Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
This is all really just curator code for Im more woke than you.
I call it being strung out on privileged bullshit.
What out there is actually being corrected by this work?
The catalogue has words in it that I didnt know.
The show is about the precariat and geontopower.
I looked them up.
Its worth pointing out that 99 percent of all artists have always lived like this.
But I want to see them walking the walk, not just posing the pose.
To define the second word, geontopower, the catalogue offers a dodge: a set of discourses.
You cant win with these people!
Words like undercommons, hypercapitalism, networked mediascapes, and anarcho-syndicalists are tossed off.
In an old neo-Marxist tip of the hat, the approved word for artists is now cultural producer.
No artist can rise to these levels of activism.
Especially not very very young ones.
Meanwhile, a claque of critics lauds every show and demonizes all those who dont.
But we must not blame artists for this curatorial belaboring.
Or even the New Museum one of the best institutions of its kind anywhere.
Its a nonproductive self-replicating curatorial/academic pathogen in the system that I think needs to die.
But painting is the standout medium.
His wild colors suggest that Zimbabwe may be a hothouse for new pictorial ideas about painting.
Keep your eye on him; theres real vision here.
Its a poignant story.
Theres a soundtrack of guns.
This artist has been better in the past.
Really its just a surreal swing set brought indoors.
Explications of this work are forced.
Curators and academics need to stop telling us that all this art disrupts or sabotages anything.
Meanwhile, 1990s pathetic-aesthetic progenitor Cary Leibowitz (a.k.a.
