While M.River posts happy i-love-everybody posts about the new year I’m here to rant.
I’m not really sure what Roberta Smith is going on about with this column:
Another lamentable creeping usage is not only pretentious, but it distorts and narrows what artists do. I refer to — rather than reference — the word practice, as in “Duchamp’s practice,” “Picasso’s studio practice” and worst of all, especially from the mouths of graduate students, “my practice.” Things were bad enough in the 1980s, when artists sometimes referred to their work as “production,” but at least that had a kind of grease-monkey grit to it.
I’m here to defend artists’ use of the word practice. If you’re reading this on our web site (as opposed a feed reader or aggregator) you’ll see to the left that we use the term:
The MTAA Reference Resource (MTAA-RR) attempts to archive most information regarding the art duo MTAA’s creative PRACTICE.
[CONTINUED]
A response from artist T.whid of MTAA to a New York Times article entitled 'What We Talk About When We Talk About Art.' If MTAA still had comments, I'm sure this post would generate a good amount of discussion. Read through for full commentary.
Originally posted on MTAA Reference Resource by T.Whid
