The work is exciting and beautiful, haunting and melancholic

Result #1

 but it is more than that. The art is alive with meaning. Its more than the promise of an original, or even of a dark night of the soul.

Result #2

The work is exciting and beautiful, haunting and melancholic a semi-ironic statement of the impotence of human presence and the fragility of things, and of the poetic solitude that can exist in the absence of any human presence. But it is all the more impressive because the sense of emotion is so subdued and equivocal.The exhibition is particularly striking in light of the fact that the American critics who have been giving this an insufficient and contradictory interpretation have been pursuing the same problematic issues that are generally neglected in this country. They have been making this argument as though it were possible, not to say inevitable, that an artist like Richard Artschwager or Robert Ryman should be in the same position as the current generation of abstract painters. There is a good deal of evidence that the case for this position is as strong as it is for any other. But the evidence is difficult to find. The fact that it was a realistic prospect and not a merely conceptual position that Artschwager or Ryman took is certainly not borne out by the evidence. What has been suggested is that the abstract paintings of these artists are less art than the symbolic and emotional abstraction of a group of mystics who devoted themselves to an intellectual and contemplative practice, whether their intention was to prove that art is spiritual or that it is a form of spiritual illumination. The evidence of this fact, however, is a fact that does not, in itself, produce an esthetic decision. It is simply a fact that the contemporary abstract painters have never been the same as the artists of the 60s. They are not the same as the abstract painters of the 70s.What is more, this fact, as well as the evidence of an effect of ambiguity and contradiction that undermines the reliability of the results of the exhibition, forces the question as to what it is that is expressed in the abstract painting of these artists.

Result #3

The work is exciting and beautiful, haunting and melancholic . . . The black and white print (which, on the contrary, is a very nice thing to have) is clearly the work of an artist who has been there, gone there, and left the country. The sense of alienation is less than ideal, but it is there, and it is there, and it is there. A lot of the art in the show is preoccupied with materiality and looks pretty manufactured, but it is an art that is going to end up looking like its maker. A lot of it is simply not there, and its not the fault of a lack of imagination. There are a lot of times when theres a small amount of emotion in a bunch of art, and it could be better, but thats the truth. Its not a problem. A lot of the art is pretty stilted. And one can only wish that it wouldnt be called that. There are some good paintings, but a lot of the others look like pretty cheap versions of what is being done elsewhere. You cant really complain. It is a shame, because those paintings are the best thing about the show, and the worst, since they are merely some more of a sales pitch. The other works, on paper, are more interesting, but the connections are either less clear or weaker. One can only hope that they will be added and made available in a timely fashion.In any event, I hope that the show does not become a too-tasteful party. Its a shame that it has been torn down, for there is a reason for it. This is a lot of fun to see, and a lot of people seem to like it. I have never really thought of it as a crowd-pleaser, but its not all bad. The point is not to give a full, fancy-free view of what is happening in the world, but to show what a group of artists are doing right now.

Result #4

. . . but the play is over. (One hopes so, too, for the production, because its an epic act.) One wonders, too, whether this does not suggest that the artist is not really an artist, and the play, in fact, a kind of genteel satire of the whole so-called Modernist esthetic. (And one wonders whether the cross as well as the cross-dressing is a little too pat.) The problem is that The Road to Damascus is a dreamlike fantasy, as well as a rather nonconceptual, if not always terribly effective fantasy. A cross is a symbol of the cross, but it is also a symbol of suffering, and it is the suffering of a hero. The road is the unhappy path, and it is hopeless. The road is a deeply felt symbol of the individual, but it is also a symbol of the painters anguish, as well as of the painters suffering.The tragic is a common theme in art, but it is seldom the primary concern of contemporary painters. For all its seriousness, it is rarely the main concern of the public. It is the tragic, however, that is central to our awareness. Its the problem of life, and it can be solved by art, and not only through the aid of art, but also by other means. One hopes that this is not too much to ask of a young artist.

Result #5

 and it seems all but certain that it will go on to do something more memorable, provocative, and original.