Re: Nameless show at John Stevenson
Title: Re: Nameless show at John
Stevenson
Hi
Judy,
Thanks for the report.
The quote offered by the informed , or uninformed,
intelligentsia reminds me why one should avoid these type of
events whenever possible. Unless of course one just has an addiction
to cheap white wine.
I know
this. I have seen some of Keith Taylor's prints, and they are not
half bad!!
Sandy
At 5:01 PM -0400 5/17/07, Judy Seigel wrote:
I was waiting for Susan to write
something, but I suppose the trip in from Monroe NY to 23rd Street was
so arduous she's still in recovery. I title this e-mail
"nameless' because I'd be terribly embarrassed to spell Cy de
Cosse's name wrong in a subject line and neglected to pick up a flyer
which would presumably have it right.
To put an end to the suspense, however, I report that the work was as
splendid as could possibly be imagined, but that I myself was somewhat
disappointed. The disappointment was not with the work, however,
which was endlessly fascinating, but because, what with the crowd of
OTHER people who felt entitled to talk, and my delight at meeting the
delightful Susan and her charming husband, I lost track of time, so
the next thing I knew they were blinking the lights. Folks still
didn't hurry out, but I had let Keith slip away from me, having had
the intention of at the very least kidnapping him and using CIA
methods to extract his every last secret. Tho admittedly, he
seemed happy to share, which makes my lapse doubly irksome.
I did however enjoy Cy de Cos's tale of hunting the holy blue calla
lily seed (title nowhere near the original, sorry, and if you can,
wiseguy, do it better)...but something like sunrise from the magic
mountain peak on the 9th point of the holy red star. Whichever, he
found a lilly-orium in of all places Texas, the goddess in charge
selected 12 seeds, grew them with incantations and faerie dust, then
brought them to an historic northern lake in a place they call
minnihsoatah, where, tho some died, several lived to fulfil their
mission on earth, and after careful contemplation he selected one to
photograph, tho swimming to or however achieving the perfect vantage
point with his massive camera was another saga --- imbuing the print
with even greater aura. But at last, everything worked, and, as I
recall, aura was further enhanced by a haze of red dots.)
Many questions remain, but I pose only two now. One rhetorical, one
depressingly mundane.
"Rhetorical" was asked seriously by a guest, either to
another guest or gallery personnel: "Why do these prints
look like paintings?"
Mundane: This is my own, as has been puzzling me for some time. I ask
it of Keith who may be busy now, but no hurry:
Why do you use Imagesetter negatives instead of, say, digital, or
other ? Should the ambitious gum printer, one leery of blotters, for
instance, get an imagesetter ?
Meanwhile, I hesitate to say this, since we already have more traffic
around here than advisable, but if you can squeeze yourselves in, come
see this show.
Judy
=======================================================================
"I'd recommend it for a Pulitzer Prize, except I lack the
credentials."
Read My T-Shirt for President: A True History of the PoliticalFront _
and
Back, by Judy Seigel. For Delicious details, and how to order:
www.frontandbackpress.com
|