It's not very popular.

report this user


The Emperor Has No Clothes


  • If you could bring one dead person back to life, who would it be?: Janis Joplin
  • What movie can you recite verbatim?: Mars Attacks
Feb 27 hitchcock commented on Cornish—Seattle's Preeminent Art School—Risks It All.
The problem with this article is that the main source is the writer herself.

You put forth a piece that is astonishingly without context and do a great disservice to all parties by printing something based on a few conversations in the hallway, a misunderstanding of adjunct work, and perhaps a press release.

Over reliance on adjuncts is a national epidemic, not a Cornish phenomenon. Unless you are a tenured Yale professor, you've probably heard of it, yet here you absurdly rely on your own brief experience as an adjunct for information.

Cornish has the same endowment problem as every other independent art school in the country. Lack of endowment forces tuitions high, eliminates most aid, makes it hard to attract students and keep standards high at the same time. Ditto faculty.

How does a school build a healthy endowment? The first thing an institution has to do is become established in 1845 or be within walking distance of the Walton family in Arkansas.

That Cornish remains an independent degree granting institution at all is a large accomplishment. Many small art schools have been bought up by for-profit corporations because they could not survive the tension between delivering quality, attracting good students and paying the bills. These schools are now reduced to exploiting the GI bill and student loan program to churn out techno-design degrees that have long ago given up the pretense of offering "art".

Perhaps, as a journalist, you might read about who else is still afloat? How are they doing it? Check out the website for the art school association at It lists Tyler School of Art but we know they have become part of the state system and the Boston Museum School became a part of Tufts in 1945.

Did you talk to anyone outside the Cornish community for perspective? It doesn't appear that you did, because you evidently do not see how silly it is to cite a a few isolated grumpy faculty and students as some kind of "outing" of perceived incompetence by the art department.

If there are a few people in the art department who are not working in media that light up and spin around after 25 underpaid years in the saddle, I cannot believe that they deserve to be publicly savaged by these histrionics.

The Cornish administration can thin out what they perceive to be "dead wood" the usual way–with retirement buyouts–without your help. If you, as a journalist, want to mix in, you oowe it to us all to do your homework.

May 5, 2013 hitchcock commented on Seniors Sleeping in Their Cars as Home Foreclosures Persist.
Those who paid and did not get underwater benefit here by not having seniors sleeping in cars out front of their houses and crapping on their lawn and by not having to deal with their corpses should the night air finish them off.
Jan 17, 2013 hitchcock commented on Currently Hanging: Paul Komada's Knitting and Painting.
"he switched from painting to knitting because it was something he could do while taking care of the baby. (It's the kind of switch female artists make, and admit to making, all the time.) "

Let's face it Jen, if a woman artist "admitted' to making that "kind of switch" you wouldn't be writing up her show.
Jan 9, 2013 hitchcock commented on Confirmed: Seattle Weekly Sold.
You gotta admit that the Seattle Weekly has been one boring paper.
Nov 19, 2012 hitchcock commented on 216 Nipples Later.
touché #130

Yes, this will sell out every one of those prints, and the curator will have a shitload of people at the opening of her new space this month.

At least someone will make some money in this tiny art colony, but none of this changes the fact that it is a stupid piece by a foolish artist.

Commentary? This is a like a pig falling into a pile of manure and claiming it was his expertise that got him there. So republican to believe that good fortune and membership in the ruling class have nothing to do with it.

If this curator is so damn edgy, then why are the same handful of drinking buddies featured in everything she is involved with or everything that is written about her?

As amusing at this thread is, it isomewhat wasted because the curator is so dead set on not seeing the obvious and sidesteps every sensible thing that is posted. It takes alot of denial to insist that creating a forum for a member of the ruling class to render the "other" in such undignified terms despite so much evidence to the contrary and try to posit that as some kind of intellectual sophistication.

Bill Clinton said it best when he declared, "...I DID NOT...HAVE SEX...with that girl."
Nov 14, 2012 hitchcock commented on 216 Nipples Later.
What is in question is not whether Arnold supports the decision Cornish made but why she puts this dumb piece in at all.
Nov 14, 2012 hitchcock commented on 216 Nipples Later.
Why so testy?

I think one point the article makes is that the culture itself presumes a particular posture in all this. Saying you are a feminist does not make you one If you fail to question the presumption of the male viewing subject and the inherent violence and power politics of language.
If Beres, and how much of a "genius' can he be based on this, puts this image out there based on a cursory web surf as if he is somehow above all that man stuff casting a blind unconsidered eye to the fact that here he is, a "genius" male artist with a permanent fill time gig recognition gallery etc. Putting naughty scrawls of his coworkers breasts up at his place of work he is no feminist that is for sure. The curator could not be too aware of the lense of the culture and how it plays a part in her choices
Nov 14, 2012 hitchcock commented on 216 Nipples Later.
Very, very good article Jen.

It is true that anger so often is directed at the women in such a controversy because it is societally easier and safer to direct it at the party with less power in the system as is evidenced by the Horse's Ass who actually imagines that one should be fired for pointing out that they would rather not be publicly ostracized and degraded in their workplace. After all, they are women and should be used to humiliation. Clearly they don't "understand" art (and you do?)

I am not sure it matters what Ben's intent is ultimately however because the image has its impact independent of his intention. If he is lampooning a particular attitude the effect is still the same. He repeats and strengthens degrading messages.

Like Archie Bunker's TV comments on All in the Family back in the 70's, the script may have targeted the racist comments of a bigot as a source of humor, in the end it just repeats his racism in a powerful forum that strengthens and spreads it.

It's impact on the students, remains negative and it legitimizes that kind of treatment of Cornish employees and women in general in their eyes.

This whole thing is sophomoric and really should not get this much attention except that some of the butthead things people are saying must not stand unaddressed. Not really much of a curatorial statement here except one more opportunity for Ms. Arnold to get attention and ingratiate herself in the great favor bank in in the sky in hopes of some future withdrawal.

I can't help but wonder why this curator, herself an artist of some potential, would waste her time with this when she could be working in her own studio? Women are no longer relegated to being salon hostesses promoting and discussing the work of men, so wouldn't it make more sense to make something of your own instead of endorsing this horseshit?

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy