I noticed that in his latest Artnet article Jerry Saltz refers to "the second-rate Marlene Dumas" - so I guess he hasn't changed his mind much since saying about her work in 1994 that "the flat-footed ways they're painted leave me completely cold".
None of the Artnet guys seem to like Dumas. Richard Polsky is always slamming her and in this article Charlie Finch calles her a "mediocre artist". Tyler Green smells blood so you can always count on him to give a little kick once it's safe.
Some critics do have good things to say about Dumas; Adrian Searle writes positively here, Richard Vine called her handling of paint "direct, notational, and extremely deft, as though Dumas were recording her dreams in their raw immediacy", and Nicole Davis writes "Dumas’s painterly quality is so sensuous that it furthers the hunger for her images" (scroll down to read more and see some images).
But really, who cares what the critics are paid to think, I'm interested in other artist's opinions. Commenter George had good things to say, Nicole Eisenmann seems to be a fan, Joy Garnett is interested. I'm definitely a fan.
Saltz going ga-ga over artists like Justin Faunce, Daniel Lefcourt, and Laurel Nakadate and dissing Dumas just doesn't make sense to me. Not that I think the above artists are bad, but their work can't hold a candle to Dumas' stuff. Maybe it's easier to over-praise stuff made by bright young locals who can fawn over you?
I'd like to hear what other artists have to say about Marlene Dumas. Please leave a comment.
UPDATE: Okay, it's 6:55pm Wednesday and 215 unique users have visited the blog so far today but only one has left a comment on Marlene Dumas. Give it up!