Thoughts?

Since Modern Art Notes and Daily Campello Art News don't allow comments, and since Grammar.police is written by the person in question, I thought I'd allow people to comment here on the potential conflict of interest that has arisen out of Kriston's curating of a show at Project 4 in D.C.

Read Lenny's thoughts here.

Kriston replies here.

One of the interesting sentences from Kriston's reply is this sentence: "I have no financial stake in Christine Gray's paintings." I'm not sure that's entirely true, even if he was not paid a stipend for his curatorial duties. Certainly curating a show is a positive thing for one's exposure, reputation and experience, all of which may translate into more earning power down the road. It certainly doesn't hurt.

I saw the show on Saturday and found some of the paintings to be quite nice. The installation was straightforward and I'm not sure what role Kriston played in making installation decisions as curator. He stated previously that "I curated the show, though that's a word I'll use lightly, since the artist knew what she wanted to do when I approached her and did exactly that."

I looked for the curatorial essay that Kriston wrote but did not see it readily available. I neglected to ask the gallery attendant for a copy.

Because of the recent "controversy" about an art critic for the Village Voice having a hand in running two art fairs, and the potential conflict of interest there, I thought a discussion should be started to talk about our own local version. I personally don't care that Kriston curated a show for Project 4. I assume the essay will make everyone perfectly aware that Kriston is a critic for the Washington City Paper and what role he played in this exhibition. And if Kriston has a bio in the WCP, it may be updated to mention Kriston's curatorial efforts.

Again, I'm making no judgments here. My only hope is that we are all consistent in our demand that art world participants remain conflict free. I trust that Kriston will remain conflict free the same that I trusted Lenny to be conflict free when contributing to DCist.

So, what do you think? Is this the same thing as the CVF firing at the Village Voice? Is this something to be concerned about specifically or generally?

Comments

[patrick]

i think the issue at hand here is the use of the word 'curator'. i have noticed this word used frequently in dc to describe one-person shows "curated" by another artist/critic/curator etc. at what point does the use of this word become futile or even misleading? the role of a curator in the aforementioned context seems to belie the decision making which is normally associated with its typical, institutional usage. i feel very strongly that providing a critical and contextualized dialog around a solo, gallery exhibition-that is writing a catalog essay- is a very valuable thing for all involved, however that is not necessarily the same as 'curating'.

[J.T. Kirkland]

Patrick,

You make some very good observations here. I agree that writing an essay for a show is not necessarily curating. I would further that to say that to curate a show doesn't necessarily mean a curatorial statement must be written.

Of course, I think this is a side discussion to the issue at hand. Regardless if it's curating a show or just writing an essay, it is still a relationship, an exchange of sorts between commercial gallery and art critic/other.

The question is what's the meaning/impact of this relationship, if any?

[John James Anderson]

It all boils down to an issue of context and objectivity. The context is in terms of what is arts coverage and what is arts criticism. In terms of Lenny's former contributions to DCist, I could only find one instance (there may be more) out of four where he promoted an event at his own (now former) gallery; it wasn't critical commentary as much as it was simple coverage. As for Capps... there's no mention of his curation at Project 4 on WCPs website, so I'm trying to figure out what the fuss is about. In both instances the parties in question have maintained a reasonable perspective of objectivity.

As for authoring a catalog, as James Elkins has noted in his text on What Happened to Art Criticism, such scribbling is rarely critical. Usually it is pensively observant.

In this town it is safe to say that eventually we will all kinda know one another, and eventually someone of "critical" influence, or of "curatorial" influence, will give a nod to the artist friend. When that nod occurs it may be best to keep in mind Clement Greenberg's review of Willem deKooning's first solo exhibition where CG wrote (and I'm grossly paraphrasing here) "he makes pretty good paintings, but his color sucks."

[Lenny]

I agree with John a little in the sense that the real issue is that there is/was no big ethical issue. But the key point is that KC made an issue about DCist and then policed the issue with the regulation that "you really can't don the critic's cap when you're a producer in the community."

But now he is a "producer in the community" while wearing the "critic's cap."

That's the point!

All that is needed to close this issue is for KC to say, "you know what? I was wrong... you CAN wear the critic's cap and still be an ethical member AND producer of the community" which I think is what he is doing.

But like politicians, it's so hard to say "I was wrong..." and march on.

A separate issue now (since Capps put up his "Gray Area" explanation) is the fact that because he is doing this curatorial effort, now Project 4 artists' for whatever untold period of time will not get reviewed by the CP - at least by Kriston - which I think hurts the gallery and the artists in that embargo period.

But that's a whole new set of discussion issues, and my point remains on the double standards of how Capps bitched (his own words) about DCist and I, and then he goes and pretty much does the same thing that he bitched about.

A clarification for John: I never, that I recall, ever authored an article or post for DCist that mentioned Fraser. I contributed info - usually to Cyndi Spain - that she then picked or added to her own info about gallery openings. If the Fraser Gallery appeared in one of those, it was probably as part of the Bethesda Art Walk openings mention and even that was something that she contributed to the post, as I wasn't foolish enough to recommend something at my (then) own place to DCist.

Essentially I would email her a bunch of openings info (excluding Fraser) and she would pick and choose from that - or use it all - and then add more info that she had and then publish it. That was my entire "relationship" with DCist.

But it make Kriston twitch.