James Wagner and Barry Hoggard both have posts and photos up of Margaret Evangeline's current show at Stux Gallery. She was one of the artists on the Adaptation Syndrome panel - I have some notes here.
Dominique Nahas has sent me an e-mail clarifying his Adaptation Syndrome position - I'm afraid I gave his contribution short shrift in the post linked to above. In fact, I was excited that he would be speaking and disappointed that he was forced to be so brief - plus I was being petty about some other things.
Well, Martin if its any consolation I wasn't paid to " plug" anybody. I did have a mandate as a speaker to propose several artmodels that were relevant in light of the title of the panel and of the exhibition, which was, if you will recall, Adaptation Syndrome. In my brief talk (...and I made my presentation very short, omitting several artist's altogether, Diana Cooper was one of them, because we were running out of time...) I gave a few examples of artists who have adapted their ideologies and their art to reflect the paradoxes of the world around them. This means, among other things, that very good contemporary artists are good artists as they have the capacity to signal through their work that there is a space of difference between the overt subject (presumably) of their art and the content of the art (which might be worlds apart). I also alluded for the need for space to exist within the art, ideologically speaking, in order for the art to foster "creative misreadings" on the part of every viewer. The term "creative misreadings" is a term used by Arthur Danto. And it is meant positively not negatively. Good art wrenches meaning away from itself and gives every viewer the space to introject (and to reflect, and project) what is real (emotionally true) in the work. Hope this clarifies my position+ what went down at the panel...
I remember he talked about Ellen Harvey but I'm blanking on the others. Anybody recall?
P.S. Dominique, did you read The Shocking Conclusion! ?