Getting reviewed or featured in Artpaper began to matter in a different way. We had a big stable of local and national writers, and our national exposure went way up, so our role in the discourse changed. We had a team that was really focused on writers and great editorial content, and the magazine got more and more rich. Vince is now at MCAD and is in charge of grad programs. Vince Leo, photographer and writer, also came on to help with the editorial content. When Lane came on, the critical content of the magazine spiked up.
As Artpaper evolved, we started having reviews and criticism and feature articles, and then the two founders left, a new editor, Lane Relyea (who now teaches at Northwestern), came on board, I came on staff in the mid- to late 1980s, and we had a new crew putting out the magazine. The Dadaists, in many ways, were a response to the French middle-class embrace of art as a commodity back in the early 20th century. A reaction to this that art was purely a commodity was part of the idea of the art strike. So, there was a lot of discourse about the rise of this particular art market while there have always been some artist millionaires, now there were artists driving around in limos, and a art rock star kind of thing was developing. During that time one of things that shifted was, particularly in New York, that the national art scene became dominated by art that was very self-referential and very much about art being a commodity. We thought it was an irreverent idea because of the context. We were promulgating it at Artpaper, because we thought it was an interesting and subversive thing for an art magazine to do. I wouldn’t say that it was really widely embraced. Was this an idea many people were aware of? What were people saying about it?Ĭuthbert: The art strike was both an idea and an art project in and of itself, in a way. The strike mainly called into question whether being an artist was an acceptable response to the cultural issues present in the world at the time. O’Callaghan‑Morrison: In October 1989, Artpaper ran an article calling for an art strike that would last from 1990 to 1993-during this period, artists and art institutions throughout the country would cease to make work.
We were subscription-based and also on newsstands. Its circulation expanded pretty quickly until we peaked in the mid-2000s. Any visual artist who had any serious intention about their career subscribed to it. But it grew very quickly, because it listed grants, jobs, commissioning opportunities, things like that, and this is all pre-Internet, so as a resource it was invaluable. How did it expand and change over the years? Lydia O’Callaghan‑Morrison: Artpaper started out quite small. Now vice president of program at the McKnight Foundation, Cuthbert recently chatted about Artpaper and the Twin Cities in the ‘80s with Walker Visual Arts Intern Lydia O’Callaghan-Morrison. From there and in his subsequent work he was in prime position to survey the scene as it developed throughout the 1980s. It evolved to carry critical discourse on local and national arts issues and to feature an array of writers and photographers, including Terry Gydesen, Jeffrey Kastner, Steve Perry, and Mason Riddle.Ĭuthbert became the chair of the publication’s artists’ advisory committee, a group formed to help develop the publication’s editorial voice later he served as director of development before becoming Artpaper‘s director from 1986 to 1990. When a friend recommended Minneapolis, he replied, “I’ve heard of that, but where is it?” Attracted by the dynamic art scene, he moved here in 1980 and quickly became involved in Artpaper, a monthly magazine founded by Remo Campopiano and Lynn Ball as a newsletter that distributed listings to artists in the community. Living in economically ravaged Detroit in the 1970s, Neal Cuthbert was looking for a change.
0 kommentar(er)
