Getting Buchel Right
Chris Marcisz writes the polite, grown-up version
of the ramifications to MoCA and to the art world at-large from the tantrum that is the artist formerly known as Buchel:
I think a depressing majority of Americans would agree contemporary art is a small and increasingly irrelevant group of rich people and their hangers-on amusing themselves. This is why insitutions like Mass MoCA, with its anti-snooty approach and educational programs for kids, is a critically important institution. It does its work with a very small budget, a very small and dedicated staff, and in no way deserves the kind of abuse it has taken in this Büchel nonsense. If the points he is making are so damn important, the decent thing to do would be to screw around with the Guggenheim or some other well-funded money-pile. In this case, there is a real confusion about who is David and who is Goliath.
It's a very good short piece that deserves to be in the Times Union or even, God-forbid, The NYTimes arts page, rather than relegated to a blog post.
My commentary is far more blog worthy - The artist formerly known as Buchel is a petulant piece of crap who has less integrity than Tiger Woods in a brothel.*
UPDATE: John Mitchell finds a nail
to hit squarely on the head as well.*The phrase "The artist formerly known as Buchel is a petulant piece of crap who has less integrity than Tiger Woods in a brothel." is a copyrighted and trademarked piece of linguistic art protected by federal law that cannot be used or modified with tarps by anyone who wears black turtlenecks, speaks German, has a fetish for airplane fuselages, or has ever brought suit against a museum located in the smallest city of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.