The Occupy Wall Street movement took on the art world, sort of, this week, with a splinter group, Occupy Museums. Convened on Thursday evening through a Facebook, Twitter and Tumblr posts, about 20 people made their way from the Museum of Modern Art to the New Museum to a downtown gallery, protesting what they say is the conflation of art and commerce, the snobbery of the art market and high ticket prices at museums, which they called the “temples of the cultural elite.”

Outside the New Museum they chanted: “Museums, open your minds and your hearts, and listen. Art is for everyone! The people are at your door.” Standing in a circle on the sidewalk, they used the call-and-repeat system known as the people’s mic, which has become a hallmark of the movement. The people’s mic is an “art form,” Noah Fischer, an artist and organizer of Occupy Museums, said later, promising that it was only the first new artistic tool to emerge from the protests. “I thing art is going a change from this movement,” he said, “because it’s going to unstick the current paradigm, which is based on money.”

After a reading from a text, which called museums a “pyramid scheme” in which “the wealthiest one hundredth of one percent claim ownership of culture,” the Occupy Museums group opened the floor to supporters to speak. One woman noted that the New Museum had recently collaborated with a group called WAGE – Working Artists and the Greater Economy – to take on the issue of artist compensation in an exhibit called “Free.” She wanted to acknowledge the museum for paying artists fairly for their work in it. But she added, “This should not be an exception, but rather a rule.” She called upon artists to be brave and stand up to gatekeeper cultural institutions. Together, she said, “we are stronger than the threat of obscurity.”

At MoMA, the protesters had been cordoned off by the police, but at the New Museum they were unencumbered. Three police officers casually watched the proceedings, leaning on their squad car. Museumgoers, too, seemed to take the spectacle in stride (though a protester in a gorilla mask, a woman who said she worked at an art museum, drew a few double takes). Some passersby stopped to listen. “It makes sense,” one 60-ish man, a neighborhood resident, said of the group’s comments, before heading on his way.

Mr. Fischer, 34, a Brooklyn sculptor, performance artist and Fulbright scholar, has been a supporter of Occupy Wall Street since it started five weeks ago, though he has spent only one night at Zuccotti Park, the movement’s epicenter. “My girlfriend, she would not appreciate me sleeping there every night,” he said, as his girlfriend looked on, nodding. He has, though, committed himself as an artist to protesting. “Right now, this is my practice,” he said. (He teaches at the Pratt Institute and rents out artist studios to make ends meet.)

Even in its first day, Occupy Museums, which is meant to be a weekly event, had drawn some criticism online, but Mr. Fischer said dissent was welcome. “This is our moment to expand people’s thinking about what part of our culture is controlled by the one percent,” he said, “and people who think about it will figure out pretty quickly that MoMA is.”

Over the summer Mr. Fischer and several others were involved in a performance of their own on Wall Street, “Summer of Change.” Wearing an oversized mask that resembled the head side of a coin (a penny or a quarter), Mr. Fischer and his compatriots gave out vast amounts of change – 400 quarters, 1,000 dimes – in an attempt at redistribution of wealth. (The project was funded by a Kickstarter.) “It’s time now, in the movement, to look beyond Wall Street and notice that a culture of economic inequality flows to all parts of our city, and all parts of our culture,” Mr. Fischer said.

At the New Museum, a protester mentioned White Box, a small gallery off the Bowery that was having an opening that night. After a consensus vote, the group marched their protest over to its doors. But the exhibit there, “WALLmART,” turned out to be in solidarity with the 99 percent movement. So after a few minutes, the Occupy Museums group abandoned their sidewalk chants and went in.

“We occupied, and now we’re going to schmooze,” Mr. Fischer said.

October 21, 2011By MELENA RYZIK

Rebels searching Moamar Gaddafi’s Tripoli compound have discovered a scrapbook filled with pictures of the former US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice.

The US State Department described Gaddafi as creepy for keeping pictures of the former secretary of state.

Gaddafi was vocal about his admiration for Dr Rice, once giving her a diamond ring and a locket with his own picture in it, and describing her as his “darling African woman”. Among the pictures in the album are a series of photos of Dr Rice and Colonel Gaddafi during their 2008 diplomatic talks in Tripoli. During their meeting he also told journalists that he loved her. US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland says she has not seen the photos, but she is not surprised he had them at his home.

“I don’t need to see the photos but, bizarre and creepy are good adjectives to describe much of Gaddafi’s behaviour so [it] doesn’t surprise me, it’s deeply bizarre and creepy though,” she said. The whereabouts of Gaddafi are unknown after rebel fighters took control of the Libyan capital earlier this week. But the private lives of Gaddafi and his relatives have been exposed to the world as rebels ransacked his stronghold.

ABC News August 27, 2011 10:28:47

The photographer Ryan McGinley.

ART lovers can be forgiven for mixing up some names. Consider the confusion between Steve McQueen, the British artist, and Steve McQueen, the 1960s Hollywood legend. Or between the American steel sculptors Tony Smith and David Smith. Or how about Judy Chicago, Gary Indiana and Marfa Texas? (Trick question: two are places, and two are people.) But these are child’s play compared to the perplexity of the moment, in which it seems that every other male artist is named Ryan.

A casual count reveals no fewer than eight: There is Ryan Trecartin, with a one-man show at MoMA PS1, and Ryan McNamara, the performance artist who entertained Hamptons galagoers at the Watermill Center benefit last month. There are up-and-comers like Ryan Johnson, Ryan Sullivan, Ryan Gander and Ryan Humphrey. And the best-known of the Ryans — the photographer Ryan McGinley, whose 2003 solo show at the Whitney Museum propelled him to art fame at the age of 25 — is often confused with his sound-alike peer, the painter Ryan McGinness.

It’s as bad as 17th-century Holland, when everyone was named Jan.

The profusion has provoked some awkward moments. Last fall, Mr. Sullivan got a phone call from a well-known charitable arts organization, informing him that he had won a $25,000 grant for his performance work. Who wouldn’t like a phone call like that? The problem was, Mr. Sullivan is an abstract painter, not a performance artist.

“They went on for two or three minutes,” Mr. Sullivan said. Then the coin dropped. “I realized they were talking about Ryan McNamara.” Ouch. “It was a gaffe on their part,” said Mr. Sullivan, who added that he took no offense. “But I was happy for Ryan. I knew who had nominated him, which was kind of why I knew who they were talking about. It’s always so hard for performance artists to make money for what they do that I think they should get grants.”

For his part, Mr. McNamara was mortified to hear about the blunder, having been on the other end of such mistakes. At an art-world gala last year, he met one of the art hive’s buzziest queen bees, who generously proceeded to escort him around the party and introduce him to everyone. As Ryan McGinley. “I didn’t know what to say,” Mr. McNamara said. “It was so awkward, and she was being so nice, I didn’t know how to correct her. Plus, I thought it was kind of funny. Later I told Ryan McGinley about it, and he said it was cool. He said, ‘I still get mixed up with Ryan McGinness.’ ”

Ryan McGinness, who was working on a project in Amsterdam, confirmed that this was the case, but that it had long ceased to bother him. “Luckily I know Ryan, and he’s a good guy, and we like each other,” he said. “If he weren’t, it would be a different story.”

Mr. McGinley was traveling and declined to comment. Mr. Trecartin plays such a mean game of phone tag that he could take it to London for next summer’s Olympics. But he briefly acknowledged this quirky art phenomenon — call it Ryan-ism — and added, “And we’re all gay!” Well, it’s certainly hard to keep them all straight. But strictly speaking, only Messrs. Trecartin, McNamara, McGinley and Sullivan are gay. Mr. Gander, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Humphrey are not. Nor is Mr. McGinness, whose relationship with Mr. McGinley is purely homonymous.

Though it seems statistically improbable, Ryan-ism isn’t limited to the art world. Hollywood has four heartthrobs named Ryan in current circulation: Reynolds, Gosling, Phillippe and Kwanten. There may be a simple explanation. According to the Social Security Administration, which keeps track of the most popular baby names, “Ryan” first cracked the top 100 in 1971 — coming in at No. 51 — and rose steadily to No. 11 in the 1980s, resting there, give or take a notch, for a good 10 years.

The reason? The prime suspect appears to be “Love Story,” the 1970 movie that featured a dreamboat to end all dreamboats: a rich Harvard student named Oliver Barrett IV, who loses his head and heart for a saucy Italian Radcliffe student, who in the end loses her life to cancer. He was played by a fresh-faced Ryan O’Neal, and it’s safe to surmise that, for a while at least, the “Ryan” vogue owed an enormous debt to him. Not having even been born when the movie came out, the real-life Ryans were of two minds on the theory. “It was my grandmother’s maiden name,” Mr. McNamara said. But he added, “The other day I met a Ryan whose mother told him point-blank that he was named that because of ‘Love Story.’ ”

These days, though, with a drug arrest, a stint in rehab and a lawsuit over a missing Warhol painting, Mr. O’Neal is not exactly a name-inspiring role model. “The idea that a generation of people would name their kids after him seems crazy,” Mr. McNamara said. It might be a coincidence that “Ryan” dropped out of the top 20 baby names in 2010. Then again, it might not.

By DAVID COLMAN, New York Times, September 2, 2011

The long believed Australian notion that all could find a space for living is flailing and so, we aim to rectify this issue for at least one person, and in doing we develop an installation that grows as the projection screen for our combined artistic and social interests and endeavours.

The OK Collective seeks to create projects that have the opportunity to develop through process, and grow organically. What might become is artwork that demonstrates and mimics the processes that we all partake of – whether consciously or otherwise. Through re-appropriation, this temporary space de-centres the viewer; the inhabitant develops their relationship to the space through action and alteration and the viewer becomes not unlike a domestic visitor or, alternately, dependent upon their own resonance within the space, a voyeur. A social game is developed as a form of artwork and allowance is made for direct observation of how people function within private space – the irony of course being obvious – what privacy?

SEVENTH GALLERY

155 Gertrude Street Fitzroy

Exhibition Opening
Wednesday 17th August 6-8pm

Exhibition Dates: August 17th – September 3rd 2011

Gallery Hours: Tuesday – Saturday 12pm-6pm

Gallery Two

THE OK COLLECTIVE (Oliver cloke and Kathy Heyward)

Uniquely Yours – 155a Gertrude Street, Fitzroy 3065

‘Uniquely Yours’ screams aloud the sign of the times as neighbouring art-spaces are sold off and threatened with gentrification, and it’s mimicry – initially coincidental
– becomes both artwork and art statement.

Through spatial re-appropriation the viewer is left de-centred; the inhabitant develops their relationship to the space through action and alteration and the viewer becomes not unlike a domestic visitor or, alternately, dependent upon their own resonance within the space, a voyeur. A social game is developed as a form of artwork and allowance is made for direct observation of how people function within private space – the irony of course, being obvious.

Consciousness is a slippery word, so slippery it babbles in your mouth as you divulge its contents, its directionless-ness. Viewed with cynicism because of its slippery foundations it becomes for most, an untenable subject matter. However, it has been the subject matter of philosophy dating back to the father of modern Philosophical thinking, Descartes; who noted that consciousness is the most indubitable thing there is… The question then arises; why seek to further understand the incomprehensible?

The answer is simple, because humans are curious animals; we wish to further our knowledge of the world that surrounds us. This investigation runs from our infantile selves that needed to touch and taste everything, then as sensations grow and expectation builds our maps that we create for the world start to form. We build a knowledge of ourselves in relation to objects, which then evolves into our relationship with others. Our developments of theories of mind educate us in our understanding of others, and ourselves and to understand that others have beliefs, desires and intentions that are different from one’s own. The communities that we grow up in corral us, delivering us into the ever-increasing world/map that we are expected to cope with easily. We do this through communication and the comprehension of rules and formulae for interaction and action.

In this project, we seek to utilise our understanding of social interactions and displace that into the gallery context. After analysing how art can be critiqued and developed, it was then recontextualised to within a more relaxed setting with a dinner party atmosphere, where food and ideas were shared. Artists were asked to bring various objects/ ideas/ artworks. This educational modeling sought to find formulae that enabled the conversation to relate to the participants concerned. It also attempted to deny any form of hierarchy, which was hoped would enhance the experience for each contributor. We then sought to take the conversation back to the original art environment in order to blur the agenda, enhance the content, but still function; to progress the ideas and dialogue about the notion of ‘consciousness’. The purpose of the project is to seek to engage a wider audience in a deeper conversation about what contemporary consciousness is. We have met on many occasions at participants’ houses to debate the differing aspects of what consciousness could be, in terms of our differing art practices, our memories, dreams, histories, relations etc. What this aimed to achieve is a greater personal theory about our own consciousness and our collective understanding of each other, whilst formulating a model through which to create artwork about ‘consciousness’.

The conversations’ set up, engaged in the pedagogic templates to enhance the flow of conversation about consciousness and artwork produced, and utilised the concept of theory of mind to help do that. What is theory of mind? I hear you scream. Theory of mind is about the understanding of the implications of communication. In early childhood it is displayed with the inclination to reference an object in the world as interesting and to likewise appreciate the directed attention and interests of another, which can be defined as the underlying motive behind all human communication. Understanding of others’ intentions is another critical precursor to understanding other minds, because intentionality is a fundamental feature of mental states and events. The “intentional stance” has been defined as an understanding that others’ actions are goal-directed and arise from particular beliefs or desires. In proposition (because it is only a theory) it is the innate potential ability in humans to communicate, it requires social experiences to bring to fruition and is used to test for some disabilities like autism. Different people, due to their interactions may develop more, or less, effective theories of mind. Empathy is a related concept, meaning experientially recognising and understanding the states of mind, including beliefs, desires and particularly emotions of others, often characterised as the ability to “put oneself into another’s shoes.” The project is aiming to allow all participants the ability to communicate when at ease and feel that they have a worthy contribution. The ‘conversation’ is not judgemental, it allows for personal opinion and memory to be valued as important as grandiose theory. Understanding and empathy are misused in educational contexts; they are seen as unsustainable and therefore not correct (able to be marked). However, the arts should provide a forum for free thinking and social interactions to be explored, experienced and analysed. The greater the range of diversity then the more interesting the conversation can become. Fundamentally, it shows that our everyday interactions are important to our being (not to mention the knowledge of our own perceptions).

So to conclude, and come full circle, it seems that a direct analysis of the word consciousness is necessary to justify our aims, If you investigate the etymology of the word as a noun, or an adjective, it derives from the Latin; Conscius, (which means sharing knowledge) made up of com (with) and sc?re (to know). Therefore, it is understood that both our activity and our subject matter are interrelated, intertwined and mutually beneficial to each other’s examination. The slippery words always seem the most interesting to scrutinise because there may not be hard and fast answers, but surely that is the most intriguing element of education.

Referencing for theory of mind: Baron-Cohen, S. (1991). “Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others”. in A. Whiten (Ed.), “Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development and simulation of everyday mindreading” (pp. 233-251). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

the mind of itself and the world
A collaborative project facilitated by Brooke Shanti Fenner, Oliver Cloke and Tahlia Jolly, with artists Laura Carthew, Nickk Hertzog, David Mutch and Mattie Young

Opened this past weekend is yet another art gallery for inner-Melbourne-urbanites to add to the growing list of which to frequent in tight black jeans and an oh-too-cool look. But, alas, there is something wrong. There is something a little bit different. This does not seem to be the norm. This gallery, Fehily Contemporary on Glasshouse Road in Collingwood, is a little bit different. There appears, here, to be some sort of ‘feeling’.

Now, all easy puns aside; a quick moment to describe. The ‘feeling’, is not in any way related to any derivative of any kind of ‘vibe’ that might be already associated with any number of the burgeoning ARIs or contemporary private galleries around the place. The ‘feeling’, has nothing to do with rustic milk-crates-as-chairs style decor or associated trendy art-scene style. The ‘feeling’ has little to do with these notions and everything to do with the manner in which art, artists and how an approach to the art world is considered.

The Fehily artists are not referred to as ‘stock’ or a ‘stable’ and they, all, are considered equals as well as associates of the gallery; encouraged to contribute to the development of an artists’ agreement, not expected to simply fling their signature at an art ‘worker’s’ contract. The work that these artists produce is not forced so harshly into little pigeon-boxes that small pieces of it break off, leaving said artist trembling and sobbing in a bleak, stained, studio corner, broken and integrally disemboweled. It is, instead, welcomed with such relish, in all manners and with an holistic appreciation for its implicit evolution that the artists are almost openly encouraged to explore their practice and not merely ‘churn’ for the next decade. These artists are not owned. Represented within the Fehily family are an enlightening mix, which also adds to the feeling that perhaps there is another way for the art world to function. Young and mature artists, in both age and practice, are brought together as well as national and international representatives. Old faves Richard Lewer, Sally Smart and Ricky Maynard hang alongside contemporary buzz-names Ash Keating, Nick Devlin and Patrick Pound as well as long-time-working-short-time-trending artists like Scott Miles, Graham Brindley and Angela Ellsworth.

And the ‘feeling’? It seems good, the feeling is good. The Fehily’s ethos comes through in the space, the works, the set-up and their methods. That they consider a cyclical approach to the working of the art industry is evidence of their own passion and understanding for supporting artists’ careers. There appear to be no secrets and the Fehily’s seem keen to lay their cards on the table and encourage others to play with them.

Perhaps this is what the Melbourne (if not broader) art world needs the most. That perhaps when the gallerists, collectors and even curators level out and stop perpetuating an ‘us’ and ‘them’ scenario then that buzz, that energy, that feeling that seemed to be fading, will come back to our contemporary scene and the artists and all stakeholders within might actually be able to just get on with it, for all the reasons that set us down that path in the first place.

Fehily Contemporary Artists – THURS 12 MAY – SAT 4 JUNE – Glasshouse Road, Collingwood.

‘Tent’  at Artecycle in the Incinerator arts complex, made from reclaimed business shirts, cotton rope, dowel and tent pegs.

From a distance the shining beacon of bright white fabric that is ‘Tent’ situates the viewer in a complex conundrum, why would a tent be considered an artistic accomplishment? And if it were not art, what use would a tent have if it has holes in? On closer inspection it becomes obvious that the tent is made from mens’ shirts, which could be considered a symbol of power and the conforming individual that creates a homogeneous society.

And what use would a viewing portal have from a tent, if it were not to stare in wonder at the delicious outdoors, at the wonders of our environment in an expanded understanding. The tent is a modality of freedom, and expansion of our typical day, or holiday facilitator.

The OK Collective is an ongoing project that aims to produce site-specific works that are an amalgamation of the skills and interests of these two artists.  Recycled materials, concentration on the hand-made and an underlying notion of playfulness are a focus of most works.