How Free Is Speech in America, Today? Or “Is Free Speech ________?” [Excerpt]
By Paul McLean
Chapter 8: Happy Thanksgiving, Art World!
It’s been quite a wild autumn in NYC, right? The Bloomberg Era is OVER! What does a titan of financial/informatic/political/education/philanthropic/surveillance/enforcement industry do, when he retires from public office? Why, he heads to jolly old England to chair the Serpentine Gallery, of course![i] Why? Because he CAN!
What else is Bloomberg chairing? Lots of Board-”work” for Hizzoner [not surfing, Ambrose,[1] LOL], including top-hatting (co-chairing) Fix the Debt! You know, the CEO-rich org that pushes corporate syndicate- + plutocrat-friendly solutions to all the societal fiscal problems rank inequality causes.[2] To paraphrase Val Kilmer in Tombstone as Doc Holliday, their hypocrisy knows no bounds![ii]
2013 is almost a memory, and what stands out? Banksy was here, and all Bloomberg did was put on his best troglodyte persona to sputter on about property’s primacy![iii] 5Pointz is GONE![iv] Did Bloomberg step in? Think about how these scenarios played out. Add OWS, and this is one way to interpret Bloomberg’s [LOL] legacy, vis-à-vis arts and culture (in- and outside the box, or, rather, outside the 1%er cage for it).
Which is the “real” Bloomberg, anyway? In a 4d reality, Bloomberg is a matrix, a multiplicitous, copyrighted property “himself,” at least in some ratio an artificial personhood. What can we discern about Bloomberg from this mayoral comment, prompted by last weekend’s deadly Metro line train derailment in the Bronx [?]:
“What can I do?” Bloomberg said when asked about his whereabouts. “I’m not a professional firefighter or police officer. Nothing I can do. All I can do is make sure that the right people from New York City, our police commissioner, our fire commissioner and emergency management commissioner are there.”[3]
On the Brian Lehrer program this morning (December 2), the host wondered whether Bloomberg’s not-empathic disclosure is a sign of “lame-duck-it is.” We could also attribute the character of the admission, adding a bit of radical color, as a symptom of the sociopathy of artificial personhood. One thing seems obvious. Management is not the same as Leadership, even when practiced by a billionaire. As we will see, this fact has broad implications in all democratic social domains that rely on free speech to function correctly, and that includes both art and government. The question is whether money, property, political power and control of media distort or even destroy democracy, over time. Clearly, this is a complex question.
∞
Lady Gaga… [who, in a truly cringe-inducing 2012 New Year’s Eve countdown moment, famously smooched our soon-to-be-ex-3-term mayor[v]… (Perhaps catalyzed by that event, she >)] …has come out as a REAL [multi-faceted or -personaed] ARTIST, to mostly MEH reviews.[vi] We have loads of examples of matrixial pop “artists” who exhibit crystalline perspectives of themselves through their commercial (and “non-commercial”) ventures: David Bowie, Garth Brooks (Remember Chris Gaines?[vii]), and David Byrne*, to name but a few. What we may be talking about phenomenologically is a form of self-derivation (as in “complex derivatives), or we may be exploring new 4d territory, with important precursors in literature, art and philosophy. There are more possibilities, of course, but for the sake of compression, let’s boil it all down temporarily to Art/Free Speech, Money (which, thanks to SCOTUS and Citizen’s United, in a political campaign, now equals Free Speech – next on deck is corporate religion[4]), and Property, for the purposes of this text.
In terms of Money and Property, who’s the best artist on earth? You might say, “Why Michael Bloomberg, certainly!” But Bloomberg hasn’t exactly outted himself as an artist, yet (unlike former President of the United States, George W. Bush, who’s just released a holiday ornament for sale[5]). Is it Gaga? NO!
The beans having been counted, which is all that seems to matter ultimately to innovative-creative management power-people like Bloomberg, we now know who’s the champion artist of the neo-Gilded Age (one of Gaga’s collaborators, Jerry Saltz’s Artist of the “Aughts”[viii]): Jeff Koons! The emblematic art of our time is a highly polished Koons steel sculpture shaped like a doggie balloon toy! REALLY! SOLD - for $58.4 MILLION dollars! The NY Times reports[ix] that princely sum’s the most for a living artist at auction! As Colbert reports during an interview with Koons, it’s “shiny!”[6] In light of the intermingling artsies of the A-List with the Pop Music Diva and Deacon class (stare-you-to-tears Marina Abramovic,[7] in tandem with both Gaga and Jay-Z, for example), we may have to re-examine Jeffrey Deitch’s failure at MoCA, which in large part was predicated on an idea that celebrity is itself art,[8] and opening the art world to the industrial stardom complex is the Future of Art. The international Creativity industries and their consumer portable stars[x] are clearly having success in generating spectacular events and soc-med buzz, as well as a massive evaluative body comprised of Creativity professionals, academics, lobbyists, bureaucrats, “artists,” marketers, select politicians, corporate officers and operatives, etc. Put enough money and pro-push into the marketing end, and wave dollars and press at art admins and dealers who predominantly survive on small margins and percentages, and the “results” (loads of Google hits) will “happen.” Only, the art world, as such, can still be a fickle domain. Just because Guy Trebay bubbles and snarks at the fabulousness of video-making at Pace, doesn’t mean that Respect is sure to follow.[xi] That said, we are still witnessing Art History as a liberal function of force, and we mustn’t underestimate the Will of Privilege, in its desire to determine the past, present and future, which is to say, Time Itself and Its indications. Art is one of the most prominent indications of Time Itself, relative to us.
∞
This just in: Justin Bieber is a #streetartist![9] …And he’s pissing off people wherever he goes! Ubiquitous is as ubiquitous does (Milo). The NY Times, which is evidently newly fond of the dispersive “trend” towards Fame as the medium of the fungible arts, continues to push the subject in the latest edition of Sunday Styles (December 1), fronting the section with a fawning Trebay hack job focusing on neo-maven Jeanne Greenberg Rohatyn, following up with articles on how unfocused on art the party scene is at the upcoming Miami Basel art fair is,[10] and another one on pop musicians who are engaging anti-fame approaches to reach their target demographics. For Gullible Reader,[xii] the message might be boiled down to a few assumptions: to be an art star, one only has to a) surrender to the Creativity professionals of sound instincts supplemented excellent connections and vast resources, or b) reject celebrity in order to magically achieve or self-manage it, while still satisfying the protocols of mass media, the impetus of which is consumption, or c) stumble through a minefield of promotional missteps on the path to viral ignominy, a virtual zombie.
A Banksy photo illustrates the anti-fame story in the Times,[11] for no apparent reason, since he’s hardly mentioned anywhere, except as an inspiration. Yes, Guy is the same art amblin’ Guy Trebay assigned to poop cleverness on the Bushwick Open Studios 2014,[12] an event more vital and significant than any artsy draw this year, including the Venice Biennale, much less the blanched art market in Florida next week. Trebay was woefully inadequate for the task of covering a grassroots, subterranean art happening like Bushwick’s. He’s just the right man for monitoring “a stealth force in the art world as a curator, dealer and adviser to the stars like Jay Z and Alex Rodriguez:” ROHATYN![xiii] Trebay is the sort of writer we must be grateful for, artsies, because he possesses a rare and wonderful gift for accidentally revealing the mechanics of inequitable culture and its systemic implications, while charmingly filling paragraphs with the anecdotal detritus that fosters self-love and other-hate among the elites, which practically ensures his longevity as a society arts fop.
To parse the narratives of Trebay is to encounter the irrational and mediocre structures of the 1% art market, and to simultaneously experience the moral vacuum it inhabits. The litany of testimonial on behalf of the players and their playthings, as recorded by Trebay, must be similar to the inventive language of early progenitors of the field, such as Old Worm.[13] We are, as readers, at once availed upon to accept the scenarios of art’s wholesale co-optation by pedigreed operatives and the disenfranchisement they peddle, and to reject any contextual substantive adjudication on values and meaning in art, apart from value and means.
∞
Does anyone remember the discord, the anti-excess animus, infecting last year’s Art Basel/Miami?[14] Did anything resembling a spiritual awakening in the art world emerge from that momentary soul searching by folks like Dave Hickey and Sarah Thornton, or connect those frank art world assessments to the duplicitous calls to conscience pitched by the usual suspects, like Roberta Smith, immediately after the spending sprees at the auction houses in November? For that matter, does anyone recall the similar phenomenon, the hand-wringing by notable art pundits like Charlie Finch and Saltz, just prior to the crash of 2007?[15] Does anyone recall the hubris of Amy Cappellazzo and Tobias Meyer? He said, “The best art is the most expensive, because the market is so smart.” Does anyone remember how quickly survivalists like Saltz pivoted to defend the 1% art market, when an insurgency arose to question the top-down lack of ethics permeating the opacity and absence of regulatory governance in the art world?[16] On the one hand, we’re told, “The rest of us just live in their world, trying to make sense of the spectacle of art, money and ambition they generate, taking pleasure and insight where we find it.”[17] On the other, we’re invited to the faux narrative feast to eat the crumby or crummy status quo storylines of gay neo-Gilded Age excess, by prattles like Guy Trebay! When do we ditch the whole lot? Do we have a public option? If not, then why not? If not, then something is very wrong.
∞
It was a record-shattering night for Christie’s. The Bacon portrait of Lucien Freud sold big, as did a Warhol (of course). Sotheby’s is also riding high, and some of the Serious Art Writers are fretting! Maybe Roberta’s[xiv] on to something! Before you run out your penthouse and throw down your fat roll on blingy artz, you better put a clamp on that YO! Some economic forecasters and specialists, like short-seller Jim Chanos, are warning that the major auction houses’ success is an indicator a bubbling marketplace is on the verge of popping. The amplification networks are running with this story, now.
Note how husband and wife Jerry Saltz and Roberta Smith both characterized the Bacon painting nearly identically,[18] in terms of the “middle-brow.” Note also how Smith inserted Thomas Kinkade into the discourse, which is completely bizarre and inappropriate (…But accidentally compelling for the purpose of 4D secondary analysis! We will get to that in another section, perhaps. - Milo). These two are conflicted! Which side of the inequality fence do they inhabit? (A funny thought-problem/visual. – Milo) If the issue really is economic relevance, and the subject is the superrich’s exclusive art commodities/currency/tax evasion/money laundering etc. market, then how is any market or economy irrelevant to the art discourse, since the baseline for all is free speech, if not free exchange (which would necessarily be property-less)? First of all, in a democracy, supposing that markets should override the mechanisms of democracy is a fallacy invented by marketers. To divorce art from democracy is equally fallacious. We do have impressive examples in American art history of democratic art programs that outperform market counterparts,[19] generate profoundly innovative art,[20] and help sustain artists outside of management/labor regimes.[xv] The alternative (democratic) exchanges and economies developed over the past century in the United States are manifold and in almost every instance have been strangled and/or exploited by the menace of markets and their various instruments of enforcement, which are prodigious and brutal.
What art economy that is morally and ethically sound could conceive of a scenario in which the death of the artist advances the value of his art? The answer for the spiritually challenged is: NONE. What possible justification is there in a democracy for the ritualistic de-humanization disguised as an art auction, such as those fall auctions of 2013? Again, the answer is NONE! It is a disfiguration of reason, tantamount to insanity, to attempt one! That we could easily amass a list of legal, philosophical and economic rationales in support of the 1% art market only supports the argument that the priorities of our democratic society are fundamentally askew, distorted by the power and influence of the global plutocracy, on parade in the halls of those Manhattan art auctioneers. The Invisible Hand of Adam Smith[xvi] is story told in the language of devotion, of divinity, and also in terms of the Crown and state religion. An all-powerful unseen Hand, moved by greed, conflated with the sacred invisible, the Spirit, is a powerful imaginary, made all the more potent by the direct action of the enforcer. It is a strange condition of our nature that we might wonder why we are subject to the cruelties of our own kind. We wonder why one person can hurt another, and we wonder how a divine order permits humans to be horrible to each other, especially when those hurt are people we love. When we are suffering at the hands of another person, we can conflate the immediate cause of our suffering (the one doing harm to us), with an invisible power. It doesn’t help when the person harming us justifies his or her behavior in the name of god. Witness Lloyd Blankfein. [21]
It is laudable that the current Pope is offering a clarifying statement on this topic. [22]The criminal’s behavior often includes layering space and obstruction to separate the management of harm from the actual enactment of it. Such activity is dimensional, particularly in the time-based aspect. The passage of time itself can afford the criminal the sanction of legal absolution, if not moral absolution. But what exactly is a statute of limitations? Is such a law bounding accountability to the passage of time a mechanism rewarding the criminal’s evasion of justice?[23] The punch line is, each person lives under the presumption of her or his singular demise, which is a most rigorous state of limitation, approximating law of the universal type. In our shared mythos, we do have the hedge of the anomaly as a subtext, and the contravening dream of immortality, of the infinite. Finitude is its own reward, perhaps, and infinity a conjecture, but in the domains of values and meaning, means and value, the wager is real, if not The Real. If we step back from the circuits of suffering, of art, of conflation, of property, power, persona and so on, we see many points of convergence and divergence. Where do we find the Real Thing?[24] Moreover, what can we learn from asking why some people feel so urgently the need to OWN it? Further, what is this mystery phenomenon, this alchemical impulse, whereby man must create something (like gold) out of nothing, or at least, nothing valuable? Why will some people undertake to reduce the most valuable things, people and places to …nothing, or nothing meaningful or valuable? Is this agenda or programming a symptom of a sickness, or something else?
∞
Scanning corporate media syndicates, we can commence analysis of how perception can be shaped over time. One method for establishing points of origin for a 4D analysis involves noting what memes are unspeakable in the subject society. In an earlier chapter, we addressed the direct and social forces applied to suppressing dissent against, or (even) the questioning of, the property regime. To expand our analysis to accommodate a proposition like “The property regime is a fundamental component of the authoritarian power architecture,” we can introduce other conditions, instances or systems, and explore how these phenomena circumstantially apply, relative to property and their complementary exchange environments. If our aim is develop a right perception, “a big picture” perspective, then we accept complexity as a given. Reduction is a selective function, pertaining to specificity or focus. For example, let’s compare the amount of press afforded the appearances of Bloomberg, or Gaga, or the art sales at the auction houses, and compare frequencies with the coincidental coverage of December 5 worker protests to increase the minimum wage at fast food outlets. The connection to property is fairly abstract. Modern wage work assumes that an individual owns her or his time and can choose to sell it on a market. What’s the story? It’s important to acknowledge in such a scan that the factors in play are not self-propelling, that agents have a hand in moving the array and its components directionally, and in their respective stacks or layers. What data is foregrounded? Which bits of information are pushed down or back? It is helpful to have computer (“desktop”) GUI as references, or movie simulations (like the operators in Minority Report[25] and The Matrix[26]) as illustrations of the 4D method. We do such arrangements in our perceptual complex all the time. These representations arise from what’s already there. They have arisen as functional, semi-autonomous scenarios, and this is interesting metaphysically. Cinema and software are still not quite conjoined. Gaming is the movement to integrate those domains. It is key to discern whether some component of schema is a proposition, or an application, or necessary stepping-stone in the evolutionary progression. So, when we analyze the data {(press//[appearances]: (Bloomberg)-(Gaga)-(auction $/content)-(low-wage strikes)>>[co-ordinates][movement][timing]>>analysis}, we can begin to fill-in the interstices with environmental influences, identifying qualities, subdural drives, and so on. Patterns are immensely useful, in clarifying and compressing the array to the extent that the database becomes legible to the analyst. Codes are helpful, too. Obviously, the language of simplification is not sufficient for describing the complex project like a 4D analysis. Rates of appearance (visible manifestations over time) are not in themselves conducive to predictive precision, especially when people are in any way involved. However, an analyst can scan all the available data and develop pretty compelling arguments for or against a future event’s occurrence, IRL. [This is 4D (UNIVERSAL) praxis by NSA in a nutshell.[27]]
<< [A sample conclusion, derived from the sample dataset above]: If the superrich + corporate syndicates + monopoly media + (absent democratic governmental intervention) continue on the current path, social unrest/rebellion is certain, over time.
∞
[Cont’d]
…What about the credit card industry?[28] How over time did corporations in the private sector usurp the Treasury’s task and responsibility to create money?[29] What are implications?
Where does one story link to another?
· Does VISA connect to Bloomberg, Gaga, the media monopoly, low-wage earners, and NSA?
> [Through advertising, the stock market and its dimensional, directional exchanges and co-operations, in data gathering ops, to generate citizen preferential profiles, via the entertainment matrix, as a means of perceptual occupation, as a driver of channeled Pavlovian consumption, and so on]*
∞
Moving forward, how many cops and/or criminal programs populate the typical daily television calendar? What is reality television? What is necessary to develop a useful political conversation? To close, in light of our Thanksgiving exercise in 4D analysis, consider the much-publicized Amazon drone parcel delivery program announcement. Consider that Jeff Bezos is now owner of the Washington Post. [30]Consider that the USA/CIA militarized drone program is currently under review, has generated significant political repercussions, elicits vehement opposition by a constellation of parties,[31] etc. Is Bloomberg for (weaponized/surveillance/private sector domestic drone programs?[32] What about Gaga?[-] What about the Post, or Jeff Bezos?[33] Is Bezos a plutocrat?[34] Is a drone a democracy-enhancing technology? How would drones be used for/against a protest, like the fast-food workers’?[35] What does art care about a drone?[36] Would drone-investors’ money be accepted at Sotheby’s? What does Guy Trebay think about drones? [-] Can you buy one with a credit card at Amazon? YES![37] In a dystopian, anti-democratic future/projection, could or would a drone be used by Bloomberg to identify Banksy, and assassinate him? Thankfully, we’re not there (yet).
[1] http://ambrosecurry.com/
[2] http://www.alternet.org/economy/10-filthy-rich-tax-dodging-hypocrites-pushing-disastrous-austerity-america
[3] http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bloomberg-steps-shadows-visits-crash-victims-article-1.1534364
* Curve ball alert! Byrne is emerging - after at least a decade of working the A-List scene(s) - as a Fine Contemporary Artist, with a tough CV; is a Pop Musician (long-in-the-tooth); a film and video guy (actor + director, etc); and a published author, industrial commentator, creative writer and social critic… We could go on. Like Robert Storr and other professional arts survivalists, diversity in the arts and culture (creative) portfolio is a must, and Byrne is perhaps most of all, a survivor. – Milo Santini
[4] http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/11/supreme_court_and_obamacare_contraception_mandate_are_companies_persons.html
[5] http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/park-cities/headlines/20131121-from-bush-the-painter-a-holiday-ornament.ece
[6] http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/417195/july-31-2012/jeff-koons
[7] http://marinaabramovicmademecry.tumblr.com/
[8] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/24/jeffrey-deitch-moca_n_3647925.html
[9] http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/29/another-flap-over-justin-biebers-art/
[10] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/fashion/at-art-basel-miami-beach-squeezing-art-out-of-the-picture.html
[11] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/fashion/Celebrities-like-lorde-and-daft-punk-Shying-From-Fames-Spotlight-.html
[12] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/fashion/ambling-through-bushwick-open-studios.html
[13] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_curiosities
[14] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/08/arts/design/art-and-commerce-meet-in-miami-beach.html
[15] http://mjfdesign.net/terri/7amoneyruinedsaltz.pdf
[16] http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/606-the-art-market-is-less-ethical-than-the-stock-market
[17] "Artists Decorate Palazzos, and Vice Versa," by Roberta Smith for the New York Times, June 8, 2011
[18] http://galleristny.com/2013/11/couple-shares-good-line/
[19] http://www.wwcd.org/policy/US/newdeal.html
[20] http://www.nga.gov/feature/pollock/lm1024.jpg
[21] http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/goldman-chief-says-he-is-just-doing-gods-work/
[22] http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2013/12/pope-francis-is-no-marxist-hes-a-marian.html
[23] http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/another-batch-of-wall-street-villains-freed-on-technicality-20131204
[24]On a hilltop in Italy, a long, long time ago? …No. - MILO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAgh86j5alI
[25] http://www.criticalcommons.org/Members/ironman28/clips/FFminorityReportGesturalinterfaceH264.mov/
[26] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFWt7SNSv8A
[27] http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/fbis-search-for-mo-suspect-in-bomb-threats-highlights-use-of-malware-for-surveillance/2013/12/06/352ba174-5397-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story_2.html (for the latest in the 4 dimensional protocols and practices at NSA)
[28] https://www.mint.com/the-history-of-the-credit-card/
[29] http://visual.ly/credit-card-history
[30] http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-10-01/business/42568774_1_jeff-bezos-washington-post-co-katharine-graham
[31] http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php/reports-on-protest-resistance/7971-protests-against-drones-spreading
[32] http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/bloomberg-nyc-domestic-drones-are-inevitable-1B9059138
[33] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2013/12/02/amazon-drones-a-flying-robot-may-deliver-your-christmas-gifts-in-four-or-five-years/
[34] http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/07/jeff_bezos_meet_your_fellow_media_plutocrats
[35] http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/12/04/drone-video-shows-the-extent-of-the-massive-thai-protests/
[36] http://www.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en&q=drone+art&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ei=l0yjUorkHOiysQS6nIGgBA&ved=0CC4QsAQ
[37] http://www.amazon.com/Parrot-AR-Drone-Quadricopter-Controlled-Android/dp/B007HZLLOK
[i] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-26/mayor-bloomberg-to-chair-london-s-serpentine-gallery.html
[ii] http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0010211/quotes
[iii] http://www.banksyny.com/
[iv] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/5-pointz_n_4316483.html
[v] http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mayor-bloomberg-kisses-lady-gaga-bring-2012-new-year-article-1.999425
[vi] http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/11/24/from-lady-gaga-to-jay-z-serious-art-is-ruining-pop-music.html
[vii] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Gaines
[viii] http://nymag.com/arts/all/aughts/62516/
[ix] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/13/arts/design/bacons-study-of-freud-sells-for-more-than-142-million.html
[x] A typical example: http://industry.bfi.org.uk/media/pdf/q/6/Final_final_report_20_May_version.pdf
[xi] (ibid, iv.)
[xii] A facet of Dim Tim. - Milo
[xiii] Trebay’s Rohatyn article is nothing more than decorative pulp fiction masking oligarchy. It is Baroque. Everything wrong about the 1% art world and its functionaries, gatekeepers, whores and guards, the Ship of Fools, is posited as glorious glimmer. Parsing this wretched fare fully would require its own chapter, or would make good voice-over for an atonal sound sculpture in a LES jazz bar. Witness: “For well over a decade, Ms. Greenberg Rohatyn has been a stealth force in the art world, the “art brat” daughter of a respected dealer who, after her college studies, went on to become an independent curator; a private dealer and adviser; a judge in the Bravo reality series “Work of Art: The Next Great Artist”; a widely photographed socialite with a prominent banker husband; a prodigious Democratic fund-raiser; and a proprietor of three increasingly influential galleries with clients from both inside the circles of usual art-world suspects as well as powerful and unexpected outliers like the hip-hop mogul Jay Z.” How much is “well over a decade?” It sounds like a really long time (but isn’t). Why and how is Ms. GR stealthy and forceful in the art world? Which art world? What is an “art brat?” Being the daughter of a dealer… this is as validating as the lineage of Dick and Liz Cheney in politics? What exactly is an “independent curator?” How long have they been around? These jobs (“private dealer and advisor” + curator) – are they licensed in the State of New York? OMG! Serving as “a judge in the Bravo reality series ‘Work of Art: The Next Great Artist’” is an occupation someone would admit, much less push as a positive on the resume? OMFG: “widely photographed”…married to a “prominent banker”…a “prodigious Democratic fundraiser” [!!!!!!!!!!!] – THESE ARE QUALITIES, QUALIFYING ATTRIBUTES…. FOR WHAT?! We must stop here, but I have to include my favorite line: “’Her aesthetic and taste is impeccable,’ Mr. Cohen said by telephone. ‘She is on the front end of a lot of things.’” The fluffing here is relentlessly frantic! We’re talking about the person orchestrating Jay Z at Pace! Anyway, hats off to the Times. You’re doing your part to destroy civilization and democracy, to accelerate the ascension and sustenance of the plutocracy, to announce the Apocalypse, as Mankind careens on the Edge of the Void. Have a nice day, Guy Trebay. - Milo
[xiv] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/arts/design/art-is-hard-to-see-through-the-clutter-of-dollar-signs.html
[xv] I like Agnes Martin as a good case study - Milo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnes_Martin
[xvi] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand
[xvii] See works by Charles R. Geisst (http://www.amazon.com/Charles-R.-Geisst/e/B001IQZD02)
[xviii] For a more animated summary of the crux, review the speech and resolutions of Louis T. McFadden (His story would make a great movie. – Milo): http://www.alweaver.com/mcfadden/mcfadden.htm
* If the author here seems to be leaving off many logical steps, well, yes that’s true. A linear narrative is 2D. We are utilizing a 4D methodology predicated on infinity. Time and other resources impacting depth of communication on the part of the analyst prevent full disclosure as a micro-archive of internal (or personal) practice as through-put systematic permutations. Plus, one must hedge against profiling in the current state of invasive disregard of citizen privacy freedoms, including freedom of thought, deducted or derivative of means of expression.