art today these are they.

Seven large paintings - and nothing to distinguish between any of them. =
I couldn't be certain but they have the feeling that=20
many assistants were burning the candle at both ends to produce them?

The fool who bought one for 2.4 million quid must be having some =
sleepless nights at the moment.
Jerwood Contemporary Painters, Jerwood Space.From:Nned Thisom

This exhibition is one that always raises a smirk on my face. The judges =
apparently travel the length and breadth of the country=20
whittling down a longlist of young painters (compiled by them) to a =
shortlist, this year of 26 artists. Of course, this not being a open=20
submission prize the longlist is mainly comprised of ex-students/mates =
of the judges.=20
The judges this year are all abstract painters, Mali Morris, Philip =
Allen and Alexis Harding. Perhaps then, it comes as little surprise=20
that much of the work in the show is abstract. Happily this is an =
opportunity to take a look at what three 'quite good' abstract=20
painters think is interesting abstract painting. Also happily, it means =
they haven't done anything as stupid as pretend that painting=20
is interesting because it can be sculpture or video as well, as the jury =
of the first of these shows did a couple of years ago.=20
I can't pretend to have found anything that interesting in the abstract =
work, a variety, much of it quite fresh but vague, only one hard=20
edged 'trendy triangles' painting that was the most stylised also in =
it's colour combinations. There was a sense that a few of the=20
pictures owed a huge debt to the abstract work of Picabia.=20
Of the other work the Mosley painting was typically fantastic, (as =
opposed to absurd, rather than good), the Wier typically RCA in=20
it's look and the token political painting, a big degree standard colour =
by numbers monstrosity based on a bombed Beiruit. I think.
Leaving this show really made me want to start a painting prize, because =
I always have faith that there must actually be some=20
'quite good' painting out there somewhere.  Alas, it is not to be found =
in the Jerwood.=20
Michael Raedecker: Line up, Camden Arts Centre, 01 may- 28 JuneFrom:Nned =
Thisom
Michael Raedecker is best known for grey paintings of lone buildings, =
sitting eerily in very sparse American seeming=20
landscapes. The works were made with swirls and washes of acrylic paint =
with lights and details sewn in using different=20
coloured threads. This exhibition is of new work, mixed up with key =
works from the past five years. I suppose the artist wanted to=20
take our presumtions of his subject matter out of our brains. The show =
features no lone bulidings, but a couple of pictures of=20
washing hanging on lines, some barren streets, some small abstract =
works, a still life, some flowery patterned pieces and a=20
some vases of flowers.=20
It is hard to understand what the artist is aiming for with this show, =
and the painful realisation that infact he is just, as the blurb in=20
the leaflet says, presenting a reinvention of 'different genres from the =
history of art including still lifes, landscapes, interiors,=20
history and flower paintings'. Which of course, he is not.
This exhibition is surprisingly and dissapointingly dull, and the sense =
from the work is that it is drifting along with little passion=20
from the artist. The big pictures are generally made up of panels, so =
it's easier for sewing I suppose. These panels often have=20
sewing that mimics and mirrors drips made from the paint on the panel =
next to it. This way of working suggests to me doodling,=20
time to spend putting things in the picture that are not needed and =
don't add anything, perhaps trying to avoid starting the next=20
one.=20
Where the work was most interesting, and probably at it's most jarring, =
was when the paintings were heavily embroidered with=20
flowers, particularly a large dark greeny grey painting in the third =
room. The flowers are in a ring around the edges but this ring=20
is slightly lopsided, perhaps reminding us that this is art. To be using =
a method which is associated more with the opposite sex=20
and from a different generation probably gives Raedecker more cudos as =
an artist in the theory books. The paintings do=20
however retain a sense of the matcho in scale.=20
I remember seeing a Raedecker painting in a painting show at the =
Whitechapel a few years ago, called 'The Edge of the Real'=20
or something similar. That painting was absolutely knock out, since then =
things have gone all downhill. I highly recommend not=20
going to this exhibiton.

------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C9E387.E5F52C30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hello and happy Summer,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.worldwidereview.com">www.worldwidereview.com</A> is =
now=20
accepting press releases. Worldwidereview is one of the&nbsp;world's top =
web=20
sites for art and culture reviews. In order to give our readers more =
information=20
we are now accepting clearly marked press releases. We especially =
welcome press=20
release from contemporary art galleries and spaces&nbsp;around the world =
whose=20
shows may have been overlooked. Worldwidereview is a completely open =
submission=20
dedicated to&nbsp;expanding art criticism.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>go to <A=20
href=3D"http://www.worldwidereview.com/Reviews_artreviewswriters.htm">htt=
p://www.worldwidereview.com/Reviews_artreviewswriters.htm</A>&nbsp;and=20
submit your press releases and reviews now.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG><FONT color=3D#ff0000>Summer =
Bulletin (three=20
jesters): Raqib Shaw, Michael Raedecker, Jerwood =
Painting</FONT></STRONG>
<H2><FONT size=3D3>Raqib Shaw at White Cube =
London</FONT></H2><PRE><STRONG>From:art reviews
</STRONG><STRONG>
Raqib Shaw's paintings are the most spectacular and successful result of =
our recent gilded age (now=20
pronounced dead by credit crunch). The subject matter is standard Hoxton =
fantasy: monsters,=20
orifices, sloths. However with the sheer excess of decoration and detail =
in enamel and shiny stones=20
the whole things become more than the sum of their parts, glittering and =
beguiling in the low lit cube,=20
they have that certain madness of art. =20

(the upstairs sculpture is crep)
</STRONG></PRE>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D1><FONT size=3D2></FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://www.worldwidereview.com/index.htm"=20
target=3D_top><I></I></A></FONT>&nbsp;</P><!--webbot bot=3D"Include" =
i-checksum=3D"2651" endspan -->
<P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D1><A =
href=3D"http://www.worldwidereview.com/index.htm"=20
target=3D_top><I><STRONG></STRONG></I></A></FONT></P>Re: Raqib Shaw at =
White Cube=20
London - the absence of ideas</P><PRE><STRONG>From:     D

If any paintings are a signifier of the over-priced, over-hyped froth =
&amp; vacuity of contemporary art today these are they.

Seven large paintings - and nothing to distinguish between any of them. =
I couldn't be certain but they have the feeling that=20
many assistants were burning the candle at both ends to produce them?

The fool who bought one for 2.4 million quid must be having some =
sleepless nights at the moment.
<H2>&nbsp;</H2><H2>Jerwood Contemporary Painters, Jerwood =
Space.</H2><PRE>From:Nned Thisom

This exhibition is one that always raises a smirk on my face. The judges =
apparently travel the length and breadth of the country=20
whittling down a longlist of young painters (compiled by them) to a =
shortlist, this year of 26 artists. Of course, this not being a open=20
submission prize the longlist is mainly comprised of ex-students/mates =
of the judges.=20
The judges this year are all abstract painters, Mali Morris, Philip =
Allen and Alexis Harding. Perhaps then, it comes as little surprise=20
that much of the work in the show is abstract. Happily this is an =
opportunity to take a look at what three 'quite good' abstract=20
painters think is interesting abstract painting. Also happily, it means =
they haven't done anything as stupid as pretend that painting=20
is interesting because it can be sculpture or video as well, as the jury =
of the first of these shows did a couple of years ago.=20
I can't pretend to have found anything that interesting in the abstract =
work, a variety, much of it quite fresh but vague, only one hard=20
edged 'trendy triangles' painting that was the most stylised also in =
it's colour combinations. There was a sense that a few of the=20
pictures owed a huge debt to the abstract work of Picabia.=20
Of the other work the Mosley painting was typically fantastic, (as =
opposed to absurd, rather than good), the Wier typically RCA in=20
it's look and the token political painting, a big degree standard colour =
by numbers monstrosity based on a bombed Beiruit. I think.
Leaving this show really made me want to start a painting prize, because =
I always have faith that there must actually be some=20
'quite good' painting out there somewhere.  Alas, it is not to be found =
in the Jerwood.=20
<H2>&nbsp;</H2><H2>Michael Raedecker: Line up, Camden Arts Centre, 01 =
may- 28 June</H2><!--webbot BOT=3D"FormInsertHere" --><PRE>From:Nned =
Thisom</PRE><PRE>
Michael Raedecker is best known for grey paintings of lone buildings, =
sitting eerily in very sparse American seeming=20
landscapes. The works were made with swirls and washes of acrylic paint =
with lights and details sewn in using different=20
coloured threads. This exhibition is of new work, mixed up with key =
works from the past five years. I suppose the artist wanted to=20
take our presumtions of his subject matter out of our brains. The show =
features no lone bulidings, but a couple of pictures of=20
washing hanging on lines, some barren streets, some small abstract =
works, a still life, some flowery patterned pieces and a=20
some vases of flowers.=20
It is hard to understand what the artist is aiming for with this show, =
and the painful realisation that infact he is just, as the blurb in=20
the leaflet says, presenting a reinvention of 'different genres from the =
history of art including still lifes, landscapes, interiors,=20
history and flower paintings'. Which of course, he is not.
This exhibition is surprisingly and dissapointingly dull, and the sense =
from the work is that it is drifting along with little passion=20
from the artist. The big pictures are generally made up of panels, so =
it's easier for sewing I suppose. These panels often have=20
sewing that mimics and mirrors drips made from the paint on the panel =
next to it. This way of working suggests to me doodling,=20
time to spend putting things in the picture that are not needed and =
don't add anything, perhaps trying to avoid starting the next=20
one.=20
Where the work was most interesting, and probably at it's most jarring, =
was when the paintings were heavily embroidered with=20
flowers, particularly a large dark greeny grey painting in the third =
room. The flowers are in a ring around the edges but this ring=20
is slightly lopsided, perhaps reminding us that this is art. To be using =
a method which is associated more with the opposite sex=20
and from a different generation probably gives Raedecker more cudos as =
an artist in the theory books. The paintings do=20
however retain a sense of the matcho in scale.=20
I remember seeing a Raedecker painting in a painting show at the =
Whitechapel a few years ago, called 'The Edge of the Real'=20
or something similar. That painting was absolutely knock out, since then =
things have gone all downhill. I highly recommend not=20
going to this exhibiton.
</PRE><!--webbot BOT=3D"Include" =
U-Include=3D"../_shared_elements/comment_on_this_review.htm" startspan =
--></PRE><!--webbot BOT=3D"Include" =
U-Include=3D"../_shared_elements/comment_on_this_review.htm" startspan =
--></STRONG></PRE></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C9E387.E5F52C30--