From: Sam Wells (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Nov 30 2005 - 11:20:43 PST
> These recent NYTimes articles sound more promotional &
> positive, like ads?
> While Cecile Starr's was very critical of influential
> people, the type we see less of these days.
True there's a difference in kind. But if the NYT printed an article -
or a letter that read - Robert Beavers at The Whitney, so when do we
see an Abigail Child retrospective there, or at MOMA.... I mean it
would mean nothing the readership knew who they in fact were !
Whereas the NYT readers knew what the NEA and NEH were in 1977.
Promotional and positive notices on AG/Exp cinema ? Heaven help us !
;-)
Really, what's to complain about a positive notice / review of these
works ? As for positive well they're fucking great artists.
When the NYT starts running ads disguised as reviews of Robert Beavers
films, I won't be complaining on the Op Ed page, cause I'll have been
struck dumb from shock ;-)
-Sam
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.