A Glib Familiarity with Labels : Open Thread

For me personally, there seem to be two benefits to this recession (among a host of truly sucky disadvantages): 1) necessity is proving to be the mother of invention, and as we solve the problems that crop up daily, I'm more and more aware how much fun problem-solving can be...not that it isn't stressful, but there is a fabulous satisfaction that comes from seeing a solution you came up with work; 2) the downturn in activity affords ample opportunity for reflection.

One such reflection effort will be "#class," the second exhibition in our new location, that's being organized by Jennifer Dalton and William Powhida:

Jennifer Dalton and William Powhida will transform Winkleman Gallery into a classroom workspace in which the public audience, guest artists, critics, academics, dealers, and collectors will discuss the role of class in the art world and identify and propose alternatives/reforms/solutions to the current market system. The notion of the gallery as a work space will be explored aesthetically, socially, critically, and academically.

The Wall Street Journal's Candace Jackson spoke with Jen and Bill last week about their plans and posted a great summary on the WSJ blog Speakeasy. I'll share more details on how you too can get involved with this effort soon.

But in thinking about the plans Jen and Bill have been sharing with me, I've been reflecting too on the overarching hierarchy in the art world, not just within the commercial art market, and realized that if, as is often the case, the fish stinks from the head down (and don't get me wrong here...I'm not one for throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but I am open to hearing other people's opinions about how the system/s can be improved), it makes sense to spend some time examining how museums works. They do represent the pinnacle of art appreciation, and all good art supposedly flows uphill into them, so understanding how they operate seems a good place to begin my search for better understanding.

Current events unfold in unpredictable ways, and I'm searching for more concrete foundations on which to form my opinions, therefore, I thought I'd look back a bit and see what I might cull from how museums have operated through the years, or even more important, what drives civilizations (especially Western civilizations with which I'm much more familiar and therefore more qualified to comment on) to build museums. Fortunately, a very handy summary of the central drive was provided in an essay by E.M. Forester titled "For the Museum's Sake" (1920) (reprinted in the collection Abinger Harvest (1964) [pp. 290-297]). He begins with a history of the renewed interest in antiquity that sprung forth during the Renaissance, but then carries on to note how the search for authentic ancient objects quickened:

In the nineteenth century the soil was scratched all over the globe, rivers were dammed, rocks chipped, natives tortured, hooks were let down into the sea. What had happened? Partly an increase in science and taste, but also the arrival of a purchaser, wealthier than cardinals and quite as unscrupulous---the modern European nation. After the Treaty of Vienna every progressive government felt it a duty to amass old objects, and to exhibit a fraction of them in a building called a Museum, which was occasionally open free. "National possessions" they were now called, and it was important that they should outnumber the objects possessed by other nations, and should be genuine old objects, and not imitations,which looked the same, but were said to be discreditable.

Once the Museum's importance as a symbol of national pride was established, and most of the genuine old objects that could be excavated seemed to have been divvied up among those with the means to steal/secure them, it was only a matter of time until plans to either expand existing spaces or build museums to house objects that were not so old would occur to the proliferating purchasers. And hence, the dawn of the contemporary art museum or contemporary wings within existing museums. (I've looked for which institution claims to be the world's first contemporary art museum but can't figure that out...anyone?).

What seems to define the excess of the typical Western museum most is the ratio of objects it possesses versus the number the viewing public has access to. In his essay, Forster tells of how the British Museum smuggled the Papyrus of Ani (the Book of the Dead) out of Egypt even though (because taking it out of Egypt was illegal) they wouldn't be able to display it. In doing so, Forster hits on what I think are two of the central flaws in how we currently build and/or interact with museums:

The dreariness and snobbery of the Museum business come out strong beneath this tale of derring-do [i.e., the smuggling tale]. Our "national possessions" are not accessible, nor do we insist that they should be; for our pride in them is merely competitive. Nor do such fractions as are accessible stimulate our sense of beauty or of religion [EW: not that that remains the end-all experience, mind you...but...]: as far as Museums breed anything it is a glib familiarity with labels.

Indeed, both those criticisms ring true for me today: 1) our pride in what is possessed in our museums is far too often merely competitive; and 2) this serves to feed a "been there, done that" approach to visiting them.

Upon our return from our first trip to Berlin this past fall, for example, during which Bambino and I saw dozens of art spaces (museums, galleries, private collections, fairs, etc.), several times, when sharing our experiences, we were asked, "You didn't make it to Museum X?" (as if that in and of itself should have been our very top priority). All of which tells me that the competitive pride Forster noted in his day has more recently morphed past just the number or prestige of objects in any given museum and into the number of museums you can check off your list. Seriously, our trip was packed with art viewing, but for some folks it somehow still wasn't enough. As it is, when I return to Berlin, my hope is to spend even more time at the Museums we had visited.

I suspect the push for more and more attendance, more and more expansion, more and more endowments, etc. is related to all this, but I've gone all long enough here.

Consider this an open thread on what might be the alternatives/solutions here? How might what/how much we collect move away from being based on a competitive drive and move toward something more admirable? And what can curb the "been there, done that" approach to museum viewing that that competitive drive seems to foster?

The Decade That Wasn't as Bad as Its Rep

I got a lovely Facebook note from my 13-year-old niece the other day. She lives with her mother (my sister), father, three other sisters and brother in another state, so I only get to see her on rare occassions. Let's call her K.

K has come to symbolize to me everything that is right about this world. Born with spina bifida and forced to wear a leg brace, I have never once seen her let that get her down, whether she's chasing her siblings across the yard, back in the hospital for more surgery, or dreaming about her future, she is an energetic burst of good cheer in a gorgeous face and it's not overstating the case to say she has this way of making the clouds part and the sun come out when she smiles at you. Life has been one challenge after another for K, but she remains a paragon of optimism. I honestly don't know how she does it.

I've been thinking a fair bit this year (with the passing of a few dear friends) about optimism. Wisdom, it seems, is the burden of age. Optimism, especially in the face of contradictory evidence, is the burden of youth and the young at heart. On the radio this morning, I heard the "man in the street" interview people about the decade that's passing. Despite turmoil and conflict from beginning to end of the last 10 years, the young folks he interviewed had big plans and big dreams. And even the grumpy older guy who was pessimistic about the future admitted that that won't stop him from buying lottery tickets (the epitome of optimism, if you ask me).

Someone recently scrawled on the wall in our local subway station that all in all things are actually not that bad. Indeed, compared to what Europe was like during WWII or the US was like during the Civil War or plenty of other places (Iran, Afghanistan, etc.) are like right now, overall life is pretty damn good here. Yes, there are hardships, anxieties, stress out the wazoo, and even heart-breaking deaths, but no one is bombing our city on a nightly basis or breaking in with machine guns and searching our home, food is plentiful (if expensive), the water and heat work in our building, we still have friends and loved ones around us. Even the act of contemplating how nice it would be to have a Porsche or a penthouse apartment is, itself, an extreme luxury we shouldn't take for granted.

Plenty of people are bidding "good riddance" to the decade this week. From Paul Krugman ("It was a decade in which nothing good happened, and none of the optimistic things we were supposed to believe turned out to be true.") to Time Magazine who called it "the worst decade ever," I have to wonder what zapped their memories. Surely they can recall worse decades with just a moment's reflection (the 1930's anyone?). Why all this mindless self-pity? (Because it sells newspapers and magazines?)

I intend to take away from the tail-end of this decade how happy I am to have my health, my darling Bambino, our friends and family, our gallery, and how if a 13-year-old girl with more on her plate than any of the chattering class will likely have to deal with in their lifetime can find the courage and strength to look forward to her own bright future, I simply won't be a part to wallowing in the negative or focusing on how horrible life has been. Life has been grand! And I so look forward to much, much more of the same if this is as bad as it gets.

Have a very Happy New Year! I wish you optimism and growth in 2010!

Umida Ahmedova

Full disclosure: We work with several artists who use documentary film and photography methods in their artwork. As in all artwork, the medium (even when it is the message) serves the end, not the means, in my opinion. Great artwork that is created through documentary processes is still great artwork.

This is an anti-art horror story that needs far more international attention by artists and everyone who believes in universal freedom of expression.

On November 17, acclaimed Uzbek artist Umida Ahmedova was summoned to the Police station in Tashkent (the capital of Uzbekistan) to be questioned and informed that she was being charged with "insult and slander against Uzbek people and traditions."

According to Umida Akhmedova, captain Nodir Akhmadzhanov, investigator of the Tashkent city police department, told her that the criminal charges have been filed against all local authors who cooperated with the Gender Program of the Swiss Embassy. Akhmedova is incriminated in the production of “Women and men: from dawn till dusk” photo album [EN - phtos], produced in 2007 under support of Swiss Embassy Gender Program, writes Fergana.ru. There's no information on other authors against whom the charges were filed. The website continues:

The investigator explained Umida Akhmedova that the case against her was produced, based on conclusions of Tashkent public prosecutor’s office experts, noting that the album “is the insult and slander of Uzbek people”. At the same time, it is absolutely unclear which photo (not the photomontage, not the screen version) may be “slander” or “insult”. It is also not clear who and when authorized Uzbek agency for press and information, the state structure, to represent the outraged honor of Uzbek people.

Umida Akhmedova shared first time she was called by police on November 17. Captain Nodir Akhmadzhanov invited her to Mirabad RDIA to give the report of witness on her “Women and men: from dawn to dusk” album. The investigator interviewed Umida for two hours and asked questions, related to Akhmedova’s participation in the production of photo album and as such movies as “Men and women: rites and ritual” and “The burden of virginity” EN]

On the Canadian website Zone of Tensions, an open appeal to the international art community to speak out on behalf of Umida's right to present such artwork un-harassed by uniformed Uzbek bureaucrats, summarizes what's at stake in this:

It is important to mention that freedom of expression is one of the key criteria of any state governed by the rule of law. Judging any artwork should be done by experts and viewers and not by forces of any official organs. Art is not equal with social and political journalism and cannot be viewed as a “document” in legal sense, therefore it cannot be an agent of “slander”.

Photographs of Umida Ahmedova possess obvious artistic value and are considered as Central Asian cultural asserts by international professional community. The government should be proud of the creativity of the talented photographer and not threaten her with criminal persecution.

Umida has worked with our artists, Gulnara Kasmalieva and Muratbek Djumaliev, and participated in their 4th International Exhibition of Contemporary Art in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, this past year. Her credentials as a recognized fine artist are solid. Granted, Ahmedova's work has been presented in journalistic contexts. This image, for example, of life in Tashkent, Uzbekistan appeared (courtesy of the Associated Press) on the New York Times website. But the images for which she's being charged with slander were clearly (to my eye at least) created as artwork. Here are a few (posted here to illustrate this point from her website here): and the one that simply breaks my heart (cultural traditions, duly noted, but still....Ouch! [even the man I assume is the boy's father is clearly in anguish...can't they figure out a less traumatic way to go about this?]): Now, when you begin to pick this story apart it seems to reveal a sneaky government effort to find some way to punish Ahmedova for her film, “The burden of virginity.” This film discusses in details a cultural practice that leads to many destroyed lives (men and women) over things that really are no one else's business:

According to the old tradition, the relatives of the groom want to demonstrate the bed sheet with blood spots as an evidence of virginity after the wedding night. It is a big shame for the girl if the bed sheet is clean. Sometimes, the newly wedded couple paints the bed sheet with the blood, prepared in advance. According to the film characters, there were even few cases of suicide among frustrated husbands.

It seems to my mind, though, that the Uzbek government knows they're on shaky legal ground in building their case against Ahmedova, so they're combining their objections to this film with trumped up objections to the “Women and men: from dawn till dusk” photo album because that series was commissioned by a foreign embassy. According to this article on the website for the Association for Women's Rights in Development:

On 16 December 2009 Umida Ahmedova was called to Mirobod Department of Internal Affairs, where she learnt that she was officially suspected of charges of slander (article 139) and insult (articles 140) and article 190 “conducting activities without license” of the Uzbek Criminal Code. She was advised to hire a lawyer. The charges relate to the publication of an album of her photographs, “Women and Men: From Dawn to Dusk”, published in 2007; “Women and Men in Customs and Rituals” a documentary film also produced by Umida Akhmedova with the assistance of the Swiss Embassy Gender Program; and to “Virginity Code” produced by Umida Akhmedova but not finally approved by the Gender Program.

“Women and Men: From Dawn to Dusk” contains 110 photographs which reflect the life and traditions of the people of Uzbekistan. The Tashkent Prosecutor's Office has brought charges on the basis that the album of photographs and film constituted “an insult and slander of the Uzbek people”. The charges carry a possible sentence of imprisonment up to six months, or 2-3 years of “correctional work”.

Uzbek regulations require any publication produced by an NGO or international organisation to receive permission from state officials, including the Cabinet of Ministers.

That last bit seems critical for the prosecution. Should they fail to prove the work is slanderous, they can at least save face by wrangling a conviction on article 190. The only problem there, though, as noted above, is that none of the other Uzbek artists participating in the Swiss program have been singled out. All of which convinces me that it's her film and not her photographs that have the Uzbek government's undies in a bunch. As such, it seems that Ahmedova is being used to send a message to other Uzbek artists.

Fortunately, in this era of mass communication, such messages can go both directions. The website Frontline has a pre-written letter you can send to the Uzbek government here. But feel free to express yourself in your own words about this matter. Here's the contact info for the Uzbek President:

President Islam Karimov
Office of the President
43 Uzbekistan Avenue
700163 Tashkent
Email: presidents_office@press-service.uz

Free Desks

Bambino and I had a lovely Christmas weekend, but spent about 12 hours yesterday moving from our current space into our new space. It's shaping up nicely, but the two very well-made desks (office desk and reception desk) we inherited (very generously from Zach Feuer) will not fit in the new space, so we're giving them away for free to anyone who will come collect them by this Thursday.

The office desk has a drawer and two sliding shelves (great for a printer that you tuck away) as well as a well-designed system for your cables and such. The base is wood veneer and the top is matte black Formica (I'm guessing).

The reception desk (pictured just a bit in the photo on the cover of my book [below]) has the same design and is on wheels. Both are somewhat heavy, but Bambino and I moved them from 24th Street to 27th Street by ourselves when we first inherited them.

Please call 212.643.3152 and leave a message (we'll call you back) or email (info [at] winkleman.com) if you'd like to come by and see them. Again, we must vacate the space (meaning with the desks gone somehow) by Thursday.

Top 10 New York Art World News Stories of 2009

If you'll indulge me just a bit (this format isn't my forte I've found, but it's fun and apparently that time of year again, so...), I'll give this my best effort. Here are what I would call the top 10 New York Art World news stories of 2009, selected in terms of entirely unscientific, anecdotal evidence of how frequently they came up at cocktail parties and such:

10. The art market turns away from that light at the end of the tunnel and returns to consciousness...only to find it's still in intensive care. Despite nearly universal relief that things picked up a bit in the fall of 2009 (after what can be described as a Spring and Summer sales season straight out of Edgar Allen Poe) and what turned out to be a surprisingly festive and even fun Miami, the art market in New York isn't a rosy picture of health just yet. At the end of 2009 we still see that art fairs are struggling, the auction results were pale reflections of their former selves, and despite the total number not being as high as predicted some mighty fine galleries called it quits this year.

9. Metropolitan Museum responds to recession with plans to do less with less. After cutting 357 employees from its payroll to help close a budget gap (resulting from a drop in endowment funding), the Met didn't so much announce its upcoming season of programming as mumble it and apologetically scurry away. As L Magazine's Benjamin Sutton termed it, the line-up is "Super Boring." Of course, after the past few years, in which the Met had blasted it out of the ball park again and again and again, perhaps we're just spoiled.

8. Notable passings. While the world of entertainment saw a stupefying number of high-profile celebrities pass away in what was termed The Summer of Death, the art world too lost its share of giants and perhaps less known artists, curators, collectors, historians, etc., just as worthy of respect and consideration. In no particular order, this year the art world lost the following : Nancy Spero, Peter Forakis, Jeanne-Claude, Evelyn Hofer, Amos Ferguson, Ruth Duckworth, Dietrich von Bothmer, Nat Finkelstein, Charles Seliger, Michael Mazur, Tony Rosenthal, Michael Martin (Iz the Wiz), Aldo Crommelynck, Sir Michael Levey, Hyman Bloom, Tyeb Mehta, Thomas Hoving, Larry Sultan, Roy DeCarava, Robert M. Murdock, Irving Penn, Don Fisher, Dina Babbitt, Barry Flanagan, Olga Raggio, Vivien Raynor, Ray Yoshida, Andrew Wyeth, Robert Delford Brown, Ernest Trova, Willoughby Sharp, Coosje van Bruggen, Louise Deutschman, and Robert Colescott.

7. Dash Snow dies of drug overdose. Probably because it's always shocking when someone so young dies so unexpectedly, the death that seemed to send the biggest shock waves through the New York art world this year was that of 27-year-old Dash Snow. Whether you loved or hated his work, there was no denying that his rebellious nature and energy added excitement to the scene.

6. Glenn Beck, Art Historian. Too unimaginative, apparently, to drudge up any new boogie men boogeymen to scare his audience into submission (and, as a paid spokesperson, to steer them toward peace of mind via purchasing gold in these times of uncertainty), blow-hard Glenn Beck instead turns to his favorite fantasy time (you know the America that only exists in Hollywood films and Beck's delusions) and teleports a favored boogeyman from the 1950s (the communist under the bed) back into Fox viewers' living rooms. He gets a scare-the-bejesus-out-of-the-heartland two-fer by inferring (just asking questions, mind you) that arguably communist iconography in the art at Rockefeller Center reveals a threat to our way of life and just so happens to indict Fox competitor NBC who are headquartered there. New York art critic Jerry Saltz was so incensed by Beck's transparent scaremongering that he encouraged the gold-hawking blabbermouth to curate an exhibition of "Degenerative Art." No word yet on whether Beck will accept the challenge.

5. The Obamas' Art Choices (and the wingnuts' response). What should have been a wonderful way to encourage national pride and interest in visual art (and for the most part seemed to have accomplished just that), also turned political as the President and First Lady made public their desire to decorate the White House with a selection of artworks that reflected their tastes (including Rothko, Ruscha, Albers, Johns, Morandi, etc.). Also in the initial list, though, was a work by Alma Thomas that was an appropriation play off of a Matisse. Displaying truly epic ignorance, right wing pundits launched a campaign to (distract from their lack of leadership ideas) have that choice reconsidered. The White House did eventually send that Thomas painting back, which upset the other side...which was clearly the right wingnuts' intent all along.

4. Performa outperforms. Everyone took their hats off to RoseLee Goldberg and the Performa crew for an extraordinarily successful biennial of new visual art performance. Perhaps the timing was right to refocus on un-commodifyable art, or perhaps the Performa folks just worked really hard to put together a fantastic program of strong work that took over the city, but the rave reviews for this year's effort poured in from all over. All of which seemed to prove that Goldberg was right when she declared before it all began that ""There is no such thing as an intellectual or artistic recession."

3. Surviving the Recession. Panel discussion after panel discussion, article after article, and surveys and entire blogs were offered, all geared toward helping folks in the arts and creative world survive the recession. Unlike beer or prostitution, which are apparently recession proof, the way that art industry types earn money (yes, insert your prostitution jokes here) is by convincing people to buy things they (and their accountants) know they don't actually need. After a rather unsettling period during which collectors were unsure how much they were worth, let alone how much they now had to spend on art, more clarity seems to have returned. (See number 10 above, though, as to why the Veuve Clicquot will still flow a bit less freely at parties celebrating this year's end.)

2. The Salander case (and especially)- Madoff comparisons. I'll quote myself here (even though this story has cooled off a bit over the past few months): "Journalists of the art world: please do the math: Bernie Madoff is to Larry Salander what AIG's losses are to your personal 401(k)." Although there was plenty to be pissed about if Salander owed you money, the amazing array of news sources who lazily relied on a wholly out-of-whack comparison shorthand for their ledes on that story was more of a sad commentary on the lack of originality in contemporary journalism than anything approaching relevance. Madoff took his investors for 49.9 billion dollars...Salander took his clients for $88 million. That's a difference of more than 49.8 billion dollars. And yet, even in the art world press (where we have a right to expect a bit of original thinking, no?) we saw this used. I mean, it's not like I can't see the comparison...it's just that I can't see why arts journalists weren't embarrassed to regurgitate the same line used in so many other accounts of the story (let alone in horridly racist accounts like this one).

1. The NuMu Controversy. Not much more needs said here about that than to point you to the highlighted text in the #2 choice from Jerry Saltz's "Best of 2009" list:


Wishing you and yours the warmest and happiest of holidays! See you next week!

Talk About Your Poor Sports

News out of the Alexandria Biennial in Egypt is that an Algerian artist (Zineb Sedira [navigate to her page from here to see work]) has been rejected from the exhibition. Not, mind you, because anyone found her proposed artwork objectionable on political or religious grounds. No...Ms. Sedira has been ousted because Egypt lost a soccer match to Algeria and the Egyptians are still steamed about that. Artforum.com explains:

The Algerian artist Zineb Sedira has denounced her eviction from the Alexandria Biennial in Egypt. As Agence France-Presse reports, Sedira, who was to represent Algeria in the exhibition, found herself barred from the event by Egyptian authorities, who cited the violence that has marred the qualification matches between Egypt and Algeria for the World Soccer Cup in 2010. Last November, Egypt’s defeat by Algeria led to violent clashes in both countries. Sedira, a Franco-Algerian artist who lives in London, was said to be “appalled” after being impacted by the soccer affair between Egypt and Algeria. The artist received a letter from Mohsen Shaadan—the president of the biennial and the head of Egypt’s fine arts sector—who informed her that Algeria would no longer be participating in the biennial due to the “anger” of the Egyptians about the behavior of Algerian soccer fans who went “beyond all the criteria and customs of the Arab citizen.” Sedira was reported to be “disappointed” by the link made by the Egyptian authorities between a soccer crisis and her own artistic activity. “I thought that we shared the same values and celebrated the virtues of art in its capacity to go beyond the national borders of a country and other vague nationalist desires,” stated the artist, adding that she had no intention to transform the Algerian national pavilion at the biennial into a soccer field or courtroom.

The Alexandria Biennial, which features artists from countries bordering on the Mediterranean Sea, runs until January 31.

The most pathetic part of Shaadan's lame defense of this decision is that fans on both sides seemed to have gone "beyond all the criteria and customs of the Arab citizen":

Egyptian soccer fans burned Algerian flags and rioted outside the Algerian Embassy in Cairo, smashing cars and shop windows, in an escalating row between the two countries over a bitter World Cup rivalry.

Egyptian fans – and the country's media – have been thrown into a frenzy over reports that Algerians attacked and injured Egyptians after their countries' teams squared off in a World Cup qualifier in the Sudanese capital Khartoum this week. Algeria won the game 1-0, giving them a spot in the 2010 Cup in South Africa.

Several hundred Egyptian fans rampaged in the streets around the Algerian Embassy overnight into the early hours Friday, scuffling with black-uniformed riot police. It began as a protest, with demonstrators beating drums, shooting jets of flame from aerosol cans and shouting obscenities and slogans against Algerians.

So by Shaadan's logic, Egypt should ban itself from the Alexandria Biennial as well.

OR...perhaps (and this is just an idea, mind you) Shaadan should re-read the mission for the founding of the biennial:

The aim of the Alexandria Biennial is to fortify the cultural and artistic dialog not only between Egypt and its neighboring Mediterranean countries but to extend it all over the world as well. This year, the Alexandria Biennial celebrates its 25th edition that aims to be a panoramic view of the latest in artistic creativity coming from our region.

Kind of hard to be panoramic when you've got such an infantile, patriotism-induced blind spot. Sedira doesn't even live in Algeria any more...she's based in London. The Egyptians should learn to separate national pride from international cultural and artistic dialog if they expect the Alexandria Biennial to truly be viewed as a significant contribution to humankind and not simply a chance to toot their own horn.

Want to Become a Successful Artist? A Case Study in Best Practices

If Carmen Herrera didn't exist on her own in the world, someone who teaches the fundamentals of how to think about your art career would have made her up. Point by point, this 94-year-old painter is a living confirmation of the validity of the most popular adages and seemingly hackneyed encouragements...seemingly, that is, until you hear Carmen's story.

The New York Times' Deborah Sontag explains:

After six decades of very private painting, Ms. Herrera sold her first artwork five years ago, at 89. Now, at a small ceremony in her honor, she was basking in the realization that her career had finally, undeniably, taken off. As cameras flashed, she extended long, Giacomettiesque fingers to accept an art foundation’s lifetime achievement award from the director of the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis.

Her good friend, the painter Tony Bechara, raised a glass. “We have a saying in Puerto Rico,” he said. “The bus — la guagua — always comes for those who wait.”

And the Cuban-born Ms. Herrera, laughing gustily, responded, “Well, Tony, I’ve been at the bus stop for 94 years!”

She may have waited quite some time to sell her work, but it went into the level of collections any artist would be thrilled to enter (Fontanals-Cisneros, Brodsky, Gund). This is no charity case human interest...Herrera is being described as "a pioneer," "a quiet warrior of her art," and someone who played "a pivotal role” in “the development of geometric abstraction in the Americas” by some impressive historians who should know.

Moreover, exemplifying a nearly heroic adherence to the best career advice for artists, Herrera refused to change her explorations to meet the latest fashions, she refuses to discuss her work in terms of anything other than how she approaches it (sometimes a triangle is just a triangle), and she never lost sight of the fact that the essence of success and recognition is and forever will be working hard:

Recognition for Ms. Herrera came a few years after her husband’s death, at 98, in 2000. “Everybody says Jesse must have orchestrated this from above,” Ms. Herrera said, shaking her head. “Yeah, right, Jesse on a cloud.” She added: “I worked really hard. Maybe it was me.”

And it's not just critical acclaim and the satisfaction of having big-name collectors and art historians recognize her contributions that Herrera earned through her patience and faith in her work. It has paid off with what Warhol termed the sincerest form of admiration: money.

Ms. Herrera’s late-in-life success has stunned her in many ways. Her larger works now sell for $30,000, and one painting commanded $44,000 — sums unimaginable when she was, say, in her 80s. “I have more money now than I ever had in my life,” she said.

The article is a delight from beginning to end, but to summarize the career advice points that Herrera' story illustrates:

1. Keep at what you're passionate about. Don't chase after trends or different media with the hopes of igniting your career...you'll never catch up to those doing something fashionable now and you probably won't be as good at something you're faking.
2. Discuss your work on the terms in which you think about it. If people in the art world want to bring other things to it (if they see sex where there is none or politics where you didn't intend that) let them carry on...but don't feel pressured to agree. Let your work speak for itself.
   
3. Your best "in" will always, always be your friends in the art world...so network! It was Herrera's good friend (another painter) Tony Bechara, who recommended her for a women's geometric abstraction exhibition that launched her success.
4. Nothing...I repeat nothing...replaces hard work if your goal for your art is true recognition and lasting importance. If they bottled what it took, everyone would be a historically important artist.