The penis salad is delicious really

Result #1

: two meaty cuts of beef, two flatbread doughnuts, and two exquisite feet of conch (courtesy of Johnnie Dane, of the Brooklyn Museums). The best parts of the show, like the rubber feet and the meat, are in the backstory: the show-pub crawl.The most revealing piece in the show, which included fifteen smaller, still-functional, and still-working pieces of broken glass, is a replica of a flasher, a deceptively simple device that gets its power from its expressive play with light, and, of course, its ugly form. (Lest you think its not possible to make an honest attempt to understand the formulaic plot, let me introduce you to Roger Colescott, the Manhattans Cracker Barrel.) These sculptures are, quite simply, objects made of broken glass. The tools used to create the cubes, which are similar in structure to the flasher pieces, are small, flattened, and partially exposed pieces of flail or fork that have been assembled into simple, recognizable forms. If you consider that part of the sculptures function to collapse the human frame, youve got a beautiful piece of mechanical waste that is as poetic as it is beautiful. It also looks totally like the glass youd get on a shelf, except that it cant be broken.The pieces that use mostly improvised means, as in the pots, jars, and pitcher, are even more intriguing. This is not to say that improvised objects are always good. It would be harder to accept these objects as being art if they werent, but, more important, what they do give us is a theory of the world. They give us a way of viewing the world that is complex and interesting, full of both joy and discomfort, and perhaps as true as it is delusional.

Result #2

, but its just not very interesting. The details were painted bright red and seared by a contrast. The taste here is somewhere between the aperitifs of the more serious canvases and that of the more avant-garde. It is hard to reconcile taste and invention in such a show, as, after all, how many paintings look like an Old Master you might have seen in a year? And, in fact, it doesnt really look like anything at all. If anything, the paintings look like stained glass windows. Much of the paint is discolored or scuffed, or somehow stained red or a dark shade of gray. If that sounds like the kind of thing youd find in the church of your grandmothers, well, thats the kind of thing thats supposed to look so beautiful but in the end youd just have to sit in the dark and look at the pictures to understand what theyre about. So, while the paintings are fascinating in the way they show the kind of surprise and invention youd never really expected to find in the work of someone who isnt in the industry, they dont prove the point that a cool artist makes, and you dont get the sense that a cool artist makes an original art.

Result #3

The penis salad is delicious really. At least the piece that came first was above a table, the rest below. In this case, the plates were marked off one from the other with a brass plate, a touch that suggested that the work was to be eaten on the same level as the sculpture. On closer inspection, this work would have looked exactly like a penis, since the perimeters of the plates were all essentially drawn in. If it were eaten on its own, it would have looked even more like an imaginary penis, since the pieces encased themselves in Plexiglas.The works two sizes also suggested that each piece was cut from the same piece of wood. In fact, the lower pieces were eight feet by nine feet, and the upper were twenty-five feet. The difference between the two sizes was not as great as one might suppose, however, since the parts of the upper pieces, which were less rounded, were made in identical linen. Only the smaller piece had a penis; the rest had no obvious penis. Theres no sense of a penis. While the penis was missing, the rest of the work was designed to look like a cast of a body. The construction of the glass floor was nothing if not a case of literal constructionlessness. What did it mean that it took four different sizes of plates to make the floor? If the floor was designed to look like a penis, the floor piece took the form of a vagina. The glass floor is so thick that the penis could not be seen. The glass is made to be porous, and it is porous all the same. The only thing that could be seen through the glass is a shaft of light that was projecting from a narrow window in the ceiling.It is as if the artist, instead of being concerned with the manifestation of an idea, were simply playing with the illusion of an illusion.

Result #4

The penis salad is delicious really, for this should not be confused with any actual genitalia, but instead merely the removal of the penis from the picture of the body. The picture is a canvas, not a breast, but its surface is purely fleshy. In turn, the pictures surface is what constitutes the skin, which in turn is the flesh of the painting. But painting only gives the pictures surface a covering, namely skin. And once again, the painting is a body, just as the painting is a painting. In short, in each of these cases the skin is what stands between the two.I would like to proceed from this point, but I think I am failing to do so. First of all, a painting is not only an object—a thing—but an image in space, a thing that resides in and connects with a painting. Second, the painting is not only a thing but a thing for which there is an image, a likeness. The likeness is, in this case, to the skin of the canvas, and the skin is what makes up the surface of the painting. It is not a quality of body that is shared by the two—the skin or a portion of the skin—but a quality of skin. The skin is what creates and defines the surface of the picture. The surface is what creates and defines the picture; the surface is what defines the surface. If, therefore, the surface is not the painting, but the skin, then the surface, which is an image, is what constitutes the surface of the painting. It is a skin that creates and defines the surface of the picture. And in the process, the surface is not an image but an image of the surface of the surface.The skin of the surface is an image, as much as the surface is an image. It is an image that creates a surface and defines a surface, and by so defining the surface it both makes and establishes the surface.

Result #5

The penis salad is delicious really, you can almost touch it. Davey Johnson has made porn, with its whole entrapping, sadistic aspect, a staple of his work. His work as a filmmaker is, in fact, a story of how far the envelope can stretch and how far the flesh can pull back. If it is to be offered in anything like its original state, it must be one in which the flesh is the subject, the sex, and the sex is the protagonist. More than this, it must be one in which the envelope is just a decorative element, a decorative touch that keeps the envelope intact while at the same time providing enough link between the envelope and the flesh that there is no real gap between the two. And if the envelope is just a decorative element, then it must be one in which the flesh is just a decorative touch that keeps the envelope intact while at the same time providing enough link between the envelope and the flesh that there is no real gap between the envelope and the flesh.What are these dreams about? For one thing, they are too free. In the first work, I imagine something as in one of the Cappella compositions—or, for that matter, at the very beginning of the Cappella group in America—the envelope is only a tool for the scenes, the envelope is simply a piece of decorative fabric. But in this case the envelope is the flesh, it is what gives the scene its mysterious, mysterious quality. The flesh is what gives the scene its mysterious, mysterious sensuality. Like Cappellas work, Dottchs work is a sort of sensual sketching, a free gesture of the flesh in which the envelope is never a real object. Dottchs work is not a kind of painting or drawing; it is a kind of sensual activity, a movement of the flesh.