Richard Wright
Jon Lutz saw last week's post on Richard Wright, commenting that they used to work together, and has since e-mailed me images of this piece he got from Richard. Jon says that a number of co-workers received work from Richard -
"I wanted to send you (images of) this work of Richard's that I have...get a chance to look at the back of the works you saw? He meticulously records all materials, sizes, dates, and details along the way. This work has 10 different materials... gold leaf, fur, among them..."
detail
detail
Jon says that Richard has moved to North Carolina. No other gallery or website that we are aware of.
- thanks, Jon!
Hey,you are in the NYTimes mag!
ReplyDeleteSend the link. Where in the magazine?
ReplyDeletewow, thanks for telling me!
ReplyDeletei posted at the same time as the person above me...
ReplyDeleteit's deep in the marlene dumas article. i'll make a new post linking to it, later, for sure.
martin, you are really famous now! i saw the article!
ReplyDeleteMovin' on up Martin! Congratulations!
ReplyDelete"An art-world blog, Anaba, has taken to listing the names of Dumas’s supporters and detractors as if they were superdelegates charged with putting an artist into office. Are you pro-Dumas or anti-Dumas? “All of the anti-Dumasers are men,” the blog noted in 2005, in a reference to a group of influential critics that includes Jerry Saltz, the art critic for New York magazine, who has described Dumas’s work as “flat-footed.” Peter Schjeldahl, the art critic at The New Yorker, says without remorse: “She is a good second-rate artist. I just don’t think it has much that other people don’t have. There is a certain glamour of sexual perversity, but it seems a little thin to me.”
also noted in my posts, along with the gender split, is that most of those quoted who don't like dumas are not artists.
ReplyDeletei'm not sure what posts exactly d. solomon read... but if you look at the sidebar on the right you will see a "marlene dumas" label.
there have been some good comments, including from corny (nicole e.), who is quoted in the nytimes article.
1. Good for you Martin.
ReplyDelete2. Complaints: They suck for not listing your name. They suck for not linking to your blog entry. They suck for essentially stealing your research (cut and pasting the quotes from your blog entry without acknowledging the human being who made the blog entry). They suck for treating an art blog as if it were something a nanobot created in cyberspace rather than the product of the hard work of an individual artist.
These are my complaints. They are not Martin Bromirski's complaints. No matter what, it is a good thing to appear in the NYT. Don't get me wrong.
Congratz Martin!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteyay martin!
ReplyDelete