art reviews

---

E-Mail This Article

On Art Chicago:

A Conversation with Mark Falanga

By M. Brendon MacInnis

Senior vice president of Merchandise Mart Properties Inc.,� Mark Falanga was largely responsible for bringing the Chicago based trade show and property management firm into the art world with the purchase of several important art fairs; notably The Armory Show, in New York, and Art Chicago, as well as several younger contemporary art fairs. In this conversation, Mr. Falanga discusses the history and behind-the-scenes work that was involved in rehabilitating Art Chicago, while pursuing an acquisition strategy that would ramp up the firm�s engagement in today�s art fair driven art world. We spoke at length, at the Merchandise Mart�s headquarters in Chicago, during the week following Art Chicago 2008.�

Can you give me a little background on how you guys [Merchandise Mart] got involved with Art Chicago?� For years we had been attending Art Chicago, we were very familiar with the show. We knew Tom Blackman, [the former owner of Art Chicago] and it was a show that we had expressed interest in; it was a show that we were aware of. What drew us to it is that the attendee base was a lot like the kinds of people that were attracted to a lot of the things that we run here at the Merchandise Mart. Much of our business is in high-end residential furnishing, gift wear, and everything�s at the very high-end � our business is essentially bringing high-end buyers into our showrooms that are selling high-end merchandise. That structure seemed to be similar to what was going on at Art Chicago, and for that reason � and because we had interest in the art market a little bit; we attended the fair just to monitor it and to see what was going on.

When you say you �had interest in the art market," were you thinking at all about perhaps one day owning Art Chicago?� Well, I would say it was in the back of our mind.

Okay.� But mostly we were monitoring the show; we understood that it was an important show and that it set the tone for a lot of what was going on in the art market.�

Up to that time, had the Merchandise Mart ever bought a fair before? Was this the first one?� Oh no, we�ve purchased a lot of trade shows, a lot of consumer shows over the years, all over. That's one way in which we�ve expanded. We had a model for purchasing shows; our typical acquisition, when we purchase a trade show, is that we keep all of their people; the founder, usually, and all of the staff that are producing the shows. What we�ve tried to do is off-load a lot of the non-creative aspects of the fair production so that the people that create � the founders � can have more time to exercise their creativity, to expand and to try new things and to add dimensionality to the shows that they've been involved with for years.�

Can you give me an example, when you say, off-load the �non-creative� aspects? Do you mean the people who work to set up the fair?� It may not be a fair word to use, to say the non-creative aspects, because I think that, you know, if a job is done well, every job can be done creatively. But what we try to do is get involved more in the operational aspects of the fair.

Okay.� We try to create some efficiencies; bringing the artwork or the merchandise to the show, helping to set up the fair, taking down the fair � taking care of the marketing, the direct mail, and things of that nature, where we've got a great staff in place here.� We create a lot of efficiency, because these groups really work over a whole series of trade and consumer shows. As a company we produce 81 different trade shows, consumer shows and conferences a year. So, around those shows we've created a great level of efficiency in setting fairs up and marketing them, registering people for them. We try to leverage that knowledge that we've created, in running all of this, into any new art fairs that we purchase so that the founders can really get less focused on those aspects of the fair and more focused on what they would do now that they have financial resources; they have the benefit of not having to worry about, you know, in the case of an art fair, where the walls are coming from, how to set up walls, where the lighting�s coming from,� how to get the artwork in, how to get it set up. All of that consumes a tremendous amount of effort; if the fair founder doesn't have to worry about that, that means they can think about, you know, "What would I like to do? I�m with this large company... there are a lot of financial resources." So they can act as great entrepreneurs without a lot of the financial constraints that an entrepreneur would ordinarily confront.

Well, in New York, I saw a pretty dramatic example of what you're talking about in the case of The Armory Show. It's amazing, the difference in the physical appearance of that show since you guys purchased it.� When did you get The Armory Show?� This is the second year that we�ve produced it.�

Wow, time goes...� So, anyway, we were familiar with Tom and with the show [Art Chicago]. About Tom, we thought great things. I think he is the one that really created the model for a successful fair; he understood how important it was to bring quality to a fair, how that really impacted the attendee base. I think it�s a bit of a simple analysis to say, you know, that Art Basel came to Miami and then that led to Art Chicago�s downfall.�

That�s the conventional wisdom.� I think that certainly may have had something to do with it; but I also think that had Tom been better equipped, financially, had he been better equipped with an organization that could respond to a large company like the folks that own Art Basel, [Messe Basel] to respond to that � I think he had the knowledge base and the vision to respond to it; but he didn�t have the organization and he didn�t have the financial resources to do what he probably knew needed to be done in order to respond to that.�

As a result, the show went down and it hit its lowest of lows in 2006. Because we had some familiarity with Tom, we had many conversations with him, on the Monday prior to the show�s opening � the show was going to open on a Thursday � so on Monday evening, actually at six o�clock, we got a call from Tom. Tom said, �Hey, I�m in trouble, I don�t have any alternative. Could you guys help me with this fair? If you don�t, it will not be produced. You�re my last and best hope.��

On Tuesday then, we evaluated a range of options. We evaluated running the fair over on Butler Field, where he had the tent set up, but no floor. We looked at running it at Navy Pier, where he had run it successfully before, so we felt that there was some protocol there. And we looked at running it here [Merchandise Mart]. At the end of the day on Tuesday, we recognized that the only viable option was to run it here where we had control over all of the labor � to set the floor, to install the walls, to get the art in, to get it set up and open.

I was there actually; we had a booth for the magazine [the M magazine] in that fair. I remember you had an antiques fair taking place at the same time, on the same floor as Art Chicago.� Exactly.

And I said to myself, wow, what a great idea, to combine those kinds of visitors in one big event. It looked like a win-win situation � all of these people who spend money on things they don�t need brought together�� Well, at that juncture, what we were really motivated by was to save that fair for the city.

Sure.� We didn�t have any grand vision for acquiring the fair, we didn�t have any grand vision for making any money. But we knew enough about fairs and shows that if a fair loses a cycle for one year, it�s very difficult to ever revive. We felt that if that show didn�t go on in 2006, with the 106 dealers that were here from all over the world, that it�s likely that the fair never would�ve occurred again. So, on Wednesday, at nine o�clock in the morning, we got together with all of the dealers, over here at our conference center.

Let me ask you, when you say "we"...� At that point, who would that be on your end? I know that the building here, the Merchandise Mart, was once owned by the Kennedy family, but I didn't realize until now that Chris Kennedy [President of Merchandise Mart Properties] was so directly involved in the operations. Was he involved in handling the Art Chicago acquisition?� I would say, at that point, I was the person who was primarily involved; Chris was actually out of town then, though he and I were in constant contact. He was in High Point, North Carolina at the time.�

I led the meeting on that Wednesday morning with all of the dealers. We told them that we were going to be producing the fair here. We told them that we had a huge staff of hundreds of people that were going to set up the walls � that were going to take their artwork from the loading docks, bring it up and help them get set up; that we were going to work around the clock and that the fair would open on Thursday night, for the opening vernissage, as was originally scheduled. The dealers in that room were shocked and dismayed. They couldn�t quite believe what was going on, they didn�t quite trust us. They thought that, you know, we may be capable of dealing with furniture and giftware and Hummel figures and clothing and patio furniture � but that we really had no sensitivity to the art market. They were concerned about how their art would be treated, all of that. They had lots of questions, lots of concerns.�

Well, I think part of the concern was just prejudice. There was a time when the "fine art people" didn�t want to be associated with the "design people". Can you imagine that? Today it's all mixed together. But not so long ago, design and fashion were words that had a negative connotation, from a fine art perspective. And in that hierarchy, the antiques and the decorative arts were really at the bottom. But today you have a lot more cooperation and crossover, so it works.� Yeah. You know, what we had was an ability to do a quick turnaround � to get the show up and running. Not only did we get all of the artwork up, the floor plan all set, the walls set up; but we also mounted a massive marketing campaign.�

That Wednesday and Thursday, and on through the weekend, we bought a lot of radio advertising; we bought newspaper advertising; we went and changed 100 bus backs that were advertising, promoting Art Chicago over at Butler Field, to be at Merchandise Mart; we put signage up all around Butler Field and ran trolleys from Butler Field to bring visitors to the Merchandise Mart. We printed directories, and, you know, it was like one thing after another. So, what happened was, the attendee base was something like 27,000, I mean people came to the fair. There was a lot of press coverage on it; it was a big issue. It was an amazing thing. During that fair then, we negotiated an arrangement with Tom whereby we would purchase the assets of the show.

What were the assets?� Well, you know, the assets of any show are effectively an exhibitor � a consumer show is essentially a list of exhibitors and the trademarks and the names. So that's what we were really acquiring, the right to produce a show called Art Chicago in the future.�

Did Tom actually own that fair? It was never entirely clear to me, the ownership...� Yeah, Tom was the owner.

When did he become the owner of that fair? I thought; didn't it start out as being owned by a couple of dealers or something like that?� For as long as we�ve known Tom being associated with that fair, he had been the owner of it. We had no knowledge during the time of this transaction that anyone else was involved. So anyway, we finalized our arrangements with him. We recognized then, that really what we were buying was a show that had all but died.

Okay.� We then went on a mission to learn more about the show. We learned a lot during the fair; we talked to a lot of people and we quickly put together a host committee, a group of people that have great knowledge of the art market to educate us and give us direction as to what we should do. We took a rather linear approach for 2007. We first recognized that we had to build it back, and bring a much better group of galleries to the fair in 2007 than what were here in 2006, in order to survive. And we had to prove to the art marketplace that we were a legitimate art show producer, because there was great skepticism that we weren�t qualified to do so. So we got great advice; and what we felt we needed to do was to first get support locally. By locally, I mean we focused on the Chicago Art Dealers Association. We felt that if we had their support to produce the show then we could at least go out to others and say that we are being supported at home. We felt that if we didn�t get that Chicago support, it would be very difficult to get the support of anyone else.�

The Chicago Art Dealers Association then, after the show, was really divided into three camps. One camp was for us producing the show; about a third of the board members were. They felt that because of the experience of 2006, we deserved the right to move ahead with it.

Was� there a new director? Did Tom retain the title of director?� We hired � we brought Tom in as part of our acquisition.

Okay.� But he was not directly involved with the production of the show; that was the advice that we heard loud and clear � that Tom was really associated with the demise of the fair, and a complication that resulted in the show being produced here. The art community felt very strongly that Tom should be disassociated with the show.�

He acted for us as an adviser and an educator; he gave us great insight to the art marketplace; he gave us great sensitivity and told us the right things to do, and, you know, he�s a great adviser. But that was the extent of his involvement with the show. He was also involved in some other activities here related to our other consumer shows.�

I see.� So, anyway, with the Chicago Art Dealers Association, about a third of the group wanted or felt that we deserved the right to produce the fair � they supported us. During that whole thing, DMG emerged with a fellow named Mark Lyman [Founder/Director of SOFA (Sculpture Objects & Functional Art), a DMG world media company] who runs the SOFA show�

Yeah, I know him. In fact he was interviewed for an article in M about a year ago. [May 2007 issue, Vol. 10, No. 9]� And he raised his hand and said �You know what? I want to run an art show here in Chicago.� So, a third of the group thought that Mark was a legitimate show producer, because he had produced the SOFA show, and he was the horse that they bet on. The other third felt that, well this is done � there should be no more art fair in Chicago. So we worked for about a month, convincing the board at the Chicago Art Dealers Association that they should go with us. We convinced them that we were going to invest heavily in producing the fair, we convinced them that the fair was going to be re-cast and re-created; we were going to involve all of the cultural institutions throughout the city to make this a real Chicago fair � which had never been done before. And we convinced them that we were going to go on a mission to attract quality back into the fair.

How were you going to do that?� By pursuing galleries throughout the world that were much better than the class of galleries that was in the show in 2006

Who did that actually? Did you have a curator or how did you�� Well, we then went out and hired some great people that understood the art marketplace; like we do in all of our other businesses. In all of our businesses there are people working in them that were recruited from those businesses; they have sensitivity to the business, they understand how the business operates.�

So, we went out and started hiring some people, and a key person we hired in that regard was a fellow named Tony Karman who is now the vice president of the fair, the vice president of Art Chicago. Tony had worked with the fair for many years, he had worked with Tom Blackman, he was very well regarded, very well liked amongst the community � and Tony had a clear vision, a clear mission. And his mission was to attract quality dealers back into the fair. Tony then traveled the world, he went to every art fair that you could possibly think of everywhere. He started convincing the gallery owners that we were investing in this fair, that we were in it for the long haul. He convinced them to trust us, and come back in.

Did you offer any special incentives? A special price break for some dealers?� I would say that we didn�t rely on that� That wasn�t our � wasn�t the first thing out of our bag. For the most part there were really no financial incentives given, but what we did do before Tony went out on his selling mission was that we re-created to show.�

We outlined a massive marketing campaign, we got about 65 or 70 cultural partners throughout the city to say yes; they would participate with us. People like Susanne Ghez of the Renaissance Society joined us, and she was curating a new insights exhibit which was really attracting the best students from the best MFA programs throughout the school to exhibit their work. We had people like Richard Wright who runs a great modern auction house [60,000-square-foot facility on the fringe of Chicago's West Loop] to participate with us, and we put together a host committee that included the top museum directors and curators and others to help guide our efforts, and to lend their names and credibility to the fair, so that when Tony went out there he could say Art Chicago is different than it ever was. The whole city is involved; many credible people are now involved, and they�ve put their trust in this fair.� We�ve got the full, unanimous endorsement from the Chicago Art Dealers Association. So, you know, we could say that you, great dealer, trust us to do all of the right things here � and trust me, because I�m telling you this is a great organization, we are going to produce a great fair. Then slowly, those dealers came back into the fair, in 2007.

I guess you could count me in that category too, of people who gave up on Art Chicago, but then slowly came around to take a second look. The roster of galleries in the 2008 show is what really persuaded me come back and see what�s going on here. It�s really, pretty impressive.� Yeah. So this goes back to 2007 now � then we realized that if we didn�t bring great dealers, a step up in quality and the type of dealers we were attracting to the show, that we would�ve failed in our effort to convince the art community that we can produce a fair. So we recognized that we had a year honeymoon here to prove ourselves, and you know, as it turned out the 2007 fair was terrific; the galleries that came in were much better than the galleries several years prior, the attendance rose from � I�m not quite sure of the number in 2006 � but let�s say 27,000, and it rose to 40,000. A huge attendance came in, great promotion, great events and activities that tied into the city.

Do you work with the satellite fairs? There�s one in particular that I�m familiar with, the one that Michael Workman does, called Bridge. Did you guys consider buying that fair too, or else doing something with them? Well, they produced their fair here in 2007, and, you know, they chose not to come back in 2008. And when they decided that; that�s when we became a little bit focused on Volta [a satellite fair that takes place during Art Basel in Switzerland, started by Chicago based gallery owner Kavi Gupta who also started the invitational fair called NEXT] in producing their NEXT show here. We felt that to have an emerging gallery � emerging art component to the fair was a very important dimension that would help attract collectors.�

When you purchase these fairs, what kind of money are we talking about?� We really don�t talk about that.� But I can say that going from 2007 to 2008, we recognized that we had to show continuous improvement. So in 2007 we proved ourselves, in showing that we could do what we set out to do. We, I think, we established a lot of credibility in the art marketplace, and we had many dealers that did very well � who then became ambassadors for us and started really getting the word out that the Mart [Merchandise Mart] is really serious about this business, in doing great things.�

And we, this year, made further commitments; we renovated our 12th floor, [where Art Chicago takes place] spent millions of dollars to create a world-class venue on the 12th floor with the gallery spaces. We brought Next into the fold, with Art Chicago. Probably some 40 dealers who worked with us in 2007 participated with us in 2008, and we had much more time to plan a more robust campaign; we had 30 museum groups, about 1000 people from 30 different museums � curatorial groups and buying groups.� There were about 9000 people who registered through our VIP program. In terms of the results of the fair, and our polling during and after the fair, 96% of the exhibitors told us that they wanted to come back next year in 2009, of those 34% said that they wanted additional space. To us, that�s really the best indication that we have as to how the exhibitors felt about the show.�

I see.� And a lot of times you may hear that the sales were good or great or mediocre; we don�t do polling in that regard.

We don�t report sales figures given to us by PR people anyway, because we know that none of this information can be verified. Even when an art fair puts out a press release that says millions of dollars of art was sold, it means nothing because in this business the people who know don�t talk about these things.� Exactly.

Thanks for being so generous with your time; I think we�ve covered pretty much all of the main points here. Quite an impressive narrative.� Thank you for showing the interest to come in.� M

Ed. Note:

Merchandise Mart Properties, Inc. (MMPI) is a trade show and property management firm. Vornado Realty Trust, owners of MMPI, based in New York City, is a fully integrated equity real estate investment trust. MMPI Art Group is comprised of Art Chicago, NEXT, The Armory Show, Volta Basel, Volta NY and the Toronto International Art Fair, all owned and produced by Merchandise Mart Properties, Inc.

Having played a key role in transforming The Armory Show from an alternative art fair in 2001 into the main event, former Managing Director Timothy Hartley Smith reflects on the fair�s history and the implications for its future under subsequent management. The fair was purchased by Chicago based Merchandise Mart Properties Inc.(MMPI) in 2006.�

---

E-Mail This Article

The Armory Show�

How it started; where it�s going�

By Timothy Hartley Smith

The genesis of The Armory Show began during a conversation among Pat Hearn, Colin De Land, Matthew Marks and Paul Morris; New York art dealers, during a slump in business. Collectively, they were looking for a stimulus to increase exposure for their artists and jump start the art market in New York. The result was an art fair in a hotel and The Gramercy International Contemporary Art Fair was launched in May 1994.
�

The new, unconventional art fair proved popular and grew over the next several years to the point where the hotel venue no longer proved adequate for the display of the artworks, or to accommodate the growing crowds. In 1999, the fair was moved to the Armory on Lexington and 26th Street and subsequently adopted a new name, The Armory Show � referencing the legendary exhibition of 1913 that took place in the very same venue. The advent of The Armory Show coincided with a resurgence in the popularity of art fairs as gathering places for collectors, art lovers and dealers. �

In 2001, The Armory Show doubled in size and was moved once more to its current location on the Show Piers on the Hudson River. Unfortunately, the owners of the fair failed to anticipate how a split venue (i.e. two separate piers) and doubling in size would impact both the management and production of what had traditionally been a �mom and pop� operation; the organization was strained to the breaking point with only two permanent employees and a tiny, temporary show staff. The fair was disastrous from a production standpoint, culminating in a petition signed by dozens of participating dealers calling for heads to roll and a complete revamping of the fair�s management.�

Partly in response, I was brought in shortly after the 2001 fair to bolster management and initiate a retooling of the organization. I instituted policies and procedures that raised the professionalism of the operation, expanded its brand, and enhanced its competitive position among Art Basel, Art Basel Miami Beach, Frieze Art Fair and a host of new and developing
venues like the NADA Art Fair, Scope and a number of more regional fairs in Europe, Latin America and Asia. I concentrated my efforts on building strong relationships with exhibiting galleries, institutions and private collectors. I instituted a VIP program that proved a standard for art fairs everywhere � especially in terms of ancillary events during and around the fair, most notably extensive visits to private collections in New York. I developed the first formal sponsor program for The Armory Show, the seeds of which continue to bear fruit for the organization.

After the deaths of founders Pat Hearn and Colin De Land, there was clearly a loss of hands-on, creative involvement among the remaining owners. A very successful dealer, Matthew Marks has little or no interest in the art fair business. Paul Morris is not a collaborator or innovator [Today Paul Morris works for Chicago Merchandise Mart Properties Inc., which purchased The Armory Show in 2007]. My title in the organization was Managing Director, but there was and continues to be a Director of the fair, Katelijne De Backer, who remains largely behind the scenes. Given the increasing competition from London and Miami, it is essential that the fair's remaining [new] owners rededicate themselves to maintaining and building excellent relationships with all of the stakeholders.� �

Today, it is simply not adequate to rely on reputation or location. The old adage that if you build it, they will come, no longer suffices.�

The fair has generally done a superb job of selecting the best galleries for participation, thanks in large part to an excellent and independent Selection Committee. Strong leadership, however, is critical to keeping and attracting the world�s very best and The Armory Show�s 2006 lineup is sadly missing some key galleries. [The 2009 lineup saw the departure of the Mathew Marks Gallery, one of the show�s key founding partners]. My hope is that this reflects a very demanding art fair calendar and focus on markets outside New York and not a loss of confidence in the future of the fair. New York, as the center of the contemporary art world, deserves a strong, world-class art fair.� M

---

E-Mail This Article

Armory Week:

A Report on the Art Fairs

By Nicollette Ramirez�

Just as we refer to the first week of December in Miami as �Art Basel Week� � when we really mean many of the art fairs taking place during Art Basel Miami Beach that have no affiliation with Messe Basel, the Swiss company that owns Art Basel and Art Basel Miami Beach, so too has The Armory Show, which took place during the first week in March this year, aquired similar branding status. �Armory Week� consists of essentially three major art fairs that take place in New York during the same dates in March. They are The Armory Show (which was recently sold to Chicago based Merchandise Mart Properties, Inc. MMPI); Alexis Hubshman�s Scope Art Fair; and Helen Allen�s Pulse Art Fair.�

All three started out as �alternative� fairs, and while in some quarters Scope and Pulse are still called �satellite� fairs, today that term really no longer applies, at least not in New York. In terms of their scale, quality of exhibitors, production values and international branding, Scope and Pulse are today at a level comparable to that of the The Armory Show.� �

Beyond these three major art fairs, Armory Week also consists of several satellite fairs; notably Volta (which was also recently purchased by MMPI); Thierry Alet�s Pool Art, George Billis�� Red Dot art fair (Red Dot was cancelled this year); Fountain; and Bridge Art Fair New York. �

Press releases disseminated by the various fairs would have us believe in record breaking numbers of attendees and sales to suffice concerns in this dour economic climate. Truth be told, some dealers confessed to the opposite, slow attendance and even slower sales, and it takes a lot for a dealer to admit when the numbers aren�t adding up.�

Prices for works from even big name artists were modestly priced; big ticket items were hardly seen in many of the booths, though perhaps behind closed doors there were transactions. Reported million dollar sales at some galleries were attributed to those serious collectors who did show up. Great thing about a financial crisis from an art world perspective; it separates the wheat from the chafe. People� who love art and collect art will find money to continue doing so; or else they buy more affordable work. Collecting art is a passion; it goes deeper than just deciding whether or not to go shopping.

At The Armory Show one of the standouts was the work by Hans Josephsohn, at the Hauser & Wirth booth. His raw, seemingly rough-hewn figurative sculptures emanated such power, something primitive and yet evolved. Although made from brass, the work� actually looks like stone.

Peter Blum�s booth featured a range of reasonably priced gems by artists Phillp Taafe and Yves Klein. Galerie Frank Elbaz from Paris showed work by Gyan Panchal, which apparently sold to one collector. Sometimes its only one person that�s needed to make the difference between make-or-break at these fairs. The Fredericks & Freiser booth featured the work of John Wesley, always eye-poppingly provocative and delicious in color. In the fair�s new �Modern� section which was held on an adjoining pier, the Robert Miller Gallery showed two exceptional paintings by Yayoi Kusama, and Cecily Brown.�

Helen Allen�s Pulse Art Fair has evolved along a remarkably similar path as that of The Armory Show, at least in the later stages in New York, insofar as both fairs were held for a few years in the original Armory building on Lexington Avenue until they outgrew that famous venue and sought larger space on the Hudson piers. In the case of The Armory Show, that fair�s original name, the Gramercy International Art Fair, was changed to The Armory Show during its years at that venue, and the name has stuck since.�

Standouts at this year�s Pulse were Galerie Beckers from Germany, which had asked veteran curator Manon Slome to select installation, video, sculpture and painting; among these, the work by� artist Liat Yossifor was particularly interesting. Praxis Gallery, with branches in Buenos Aires, New York and Miami, presented two distinctly different Federico Uribe multi-media pieces; one of a close up of a man�s face, the other an intricately laced representation of a bookshelf. Artists Vadis Turner featured at the Lyons Ortt Weir booth did an installation entitled The Reception, which was part of her Dowry exhibition scheduled to take place at the gallery in April 2009. Typically female objects such as patchwork quilt, stockings and tampons are some of the materials Turner uses to create a ripe, fruitful display of everything a woman is expected to need for her dowry, from wedding cake to sex swing!

The Volta Art Fair, a newcomer in the orbit of satellite fairs in New York, benefitted greatly from the logistical support of its new owner, MMPI. The fair, held on the 10th floor of an office building in Midtown Manhattan just across the street from the Empire State building, served up a range of fun surprises such as the Japanese artist, Kaoru Katayama, at Galleria T 20. A tangle of thread spread throughout the booth was an enticing trap for willing participants in search of a clever piece of bling-bling buried in a tangle at different times of the day by the artist. Another standout was Angelo Plessas�s light sculptures at Think 21 with its subversive titles. Gordon Cheung, a London based artist showed some luscious paintings at Fabio Ianniello�s booth. �

Among the big three � the Armory, Pulse and Scope � the Scope Art Fair is the most accessible to the public. Held in a pavilion style tent in the middle of the newly renovated Lincoln Center on Broadway, between West 62rd Street and West 63rd Street, this fair has more of a boutique feel. While The Armory Show and Pulse look very simular in terms of their industrial scale (both are held on huge piers over the Hudson) and their ability to attract many of the same top dealers from around the world, Scope retains its human scale. To be sure, this has a lot to do with the venue. Architects Tod Williams and Billie Tsien, noted for work that bridges architecture and the fine arts, recently completed the Center�s new Harmony Atrium space, which emphasizes the open, civic nature of the 16 acre campus where the organizers of Scope have chosen to pitch their tent.

Standouts in the fair include Yigal Ozeri's hyper realist paintings at the Mike Weiss Gallery, Jeong Ji-Hyun at Gallery SUN Contemporary, from Korea, Song Ying at Pan & Wei Gallery, from China, and Han Yajuan at Chinese Contemporary, (New York, London, Beijing).

Beyond the art fairs, offsite events at galleries, museums, collectors homes and unconventional venues rounded out the week. Of these, two of the bigger events were presented by Jeffrey Deitch, whose Deitch Projects hosted a performance in its Long Island City space with Vanessa Beecroft; and Pace Wildenstein Gallery which hosted an event with John Bock in the Saatchi building on Hudson Street. The Beecroft performance at Deitch had mixed reviews. The space was so well lit you could believe you were in daylight, but this may have worked against the performance in that you could see flaws in the uneven make-up on the models and the less than harmonious interaction between model and sculpture. Of course, on the other hand, this may have been the artist�s intention. �

Comparisons between Miami�s Art Basel Week and New York�s Armory Week are inevitable. Art Basel Miami Beach may have suffered the brunt of the then new downturn, but the fun factor was at an all time high back in December as people flocked to the sunshine winter get-away to party and let off the steam. Not necessarily so in chilly New York City during the first week of March. The MoMA party for Gang Gang Dance was a study in musical art and confusion as the somewhat stiff crowd figured out what to do to the music as the the band played. Le Baron at Gold Bar was a fun night with the guys from Paris holding court to the international band of revelers who gathered to celebrate the art of music and dance. Emmanuel Perrotin�s party at Beatrice the night before was another study in uber-cool trust afarian style boho schmoozing.� �

X Space, a non profit space sponsored by the� Elizabeth Dee Gallery, opened to a lot of fanfare with the art world star Maurizio Cattalan in attendance. Next door at the Chelsea Art Museum, artist Paul Notzold presented an interactive piece including the performance of actors in the windows of the 3rd Floor of the museum, incorporating text messages from an audience on the street that appeared as speech bubbles from the mouths of the actors on the walls of the museum. Txtual Healing brought the intersection of human, technological and artistic convergences to an all time high. �

Such extracurricular art events remind us why we need art, especially now. Not surprisingly, amidst all of the doom and gloom, people watching, ego-stroking and the occasional thrill of a sale, what these art fairs lacked was what the commercial art world lacks in general, i.e. the essence of art.� M

---

E-Mail This Article

Carolee Schneemann
P.P.O.W.� Gallery

By Joel Simpson

A t the age of 69, Carolee Schneemann is justly celebrated for her courageous work from the 1960s to the present that has exerted a gender-revolutionary force throughout the art world. The works in this condensed but well-chosen retrospective, Painting, What It Became, focuses on her more often neglected painting, while offering a taste of Schneemann�s challenging vision in her performance art and installations. Maura Reilly, who curated the show, and who is also curator of the Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum, writes the illuminating essay in the brief catalogue for the exhibit, in which she stresses that Schneemann is at base a painter, and that all of her work emanates from painting, even as it breaches the frame and morphs into performance art (there�s a fascinating illustrated graph of Schneemann�s artistic development by Ward Shelly in the current show at the Sackler Center).�

Looking at her earliest works in the show, those from the late 1950s, the influences on Schneemann from fauvisme and abstract expressionism are evident. Clear figures emerge from works like, Three Figures after Pontormo (1957) and Personae: JT and Three Kitch�s (1957). In both, the textures and colors that comprise the figures are the same ones that create the surrounding background, so that the same gestural energy�contrasty and impassioned in the first and sunny and sensuous in the second�flows unhindered between figure and ground.�

Crossing the threshold into the 1960s, however, the figures become more elusive and smaller, and added-on objects begin to appear, like the pasted-on photographs in the 1961 Tenebration; or the broken umbrellas, a hanging hubcap, and a protruding cigar box in the 1963 Four Fur Cutting Boards�Schneemann�s version of surrealist media mixing. The painting gestures have changed, too, in the direction of action painting: drips and sweeps, yes, but also color masses that might be described as �glancing body blows.�� �

This is, of course, the period in which Schneemann began her daring performance pieces, her �happenings.� Meat Joy (1964), a video of which plays as part of the show, featured eight semi-nude people rolling in raw fish, chicken, sauage, paint and scraps of paper, and later Body Collage (1967) in which the nude Schneemann rolls around in glue, paint and scraps of paper, turning herself into both brush and �canvas.� The �glancing body blows� in Four Fur Cutting Boards, then are imaginable as imprints of bodies tossing themselves around in an exuberant happening. Unlike the drips and sweeps of a Pollock, the tracings of arm, hand, and body gestures directed at the canvas, the main action of this action painting is really off the canvas, which becomes the almost incidental registration of activity taking place in the space in front of it. The viewer is thus invited to imagine what could have taken place, rather than challenged to decipher the gestural tracings of actions deliberately directed at the canvas. The work truly exceeds the bounds of the frame. �

Schneemann realized early on that she would face a political struggle to be taken seriously as a woman artist. Even as a child, when she first developed the desire to become an artist she saw no women among her heroes, and knew that she would have to break new ground, and not just be a good �woman artist.� When she finally did so with her radical performance pieces, she scandalized critics and drew criticism as �narcissistic,� �exhibitionist,� �self-indulgent,� and �pornographic.� It was a risk she had to take within the American moral landscape, one that might not have been so acute if she had been living in Sweden or France. Yet she really wasn�t going that far beyond where radical expressionism had already been taken, for example, by Japanese avant-gardist Ushio Shinohara (b. 1932), who in 1959, put paint on his semi-nude body (he wore shorts) and banged and rolled around against a large roll of paper hung on a wall. Eight years later in Body Collage Schneemann gendered the gesture, turning it into polymorphously perverse play, thereby radically reversing the role that women have traditionally played in art. The Guerilla Girls like to point out that 3% of the Met�s modern artists are women, but 85% of the nudes are women, suggesting that they are mostly the objectified erotic idealizations of men. But by being brush, canvas as well as the artist in Body Collage, and appearing nude in the video, it�s as if Schneemann took a classical or contemporary nude figure, and animated it into getting up out of its passive pose and start raising artistic hell. She withstood the criticism and ended up being justly celebrated as a prophet.

The paintings in this show help clarify Schneemann�s developmental journey to this point, which won her the most notoriety. The show also features samples of some of her best known installations, such as Up To And Including Her Limits Installation (1976) and War Mop (1983), as well as the intriguing photographic portfolio, Eye Body (1963�2005). Schneemann�s last major museum retrospective was in 1996 at the New Museum of Contemporary Art on the Bowery. Perhaps it�s time for another one. � M