bad nasty stupid crazy low

Result #1

bad nasty stupid crazy low .") But his public criticism is noncommittal: He thought that it was depressing that he had to return to his seedy days as a crusty old Methodist preacher. But when he asked a judge to back him up, they said no, since what he was doing was insubordination. Since then, his work has mostly come to him from the backstage of the courtroom, where he asked whether or not they were sending him back, and was apparently a source of inspiration to him.On the other hand, the end of the image is not the end of the world as much as it is the end of a situation. As the paintings say, it is probably going to end in more seamy shenanigans. He has never really been specific about the specifics of his career—in fact, most of the artworks that appear in his show are not even his own. But their presence in the gallery signals that the day is not far behind. I think he is getting there. As art theorist Eric Furlong has pointed out, the process of emigration is easy enough: Just drive to L.A. and get a job as a gallery artist. How many times have you seen a pre-Facebook world? What if he had to emigrate? He makes a logical, even sensible point that a person is the sum of all his or her various alter egos.But for all that, Im not sure what to make of all the work being done in the name of art that is being made today. Duchamp was not part of the contemporary avant-garde; Picasso was not. Duchamp was a bit too critical; Picasso wasnt. Duchamp wasnt even highly technical. Picasso isnt machinelike. He makes his own tools and uses old tools for new ends. Duchamp, too. Only one way to do things was in reality. The others dont make art; Duchamp made them.

Result #2

icky homoerotic wall. In the two year period covered by this show, the artist performed at most one, two or three other paintings per month—a no-nos for most, considering the stress upon the artist that it would probably place on the work. It was very much a highlight, however, to see that there was plenty of room for the viewer, and that the paintings could accommodate an abundance of both flesh and painted space, and that even the artifice of the paint, in its colors and manner of application, was sufficiently transparent enough to allow the viewer to see that the art, with which it was tied to the body at the time, still had some utility beyond merely being a tool for making an expression.Robert Bechtle-Cooper was a free-lance writer who lives in Portland, Oregon.His contributions to Artforum are usually limited to brief essays on paintings and subjects, either in brief reviews or with limited comment.His recent show of paintings and collages is small, and will probably be followed by a retrospective of his work. His new paintings, with their allusions to geometric form, will probably be the last paintings exhibited before the artist is forced to become a free-lance writer.

Result #3

 of LeWittsness. The show itself was half a build around a straight portrait of the God-in-Her-Veils, and, given the several additions (and subtractions) to the show, it must have seemed like a total mess, but what an additional half-hour of the existentialist tome a soul could provide. Yeats is one of the truest of hip-hop legends, and his own trademark is his own New York. He's credited with inspiring rappers like R. Kelly and Biggie Smalls to bare with the unfortunate, no show for the city.Shane MacDonald is a frequent contributor to Artforum.

Result #4

.") Of course, their style of painting is also a low-key, low-key statement—tacky, pathetic, and funny.If a work really is interesting to me, it has to be simultaneously a slapstick comedy of style, style, and style, a simple draw of style, a low-life slapstick, and a high-life stupidity. The current kids art is no exception. If one wants to enter the low-life universe of them, it is probably best to seek out pieces of garbage such as Untitled (Solemn Sanctuary), 1989, a place for things that the world cant bear, pieces of string that cannot be easily broken. In this piece, pockmarked and left hanging as a reminder that everything is still there, a white sheet of paper literally standing for nothing, another piece of string, in the form of a pair of herringbone gills, a combination of painted little fish and an angry note, a black smear of plaster that implies that this is not only a difficult thing to prove, but that it is an irredeemable stain of a form.And, theres the only constant in the world of the Guggenheim. Even more than in the old days, when the rubric of Guggenheim and Museum was created as an epitome of high seriousness, the Guggenheim has become a more serious, more calculating institution. The Guggenheims own enigmatic cryptic message remains a work in progress; it does not yet have an explicit message, and there is much to discover.

Result #5

bad nasty stupid crazy low vernacular—were there: The ek-fall. The deconstruction of culture.The historicism of everything, said that ancient Greek thinker, philosopher, and dramatist, Theodore Kackel; Or, starting with the image of the eagle and retreating back into the very origins of time. The Neoplatonic idea of the first fall. Only rather, it is not the mythical one at all. And we, as travelers in our own old memories, have a dream of a strange flight, an illusion, perhaps, of a ship that, reaching the coast of the waters of the Plastikos, traveled in a certain direction, only to be stopped again in an unknown land. Thus, this, as in the dream of Oedipuss, is the material basis for the history of art, as demonstrated by Kackel, with the help of the other ancient philosophers—a cast of 40 thousand drawn from the museum collection, who are now making their way to the Museum of the Imagination in Kassel, where they have the chance to re-create an Alexandrian temple and exhibit a collection of classic Greek sculpture. The artistic prehistory of Western Europe is well documented, though, as the oldest documented artwork. For example, Raphael left his last impression on Clement Greenberg, who, in his essay The Golden Age of Modern Art, 1937, uses Raffaeles Leonardo painting the Golden Age, ca. 1512, in order to establish the difference between the poetic (as in painting) and the rational (as in science). In fact, all the figures in Kackels dream are now old-fashioned intellectuals—one can recall in this regard the philosophical asides in the first pages of Pierre Bourdieus Origin et cetera, that are written in the final chapter of his essay.