Comments on: Artists I Like: Nava Lubelski

By: Arthur Whitman

Arthur Whitman — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:55:00 +0000

Everything else being background.

By: Arthur Whitman

Arthur Whitman — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:54:13 +0000

But I suppose I mainly just think they look cool.

By: Arthur Whitman

Arthur Whitman — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:50:02 +0000

The needlework contains and pretties the stains up as well as emphasizing them. At least with the pieces I’ve seen in person, the stains would not be visually compelling enough by themselves to sustain attention. I agree though that the paintings are much more complicated the statement lets on.

By: Steve Durbin

Steve Durbin — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:33:28 +0000

Leslie,

I enjoyed seeing the Amer works, thanks for the link! She seems to be in full command of her materials, but I wish I could see them up close. Probably a good thing I don’t live in New York, though, I’d never get anything else done.

Arthur,

I agree, mending and decoration are not incompatible. But it does leave the “feminine” needlework celebrating (Leslie’s word) or emphasizing (mine) the “masculine” spoiling and destruction, which seems problematic. There’s no requirement that this be resolved, but the statement seems not to address it. Unless this is “flirting” (Lubelski’s word) with the “predominantly male.”

By: Leslie Holt

Leslie Holt — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:50:15 +0000

Jay,
I was fortunate to see a Bontecou exhibit a few years ago. You are right – these are not tender, delicate or domestic stitches she is using. And that is part of her work’s power – she takes this vernacular, familiar in one context, and transforms it into something else. The ones with the deep dark holes are frighteningly powerful!

Arthur,
Bombastic is kind of a harsh way to categorize her statment, but it does feel like she reached for significance where she could have left it alone. It is hard not to be self conscious about the use of certain materials.

By: Sunil Gangadharan

Sunil Gangadharan — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:01:24 +0000

Original work. Some of the staining is very well executed. Looks like she also cut off some of the canvas (there seems to be a huge hole in A Lie About Birds and Bees and some of the stretchers seem to show throug – or is it an artifact of her stains) and then stitched them back together.. Not my kind of art but it is original and visually appealing.

By: Arthur Whitman

Arthur Whitman — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 01:00:46 +0000

She implies a negative view of the stains (they spoil), but I love them for their colors and gradations and edge shapes (if this is a guy thing, so be it). And I don’t see the emboidery as mending, but rather decorating (a loaded word here the last few days?) or emphasizing the stains.

I think of these interpretations as being complementary rather than opposed to Lubelski’s own. Stains can be be shameful or immoral and at the same time be beautiful. This might be a contradiction of sorts, but not one that can’t be contained in a work of art. And there are connections between decoration and mending too. In addition to their associations with “women’s work”, they are both possible responses to imperfections or damage. If there is an unsightly spot on the floor, you might put a rug there.