Comments for 1st Public White Cube http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc Working with the public’s involvement - Economic influence on artistic projects Thu, 9 Sep 2010 05:48:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 Comment on Turning the PWC into mincemeat by Koenraad Van Linden Tol http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=615#comment-379 Koenraad Van Linden Tol Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:52:20 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=615#comment-379 To SFMOMA.The first thingI lkie to say is: That the people of SFMOMA who workt together with Aoife did a fantastic job, knowing how precise she is, they most have an intuitive good feling about what she wanted to expres. Aoife's main idee is , to show poeple that you explosifs a tool of Art, instead. And if you go to her web side(aoifevanlindentol.com) you will see that some of her work is very delicate. She is surtenly not an agressif person who is blowing things up left right and center.It is great that she won.And I hope you all will meet her one day and you will discover that she is a joy to be with. All in good fate her dad Koenraad To SFMOMA.The first thingI lkie to say is: That the people of SFMOMA who workt together with Aoife did a fantastic job, knowing how precise she is, they most have an intuitive good feling about what she wanted to expres. Aoife’s main idee is , to show poeple that you explosifs a tool of Art, instead. And if you go to her web side(aoifevanlindentol.com) you will see that some of her work is very delicate.
She is surtenly not an agressif person who is blowing things up left right and center.It is great that she won.And I hope you all will meet her one day and you will discover that she is a joy to be with.
All in good fate her dad Koenraad

]]> Comment on What on earth has happened to the Public White Cube? by Snapdad Hawkins http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=503#comment-327 Snapdad Hawkins Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:50:18 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=503#comment-327 Wir sind alle Opfer der Natur. Natur tut, was gut sich fühlt. Gott hat keinen Platz in einer Gesellschaft, die auf perversion und grausamem Schicksal errichtet wird. Wenn es Gras auf dem Feld gibt, spielen Sie Kugel. Wir sind alle Opfer der Natur. Natur tut, was gut sich fühlt. Gott hat keinen Platz in einer Gesellschaft, die auf perversion und grausamem Schicksal errichtet wird. Wenn es Gras auf dem Feld gibt, spielen Sie Kugel.

]]> Comment on You could hardly fail to hear the discussions in the museum’s corridor by Scott MacLeod http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=608#comment-307 Scott MacLeod Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:21:57 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=608#comment-307 I would have been happy to have worked within the constraints of having closed doors if that constraint had been communicated to me. I would have been happy to design the installation for closed doors if someone had said: "the doors need to be closed." I would have been (not happy but) more willing to have the door-closed rule imposed upon me 1/3 of the way through the exhibition if I had been properly communicated with and if my concerns had not been trivialized. I responded voluminously to PWC's misinterpretations & misrepresentations of both my installations physical components & my intentions, but I wouldn't characterize it as an "attack." I also can't quite fit your description "chafed against the regulations and restrictions" in anywhere. That sounds like a low-level constant grumbling, which is far from the case. I had some confusion about how information was passing or not passing between you & curatorial department, and I had this issue with the doors closing. Otherwise the museum's service to the art & artist has been as excellent as ever. Installation, conservation, the guards & janitorial, all excellent in relation to this installation. I can't find any reference to "Declaredly unhappy about the continuing misappropriation of the MOMA’s curatorial staff for participative services" here on PWC site, so this is news to me. I am not certain what this phrase of yours means: "lays claim to all the conservational care that he begins to resent when the museum refuses to open the door to Pandora’s Box." When you say "he suspects us of bigotry" - it's this kind of thing that makes me a little frustrated with you, because (a) I think it is inaccurate and (b) it suggests to the reader that I used the word "bigotry," which I didn't and which is a word that seems to me entirely innappropriate here. And how do you get the impression that I have an "intuitive sense that all our rules hamper aesthetic freedom." That's ridiculous. I am entirely the kind of person who functions far more efficiently & creatively within a clearly-defined system of constraints. It's when the rules are changed mid-game, or when rules are invisible, fast & loose, miscommunicated, misused, etc that I get frustrated & start feeling a bit hopeless, as I have all weekend & as I do now on my way to take the bus to work. I too, for a moment, thought it was funny. Now I wish I hadn't made my bid. I would have been happy to have worked within the constraints of having closed doors if that constraint had been communicated to me. I would have been happy to design the installation for closed doors if someone had said: “the doors need to be closed.” I would have been (not happy but) more willing to have the door-closed rule imposed upon me 1/3 of the way through the exhibition if I had been properly communicated with and if my concerns had not been trivialized.

I responded voluminously to PWC’s misinterpretations & misrepresentations of both my installations physical components & my intentions, but I wouldn’t characterize it as an “attack.” I also can’t quite fit your description “chafed against the regulations and restrictions” in anywhere. That sounds like a low-level constant grumbling, which is far from the case. I had some confusion about how information was passing or not passing between you & curatorial department, and I had this issue with the doors closing. Otherwise the museum’s service to the art & artist has been as excellent as ever. Installation, conservation, the guards & janitorial, all excellent in relation to this installation.

I can’t find any reference to “Declaredly unhappy about the continuing misappropriation of the MOMA’s curatorial staff for participative services” here on PWC site, so this is news to me.

I am not certain what this phrase of yours means: “lays claim to all the conservational care that he begins to resent when the museum refuses to open the door to Pandora’s Box.”

When you say “he suspects us of bigotry” - it’s this kind of thing that makes me a little frustrated with you, because (a) I think it is inaccurate and (b) it suggests to the reader that I used the word “bigotry,” which I didn’t and which is a word that seems to me entirely innappropriate here. And how do you get the impression that I have an “intuitive sense that all our rules hamper aesthetic freedom.” That’s ridiculous. I am entirely the kind of person who functions far more efficiently & creatively within a clearly-defined system of constraints. It’s when the rules are changed mid-game, or when rules are invisible, fast & loose, miscommunicated, misused, etc that I get frustrated & start feeling a bit hopeless, as I have all weekend & as I do now on my way to take the bus to work. I too, for a moment, thought it was funny. Now I wish I hadn’t made my bid.

]]> Comment on Phew! Our friend Scott certainly knows how to keep us on our toes by Scott MacLeod http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-306 Scott MacLeod Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:21:42 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-306 So Karl Heinz you were prescient about the “hidden rules” you mentioned above. On Friday the Curatorial Department of SFMOMA surprised me by enforcing a previously invisible rule that they had made (possibly in agreement with you? - I'm not clear about it) - they ordered the main doors to my installation closed. When I went to find out why, they just said "it's a curatorial decision" and that the doors were "insignificant." I argued that in fact the doors were important, that I had designed the installation partially in relation to the doors being open - as the logical entry point for the majority of visitors - and the sightlines, ie the sequence in which the viewer would see the various components was in fact important to me. In response to my argument, SFMOMA's Curatorial Department representative xxxxx <sup><strong>1</strong></sup> said “It doesn’t matter. People can just turn their head to the left when they enter the room.” So, in the end, I had no recourse, it was obvious she had not the capacity or authority to change the decision. So now you & I know the answer to one of the questions we have been thinking about this week, that jurisdiction belongs not to the artist behind the webcam nor to the artist on site, but to the institution with real space. I think we suspected as much. Anyway caveat emptor, as always. In any case it was a great experience and a great bargain (though not as great as this week's!) and also now my life is much easier: now I know that when I hang my paintings, I don't need to bother to hang them straight, because the viewer can always just tilt their head to the left. - That's "participation" ! <sup><strong>1</strong></sup> <strong>name deleted on request</strong> So Karl Heinz you were prescient about the “hidden rules” you mentioned above. On Friday the Curatorial Department of SFMOMA surprised me by enforcing a previously invisible rule that they had made (possibly in agreement with you? - I’m not clear about it) - they ordered the main doors to my installation closed. When I went to find out why, they just said “it’s a curatorial decision” and that the doors were “insignificant.” I argued that in fact the doors were important, that I had designed the installation partially in relation to the doors being open - as the logical entry point for the majority of visitors - and the sightlines, ie the sequence in which the viewer would see the various components was in fact important to me. In response to my argument, SFMOMA’s Curatorial Department representative xxxxx 1 said “It doesn’t matter. People can just turn their head to the left when they enter the room.” So, in the end, I had no recourse, it was obvious she had not the capacity or authority to change the decision. So now you & I know the answer to one of the questions we have been thinking about this week, that jurisdiction belongs not to the artist behind the webcam nor to the artist on site, but to the institution with real space. I think we suspected as much. Anyway caveat emptor, as always. In any case it was a great experience and a great bargain (though not as great as this week’s!) and also now my life is much easier: now I know that when I hang my paintings, I don’t need to bother to hang them straight, because the viewer can always just tilt their head to the left. - That’s “participation” !
1 name deleted on request

]]> Comment on Tim Roseborough aka Arthur Basille by pwc http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=599#comment-305 pwc Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:37:41 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=599#comment-305 This refers to comment #1 at http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=578#comments This refers to comment #1 at http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=578#comments

]]> Comment on Tim Roseborough aka Arthur Basille by Scott MacLeod http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=599#comment-303 Scott MacLeod Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:37:01 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=599#comment-303 What kind of statement has MOMA requested from you? Why do you think they would need to have a statement from you? Is this post (above) the statement you are providing in response to this request? What kind of statement has MOMA requested from you? Why do you think they would need to have a statement from you? Is this post (above) the statement you are providing in response to this request?

]]> Comment on Phew! Our friend Scott certainly knows how to keep us on our toes by Scott MacLeod http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-302 Scott MacLeod Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:32:02 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-302 It certainly wasn't my intention to get involved in a ruckus; I just wanted to take advantage of the cheap rental rate for a room in the museum. But I do have a low tolerance for certain things & I tend to respond without too much forethought. But it's probably healthy exercise for both of us, exercising certain muscles without overdoing it. So I'm glad you understand that, yes, I am somewhat protective of my work but I have not meant here to denigrate yours. Your work here is, I think, complicated, ambitious & perhaps only beginning. Your project's taglines are "working with the public's involvement" and "economic influence on artistic projects," but I don't see that there has been too much connection here at sfmoma to those two concepts. Really, how has the public been involved? Tim Roseborough & Annette Halm seem to be quite professional artists, Jeanne Henzel Shwartz I can't tell, but if she is the public my guess is she is very informed public. Arthur Basile I don't know. But I think in general here the involvement of the "public" is minimal. The iterations in Germany look more interesting, more sustained, I think it might be due to the nature of that space, perhaps to the cross connections socially (I'm assuming it's more local to you) - but this is only conjecture & I cannot extrapolate as much information from the documentation photos & notes as I can here, having the benefit of direct observation etc. And as to the "economic influence," it's a good concept but I'm not sure I'm too interested so far in what I, as an informed public & participant, have been able to observe or understand from the results. It's to the highest bidder, with attendant consequences: it's cute, it's frustrating, it's excellent, depending on one's success or failure within a very simple financial interaction. But I don;t know if I have any insight into anything like "economic influence etc." Maybe it's enough, as an experiment, to just act out the financial transaction, just as my experiment is simply to put some objects arranged in a space so that I can observe and analyze how they interact with each other. Do the things that I think are happening happen? Is this line of inquiry worth pursuing? I'll make my own determination & my hope is that (with a building stuffed with people whose business it is to have opinions & knowledge about art) maybe some few people in the museum will give me also some feedback about this. I hope my "conversation" with you will be understood as part of your project, not as something outside of or counter to it. Anyway, I think this project of yours has many many possibilities and I wish you all the best with any future versions you produce. I just don't think too many of the possibilities that were articulated here at SFMOMA were very interesting ones. Tant pis. In my opinion, museums usually make things less interesting, not more. They are more like supermarkets than like farmers' markets. So for you & I, as farmers AND as people who need certain kinds of sustenance, well, even if we prefer the seasonal & local, we do go to the supermarket for some things, because the supermarket is an arrangement of economic relationships & assets that is able to provide for instance cucumbers from Chile, tangerines in July & art projects from Berlin. Maybe we can have a coffee next time I'm in Berlin. It certainly wasn’t my intention to get involved in a ruckus; I just wanted to take advantage of the cheap rental rate for a room in the museum. But I do have a low tolerance for certain things & I tend to respond without too much forethought. But it’s probably healthy exercise for both of us, exercising certain muscles without overdoing it. So I’m glad you understand that, yes, I am somewhat protective of my work but I have not meant here to denigrate yours. Your work here is, I think, complicated, ambitious & perhaps only beginning. Your project’s taglines are “working with the public’s involvement” and “economic influence on artistic projects,” but I don’t see that there has been too much connection here at sfmoma to those two concepts. Really, how has the public been involved? Tim Roseborough & Annette Halm seem to be quite professional artists, Jeanne Henzel Shwartz I can’t tell, but if she is the public my guess is she is very informed public. Arthur Basile I don’t know. But I think in general here the involvement of the “public” is minimal. The iterations in Germany look more interesting, more sustained, I think it might be due to the nature of that space, perhaps to the cross connections socially (I’m assuming it’s more local to you) - but this is only conjecture & I cannot extrapolate as much information from the documentation photos & notes as I can here, having the benefit of direct observation etc. And as to the “economic influence,” it’s a good concept but I’m not sure I’m too interested so far in what I, as an informed public & participant, have been able to observe or understand from the results. It’s to the highest bidder, with attendant consequences: it’s cute, it’s frustrating, it’s excellent, depending on one’s success or failure within a very simple financial interaction. But I don;t know if I have any insight into anything like “economic influence etc.” Maybe it’s enough, as an experiment, to just act out the financial transaction, just as my experiment is simply to put some objects arranged in a space so that I can observe and analyze how they interact with each other. Do the things that I think are happening happen? Is this line of inquiry worth pursuing? I’ll make my own determination & my hope is that (with a building stuffed with people whose business it is to have opinions & knowledge about art) maybe some few people in the museum will give me also some feedback about this. I hope my “conversation” with you will be understood as part of your project, not as something outside of or counter to it.

Anyway, I think this project of yours has many many possibilities and I wish you all the best with any future versions you produce. I just don’t think too many of the possibilities that were articulated here at SFMOMA were very interesting ones. Tant pis. In my opinion, museums usually make things less interesting, not more. They are more like supermarkets than like farmers’ markets. So for you & I, as farmers AND as people who need certain kinds of sustenance, well, even if we prefer the seasonal & local, we do go to the supermarket for some things, because the supermarket is an arrangement of economic relationships & assets that is able to provide for instance cucumbers from Chile, tangerines in July & art projects from Berlin. Maybe we can have a coffee next time I’m in Berlin.

]]> Comment on Phew! Our friend Scott certainly knows how to keep us on our toes by pwc http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-301 pwc Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:15:16 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-301 First of all: Sorry for mistaking the thermometers for clocks. Indeed, it was really hard to tell from the pictures. Secondly, this confusion is a pity to some extend – a close observation of the thermometers would have shown much more correctly what was going on in the public white cube during the last days. The air quickly heated – all the little disputes, the quarrels, the discussion and especially your decision to go public with all that on the website really brought the project to a new level. Because from that point on we were really talking about "participation" For what is at stake now is nothing less then the question of power in terms of our monopoly of interpretation. You challenged us, we responded – and the other way around. Our fights teased out the hidden rules, which to a certain extend are built into the art-system: the whole set of desires and destinctions, the borders existing between in and out, the rules of crediting and the roles to be played. In the end, your participation made a really remarkable contribution, Scott. Thank you for that. First of all: Sorry for mistaking the thermometers for clocks. Indeed,
it was really hard to tell from the pictures. Secondly, this confusion
is a pity to some extend – a close observation of the thermometers
would have shown much more correctly what was going on in the public
white cube during the last days. The air quickly heated – all the
little disputes, the quarrels, the discussion and especially your
decision to go public with all that on the website really brought the
project to a new level. Because from that point on we were really
talking about “participation” For what is at stake now is nothing less
then the question of power in terms of our monopoly of interpretation.
You challenged us, we responded – and the other way around. Our fights
teased out the hidden rules, which to a certain extend are built into
the art-system: the whole set of desires and destinctions, the borders
existing between in and out, the rules of crediting and the roles to
be played. In the end, your participation made a really remarkable
contribution, Scott. Thank you for that.

]]> Comment on Situation Room by Scott MacLeod http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=583#comment-300 Scott MacLeod Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:52:25 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=583#comment-300 Oh eBay isn't that complicated a business & neither is communication. One simply pays attention to other people & what they say & then tries to give them the kind of treatment one would like oneself. It's great you fixed things quickly but I don;t think you should make too big a thing of me asking you to correct spelling of my name. Beyond simple respect, it's a museum & one expects things to be done right. When I helped install Ledia's sand, I tried to do things as well as possible, it's part of my job at museum. And you were the one who specifically asked me for permission to give out the information about my cv, experience etc as an artist. Sure I was enthusiastic in my response, but I didn't initiate request & really couldn't care less one way or the other. "iron principle of artistic authorship and vita" makes me laugh because of what I know about my history, feelings, activities etc specifically in regards to these types of issues of authorship etc. That you do not know anything of these is almost proof of the pudding. Anyway, sticks & stones I guess, but why can't we all get along instead? But maybe we can't? It does appear from your post of 1/15 7:28 that sitting staring through your webcam has touched some nerve, rubbed off some scab, raised some issue for you, as it is a little vituperative & unseemly. More so than necessary I think. And again I have to laugh - this image of MOMA staff "hurrying" to make my work easier is pretty hysterical. Everyone's doing their job, I would imagine. James is taking pictures, Melissa printed a label for me to nail on the wall, the guards are guarding, John swept up some sand that I missed in my own sweeping. I guess that others are slaving away for me, arranging press interviews, magazine covers, catalogs, etc - all the complicated work involved in "mission control" for such a space flight - I'm sure they are all very busy with this because I haven't seen them anywhere - so they must be busy with such thing. It's always busy on Planet MacLeod & why not? Maybe it's just a gambit, a ploy to elicit some reaction? Some of my vast army of personal assistants are of that opinion. I'd like to chat more but excuse me, I have to go downstairs now & find out why my damned lackeys & minions haven't finished the laundry, the vacuuming, the dish-washing, let the dog out, opened the bills etc. Ciao from the Magnetic Master. Oh eBay isn’t that complicated a business & neither is communication. One simply pays attention to other people & what they say & then tries to give them the kind of treatment one would like oneself. It’s great you fixed things quickly but I don;t think you should make too big a thing of me asking you to correct spelling of my name. Beyond simple respect, it’s a museum & one expects things to be done right. When I helped install Ledia’s sand, I tried to do things as well as possible, it’s part of my job at museum. And you were the one who specifically asked me for permission to give out the information about my cv, experience etc as an artist. Sure I was enthusiastic in my response, but I didn’t initiate request & really couldn’t care less one way or the other. “iron principle of artistic authorship and vita” makes me laugh because of what I know about my history, feelings, activities etc specifically in regards to these types of issues of authorship etc. That you do not know anything of these is almost proof of the pudding. Anyway, sticks & stones I guess, but why can’t we all get along instead? But maybe we can’t? It does appear from your post of 1/15 7:28 that sitting staring through your webcam has touched some nerve, rubbed off some scab, raised some issue for you, as it is a little vituperative & unseemly. More so than necessary I think. And again I have to laugh - this image of MOMA staff “hurrying” to make my work easier is pretty hysterical. Everyone’s doing their job, I would imagine. James is taking pictures, Melissa printed a label for me to nail on the wall, the guards are guarding, John swept up some sand that I missed in my own sweeping. I guess that others are slaving away for me, arranging press interviews, magazine covers, catalogs, etc - all the complicated work involved in “mission control” for such a space flight - I’m sure they are all very busy with this because I haven’t seen them anywhere - so they must be busy with such thing. It’s always busy on Planet MacLeod & why not? Maybe it’s just a gambit, a ploy to elicit some reaction? Some of my vast army of personal assistants are of that opinion. I’d like to chat more but excuse me, I have to go downstairs now & find out why my damned lackeys & minions haven’t finished the laundry, the vacuuming, the dish-washing, let the dog out, opened the bills etc. Ciao from the Magnetic Master.

]]> Comment on Phew! Our friend Scott certainly knows how to keep us on our toes by Scott MacLeod http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-299 Scott MacLeod Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:30:11 +0000 http://publicwhitecube.com/pwc/?p=589#comment-299 Corrections: They are thermometers, not clocks. And the white board has written on it also "white, bored." It's just a little hard to see things clearly from such distances: camera to wall, camera to Europe etc. Such a small window. Not "heralded," just mentioned. Not blood, just ink. Not against sand or pretensions, I think. Not against anything, really. Just looking specifically at one component of your project, the commercial perspective, and deciding that in spite of my current poverty, it would be worth a few hundred dollars to have a chance to realize a version of this installation in a setting which is close to that for which is designed - meaning that it was designed for gallery associated with local government more than for art setting, but this is "official" enough so that audience might be an appropriate one. Maybe. It's an experiment, to buy a chance to make this work in such a setting. Instead of, for instance, working ten-fifteen more years (on top of already 28 years) to have such a chance. And it is also an experiment with that part of your project, the commercial aspect, and sure, maybe it would be "better" of me to make a better relationship to "participation" or to Ledia's sand et, but well it's just not to be. Ledia's sand becomes part of my scenario instead of mine being an addition to hers. Anyway it is all a kind of feeling-around in the dark here, a kind of experiment for me & for you & I guess for Rudolf too. And I do think I mean to bump around a little, why not? The other iterations have been kind of soft core, except for initial two-pound ape merle haggard sex shack, okay, but not too many roads leading out from that shack really. I don't like being made fun of or having my words twisted around, but I guess I have paid my money so I must take my chances, as you also are taking some chances. We have both crossed the line between public & private emails, which has maybe made something simple become complicated. I'd prefer not to have a macho arm-wrestle, I'm pretty tired from working etc & I kind of enjoy having some work hanging in museum & want to keep enjoying it rather than feeling the need to defend myself. Anyway, it's your game so I have to play along to some extent. it would be easier to explain to visitors if it was my show only & not within Ledia // Cube // Participation // Moma. But what could I expect from bargain-basement price of $108.02? And yes I am interested in transparency & yes I hope you do see all this as "participation." And I am curious to see how the next successful bidder will handle this. Corrections: They are thermometers, not clocks. And the white board has written on it also “white, bored.” It’s just a little hard to see things clearly from such distances: camera to wall, camera to Europe etc. Such a small window. Not “heralded,” just mentioned. Not blood, just ink. Not against sand or pretensions, I think. Not against anything, really. Just looking specifically at one component of your project, the commercial perspective, and deciding that in spite of my current poverty, it would be worth a few hundred dollars to have a chance to realize a version of this installation in a setting which is close to that for which is designed - meaning that it was designed for gallery associated with local government more than for art setting, but this is “official” enough so that audience might be an appropriate one. Maybe. It’s an experiment, to buy a chance to make this work in such a setting. Instead of, for instance, working ten-fifteen more years (on top of already 28 years) to have such a chance. And it is also an experiment with that part of your project, the commercial aspect, and sure, maybe it would be “better” of me to make a better relationship to “participation” or to Ledia’s sand et, but well it’s just not to be. Ledia’s sand becomes part of my scenario instead of mine being an addition to hers. Anyway it is all a kind of feeling-around in the dark here, a kind of experiment for me & for you & I guess for Rudolf too. And I do think I mean to bump around a little, why not? The other iterations have been kind of soft core, except for initial two-pound ape merle haggard sex shack, okay, but not too many roads leading out from that shack really. I don’t like being made fun of or having my words twisted around, but I guess I have paid my money so I must take my chances, as you also are taking some chances. We have both crossed the line between public & private emails, which has maybe made something simple become complicated. I’d prefer not to have a macho arm-wrestle, I’m pretty tired from working etc & I kind of enjoy having some work hanging in museum & want to keep enjoying it rather than feeling the need to defend myself. Anyway, it’s your game so I have to play along to some extent. it would be easier to explain to visitors if it was my show only & not within Ledia // Cube // Participation // Moma. But what could I expect from bargain-basement price of $108.02? And yes I am interested in transparency & yes I hope you do see all this as “participation.” And I am curious to see how the next successful bidder will handle this.

]]>