Comments on: Journie hall of shame http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/ All that flavorful brownness in one savory packet Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:11:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Journie Beckwith http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-225357 Journie Beckwith Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:42:23 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-225357 <p>As you can see my name is Journie just like this websites name</p> As you can see my name is Journie just like this websites name

]]>
By: Manish Vij http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36715 Manish Vij Sat, 03 Dec 2005 07:05:33 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36715 <blockquote>There's also very little "modern" art that is identifiably South Asian...</blockquote> <p>There's <a href="http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/001946.html">Raza and his contemporaries</a> in the 0th gen. The 2nd gen is young yet.</p> <blockquote>It is at the Met.</blockquote> <p>You are correct, sir. I misread.</p> There’s also very little “modern” art that is identifiably South Asian…

There’s Raza and his contemporaries in the 0th gen. The 2nd gen is young yet.

It is at the Met.

You are correct, sir. I misread.

]]>
By: dogday http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36711 dogday Sat, 03 Dec 2005 05:29:51 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36711 <p><i>...there are no big, second gen names in desi modern art yet.</i></p> <p>There's also very little "modern" art that is identifiably South Asian (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.-generation) or rather, no modern South Asian movement or moment that has proved to be as important to the artistic world as the "classics" of South Asian art (painting, sculpture, architecture). Even this Karkhana exhibit draws much of its strength from its manipulation of the miniature, a "classic" form...</p> <p>All this to say that from a curatorial standpoint, exhibits like Karkhana are not so appealing to the MoMA, as they neither have a well-known modern context nor do they express a profoundly new aesthetic influence (the form of collaboration the Karkhana artists are engaging in is interesting, but not necessarily new).</p> <p>That said, what is important is that Karkhana breaks the classic form of miniatures and that in and of itself is important, primarily to South Asian art. It is a movement away from the history and traditions that loom (and almost glower) over all South Asian art, and that's worth noting. Again, however, to record that moment and put it in the MoMA is difficult, primarily because American, Latin American and European art has already gone through such processes [and in order to showcase South Asian art going through a similar process, well, MoMA would need more "modern" South Asian art, which returns the argument back to my first point...]</p> <p>"Fatal Love" was pretty interesting, in part because it documented a moment in art, politics and history, and had it's scope been just a bit bigger and not so specifically refracted through the events of 9/11, I think it could of and would of made it to the MoMA.</p> <p><i>IÂ’m not sure why this exhibit is at the modern art museum rather than the Met.</i></p> <p>It <b>is</b> at the Met.</p> …there are no big, second gen names in desi modern art yet.

There’s also very little “modern” art that is identifiably South Asian (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.-generation) or rather, no modern South Asian movement or moment that has proved to be as important to the artistic world as the “classics” of South Asian art (painting, sculpture, architecture). Even this Karkhana exhibit draws much of its strength from its manipulation of the miniature, a “classic” form…

All this to say that from a curatorial standpoint, exhibits like Karkhana are not so appealing to the MoMA, as they neither have a well-known modern context nor do they express a profoundly new aesthetic influence (the form of collaboration the Karkhana artists are engaging in is interesting, but not necessarily new).

That said, what is important is that Karkhana breaks the classic form of miniatures and that in and of itself is important, primarily to South Asian art. It is a movement away from the history and traditions that loom (and almost glower) over all South Asian art, and that’s worth noting. Again, however, to record that moment and put it in the MoMA is difficult, primarily because American, Latin American and European art has already gone through such processes [and in order to showcase South Asian art going through a similar process, well, MoMA would need more "modern" South Asian art, which returns the argument back to my first point...]

“Fatal Love” was pretty interesting, in part because it documented a moment in art, politics and history, and had it’s scope been just a bit bigger and not so specifically refracted through the events of 9/11, I think it could of and would of made it to the MoMA.

IÂ’m not sure why this exhibit is at the modern art museum rather than the Met.

It is at the Met.

]]>
By: Manish Vij http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36704 Manish Vij Sat, 03 Dec 2005 02:28:41 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36704 <p>Do you only listen to classical music?</p> Do you only listen to classical music?

]]>
By: Telegu love http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36703 Telegu love Sat, 03 Dec 2005 02:27:30 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36703 <p>Modern art is crap anyway. What does it matter that it's shown at the bloody MoMa or some exhibit in Conneticut. And what makes it worse is the publicity for this just because they're Asian (exotic for those fools in New York). This crap must stop.</p> Modern art is crap anyway. What does it matter that it’s shown at the bloody MoMa or some exhibit in Conneticut. And what makes it worse is the publicity for this just because they’re Asian (exotic for those fools in New York). This crap must stop.

]]>
By: Manish Vij http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36643 Manish Vij Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:06:17 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36643 <blockquote>How can Ridgefield Connecticut have a cooler exhibit than New York?!</blockquote> <p>For the same reason that <i><a href="http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/001104.html">Fatal Love</a></i> was at the Queens Art Museum and not at MoMA: there are no big, second gen names in desi modern art yet.</p> How can Ridgefield Connecticut have a cooler exhibit than New York?!

For the same reason that Fatal Love was at the Queens Art Museum and not at MoMA: there are no big, second gen names in desi modern art yet.

]]>
By: Nina P http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36630 Nina P Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:25:33 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36630 <p>I actually gasped and moaned aloud reading that godawful tripe. Yeech.</p> <p>How can Ridgefield Connecticut have a cooler exhibit than New York?! I hope someone rectifies this, I want to see those collaborative modern minatures.</p> I actually gasped and moaned aloud reading that godawful tripe. Yeech.

How can Ridgefield Connecticut have a cooler exhibit than New York?! I hope someone rectifies this, I want to see those collaborative modern minatures.

]]>
By: Rani http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/12/02/journalistic_ha/comment-page-1/#comment-36618 Rani Fri, 02 Dec 2005 13:16:56 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=2603#comment-36618 <p>Ick and very surprising. Cotter reviews everything (remotely) South Asian for the paper and I've never seen anything like this before. Must go check Nexis...</p> <p>The exhibits, however, look very cool.</p> Ick and very surprising. Cotter reviews everything (remotely) South Asian for the paper and I’ve never seen anything like this before. Must go check Nexis…

The exhibits, however, look very cool.

]]>