It Was Only A Matter of Time

As posted by woostercollective.com: "[This was] Placed outside of the White Cube Gallery Masons yard at 3.30 am on Sunday night in response to the Damien Hirst's "For The Love of God" diamond skull exhibition.

The "For the Love of God" prank was created using 6522 Swarovski crystals and took Laura, the artist, a month to create."

Now I'm just waiting for a line of jewelry to come out. Wait, it already has. Just hit up Target or Hot Topic for the very shiniest in glam-punk gear.

So, the prank has mos def started an inevitable riffing/commenting trend that will see death objects be-blinged, or perhaps Hirst-ified...if nothing else, this work is easier to ape than a floating shark.

But, that off-the-cuff comment raises larger issues (no, not of the commidification of art, that ship has certainly sailed) but of where one draws the line between a precious, singular object, and an object for replification.

I am certainly not the introducing an original idea here, but it does raise questions of the ramifications of comodifying the minutiae of life. In a larger sense, it taps into a universal desire to see, and be seen as intelligent, erudite, and witty (I am no exception).

In an age of instant gratification, where knockoffs of knockoffs abound and “group identification” is as simple as the right pair of limited-edition Nikes, I posit that we are nearing a time where there will be greater and greater stratification between high and low, between fine and craft. That might not be a bad thing per se, but the unintentional fall out will be a war of ideologies (according to Jacksonville artist, James Green this is already occurring). Which in blind striving for the winning argument will be reductivist to the point of redundancy. As the shades of theoretical grey fall by the wayside, absolutism will take hold, and then we'll be left with a bunch of brittle, flat, art...that serves no purpose save for to shriek it's own validity from gallery walls.

So, does this mean that the Hirst skull points to the downfall of civilization? No. It is merely that my observation that the furor created by this piece should be a jumping off point for discussion. Hopefully, not further stratification.

Either side you choose though, rest assured there will be a logo and a t-shirt not too far behind.

Unresolved Genius

It’s been a while since I posted, and I apologize…the last few weeks have been hectic: between traveling and writing for my paying gig, I haven’t had a minute to think.

However, I do feel that there are several things that need to be addressed and so this week, I’m going to take the time to go down the line.

Damien Hirst’s skull. More specifically, “For the Love of God,” as the work is entitled, is, as most of you know, the diamond-encrusted skull of an 18th century man. It is completely covered in diamonds, except for the teeth, which have been polished to a high, ivory sheen—heightening the contrast between the perfect facets of the diamonds and the, well, humanity of the piece.

“For the Love of God,” is beautiful in and of itself. The workmanship is flawless, and the more one looks at it, the more one is tempted to agree with Hirst’s comment that he wouldn’t mind something similar being done to his skull, post-mortem of course. But it does raise a lot of questions, not just about life and death, art and craft; but too of British colonialism, oppression, and insular cleverness. Of course, its also interesting to ponder the piece’s meaning if the stones were to be revealed as fakes…

The article linked below makes a good case for artists who are called geniuses during their own lifetimes—in addition to a pretty sharp review of the Hirst Skull--but then again, Picasso was (called a genius in his lifetime), and his “Demoiselles” is still largely considered to be the most influential painting of the 20th Century. Go figure.

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9656

Hunny, what’d you do with my Munny?

The upcoming show, “The Color of Munny,” organized by Urban Jacksonville’s Joey Marchy, taps into a curiosity and fascination with vinyl toys and readymade products that traces its lineage back to Pop and Dada art.

Munnys, all of one shape and size--unless modified--will join in other shows that take an iconic object, and hand it over to various artists. Sometimes, having such a disparate group showing together can lead to an incoherent mess.

However, the unifying link of shows like this is less the lure of the object itself, instead its the desire to see how Munny gets reimagined. It’s doubtful that there will be a shortage of opinions, i.e. “How-I-would’ve-done-it” let’s just hope they don’t run amok.

For an example of a similar show, skip over here to read about a Darth Vader exhibit in conjunction with the “Star Wars” 30th anniversary: http://blogging.la/archives/2007/05/darth_vader_gets_a_makeover.phtml.

Because he is a figure, Munny is ripe for the riffing: suited up as Captain America, flattened as a sly nod to Barry McGee or just deconstructed. Perhaps Munny becomes a shell of himself (literally or figuratively) à la Eva Hess...or maybe Munny makes an appearance, as one of the monsters of art history would’ve presented him.

It would seem that Munny is less about personal exploration, and more about personal iconography and wit; as such, he/she/it provides a glimpse into an artist’s personality...not just their dogma.

Dictionary Definition

This might be the dictionary definition of irony: “The Splasher” a so-called revolutionary in the battle against artistic commodification of street art. His or her m.o? Unceremoniously splashing (hence the comic-esque moniker) existing street art pieces, especially those by Swoon, Banksy, and Shepard Fairey…artists that have not only attained a level of ‘street cred’ but who also have successful careers.

It is worth noting that in Streetsy’s (www.streetsy.com or nymag.com/news/features/32388/index8.html) images, the splashes are clearly not in any way an aesthetic statement…they are meant to deface the image in question.

Read the article here: nymag.com/news/features/32388/

“It’s mathematics…you don’t to more with less, you do more with more.”

In a conversation I had yesterday with Robert White, of the Cultural Council, he made the cost of the Property Tax Relief blindingly clear: the cost of a gallon of gas, or a Starbucks latte-a-day. Over the course of a year, that sum amounts to little over one-thousand dollars.

Indeed, I am in no position to shake a casual stick at a cool grand, but when I think of what that money will really cost; in terms not only of my cultural leanings, but too the beliefs I spout so frequently to anyone within earshot, I know that it is time to take a stand. I oppose the property tax relief and have already badgered the mayor’s office, and my city council rep (for those of you living in Riverside, that’s District 9, Warren A. Jones, 630-1395, WAJones@coj.net).

But the thing that bears noting is this: the tax relief won’t just affect Jacksonville’s cultural scene, will impact non-profits across the city and those resources like the police and firefighters. The mayor is presenting his budget to City Council on Monday, July 16, at 10:00 a.m., and in it, he has to reduce the budget by 10%. Judging from experience, those entities deemed non-essential will be the first to go.

What can we do? Now would be a good time to call or write city hall, or your council person, and tell them how you feel…what you are thinking.

But for those of you that aren’t sure what got passed and what is up for grabs, here’s an excerpt from a Florida Times Union Article:

The Legislature passed a multi-part property tax reduction plan: An immediate, one-year rollback of local governments’ 2007-08 fiscal-year property tax revenue to their 2006-07 levels, a mandatory cut of 3 percent to 9 percent in local governments’ property tax revenue; a cap on future tax growth, tied to personal income growth, and a constitutional amendment election offering Floridians an expanded homestead exemption. The rollback, cuts and caps were done through legislative action; the constitutional amendment will go before voters January 29. However, in three counties (including Duval), governing bodies can override the rollback. In Duval the approval of 15 of the Jacksonville City Council's 19 members would be needed.

The constitutional amendment:

The amendment would establish a new homestead exemption of 75 percent off the first $200,000 of a property’s value, 15 percent off the next $300,000 in value, and a maximum exemption of $195,000 for homes worth more than $500,000. The maximum exemption will rise according to per-capita personal income each year. There also are benefits for low-income seniors, those with affordable-housing status and waterfront properties. If the amendment fails, the Save Our Homes benefit would stay as is, as would the tax rollbacks, cuts and caps. Homeowners whose homes are valued below $200,000 would receive a minimum $50,000 exemption.

So really, there are several hurdles to clear, or at least stay in front of. But for now, just weigh in with the city government. According to White, only about 20% of the people contacting their reps are currently opposing the tax relief. And remember, you don’t need to be a homeowner for this to affect you. What happens when you go to the library and it’s closed, or the park is over-run with weeds, or, the beach is closed, what then?

If you don’t know what district you live in (I wasn’t sure), you can call 630-CITY or go online to coj.net.

Because as White noted, “It’s mathematics…you don’t to more with less, you do more with more.”

Mayor Peyton
630-1776

Jacksonville City Council
117 West Duval St.,
Suite 425
Jacksonville, FL 32202
630-CITY

District 1
Lake Ray
630-1389
LRay@coj.net

District 2
Lynette Self
630-1392
LSelf@coj.net

District 3
Richard Clark
630-1386
RClark@coj.net

District 4
Suzanne Jenkins
630-1394
SuzanneJ@coj.net

District 5
Art Shad
630-1382
AShad@coj.net

District 6
Sharon Copeland
630-1388
SCopelan@coj.net

District 7
Pat Lockett-Felder
630-1384
PFelder@coj.net

District 8
Gwen Yates
630-1385
GYates@coj.net

District 9
Warren A. Jones
630-1395
WAJones@coj.net

District 10
Mia Jones
630-1684
MJones@coj.net

District 11
Warren Alvarez
630-1383
WAlvarez@coj.net

District 12
Vice President
Daniel Davis
630-1380
Email:

District 13
Arthur Graham
Phone: (904) 630-1397
Email: ArtG@coj.net

District 14
President
Michael L. Corrigan, Jr.,
630-1390
Corrigan@coj.net

Taxation Without Representation …wait? What’s Happening?

Though it seems that the dream of owning a house has been undermined by skyrocketing taxes, or the desire for a multi-faceted city dashed by economic realities, I refuse to believe that there isn’t a happy medium. Rushing to a decision can’t be the answer.

The property tax cuts that were passed in Tallahassee last week will affect just about everyone in the state. From small arts-organizations to special events and parks, the rollback in taxes might put a little money back in pockets, but the services that our community has come to count on will be reduced, some gone all together.

Tomorrow, for my “day job” I’ll be talking to Robert White, Executive Director of the Cultural Council, about how these cuts will affect our community, and what we, as citizens can do. I’ll post some of that information.

Until tomorrow then.

In the meantime, call or write your (Duval) representatives:

Anthony C. Hill Sr. (Dem)-hill.anthony.web@flsenate.gov
5600 New Kings Road, Suite 5, Jacksonville, FL 32209-2146, 924-646.

Stephen R. Wise (Rep)-wise.stephen.web@flsenate.gov
1460 Cassat Avenue, Suite B, Jacksonville, FL 32205, 381-6000.

James E. King Jr. (Rep)- king.james.web@flsenate.gov
9485 Regency Square Boulevard, Suite 108, Jacksonville, FL, 32225-8145, 727-3600.

The above information was taken from the website, www.flsenate.gov.

Here’s a link to a T.U. article on the tax cuts: http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061807/met_178256184.shtml.

My God, His Jaw Must Be Tired: Cocaine Angel at MOCA Jacksonville

"Cocaine Angel," the much-lauded feature film debut of director Michael Tully, written by (Jacksonville’s own) Damian Lahey, who also performs the lead role, was screened at MOCA Jacksonville, Wednesday night. The film had its U.S. premier at SXSW, and has been called a “minor masterpiece” by Indiewire.

Despite the pouring rain, there was standing-room-only in the museum’s small auditorium. The film is a gossamer study of a week in the life of a derelict cokehead, Scott (Lahey). From his crack-whore girlfriend, Mary, to the daughter who is always thrilled to see him, it strives to be a Chekhovian study and falls just short.

It is a glimpse into the lives of people generally discounted as they walk down the street–though limping along with a bandaged, unshod foot and a fifth of whisky generally doesn’t do too much to inspire interest beyond disgust. Shot through a haze that captures the heat and grimness of a Jacksonville summer, heightening the boredom, poverty, and squalor in which Scott et. al. live.

Unlike other drug tales, there is no glamour or beauty to the lives Scott and Mary lead. But there is unexpected beauty in the story, when Scott, high and in need of reassurance talks to himself in the mirror, then kisses it twice, or when after recounting how she scored some cash and ended up with cigarette burns in her ass, Mary says. “Nah, it kinda’ tickled, I was high.”

The drama–inserted for texture and good measure–is where the film falters. It becomes a little too melodramatic and tedious towards the end–presented by people the viewer really has no reason to care about. Ultimately the best part of the film, and the reason to see it, is Lahey’s performance as a decent–along the line of, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king–cokehead, struggling not towards redemption, but his next fix.