George Condo Makes Mark Rothko See Red

Though Beavis and Butt-Head might approve of the New Museum's retrospective

In the end, though, this exhibition suffers from far too much ersatz feeling and an overdose of treacly painterly pandering. Back to Rothko: Paintings need something important to say to be convincing, no matter how highly skilled. In the end, what this exhibition illustrates—to anyone really looking—is that Condo's art didn't so much make history as ride its coattails.

« Previous Page
 |
 
1
 
2
 
All
 
My Voice Nation Help
6 comments
Matt004
Matt004

Art does not have to announce itself as being about something to be about something.Do you think Koons' bunny is about rabbits?

Morganized1
Morganized1

I was looking to do something, and since I read the artist's post scathing the writer for an inability to be original (citing Rothko) I will go look. Who wouldn't be offended by the bland analogy,

George Condo
George Condo

Someone is responding to your article under my name

Mark Kostabi
Mark Kostabi

I'm referred to as "dubious" in the Village Voice. At least I'm cited as an influence, along with Velazquez, on George Condo.

george
george

its unfortunate that the trolls have to upset my drinking pattern by invoking the words of rothko to justify a moronic critical assessment of my work. why can't you come up with something original? perhaps you are the one depending on historical rhetoric and also the fact that you liked uncle joe one of the world's worst paintings says much about the size of your brainless dick!

 
Loading...