"I will not be other than I am: I find too much content in my condition: I am always caressed." A Young French Witch, C. 1660

http://www.richardkehl.com/published-boo…

a)"dissing pretty" is the "loser dumb shits" way of reckoning ignorance and absence of intellectual hard work when it come to art critique and understanding-period. Any loser starts with that shit and run...

b) apparently Alice Wheeler (nor Mr. Kucera) have ever heard of Nan Goldin. Wheeler's work is such a shameless rip-off of the 'Nan' schtick that it's sad really. If being in the right place at the right time (Kurt Cobain pre fame) is being a good artist then...

c ) Haven't we established "The Hedreen" is nothing but a tragic dumping ground for the pretentious losers in this town to parade around their egos? Come on now people-forward, not backwards-please!

d) pink potato whales studded all over with eyes and a big false buck tooth...WOW!!! amazing (in several senses of the word)...

e) "OMG this is NOT how Expedia described this place...YUCK WHAT IS THAT???...Is that a cum stain on the bedspread...SHIT, I'm not smelling THAT-GROSS-YOU smell it!...What's that smell???...ugh this carpet is so filthy...I just can't stay here, SERIOUSLY! I JUST THREW UP IN MY MOUTH! Who's towel is that? I'm outta here. What...OK, how about we just make Art about it and just split? KOOL..."

only in Seattle..shame on you Ms. Graves. Any chance you hear what an idiot you sound like???

Northwest Mystic, sticksandstones, Hibrow Gorilla: this troll has been posting the same comments on every single review for more than a year. So there's no point in me addressing that earless megaphone.

But for anyone else who's interested, Alice Wheeler takes pictures of strangers at county fairs and parades and other large public gatherings. They're usually people who have constructed some theatrical version of themselves, and by shooting them, she's almost just recording their wish to be recorded. They're almost always a little down at the mouth, almost an inverse class to Tina Barney's upper-crust portraiture. They pictures often include a vivid, almost electric, palette of colors. Each print is large and glossy and solo, and usually there's only one person in it.

Nan Goldin, meanwhile, captures her closest friends, usually naked and in bed, sometimes dying, sometimes having sex, often in pairs. They're private shots dragged public. They're usually presented in slide shows. The colors are drab.

The two artists don't make images that look alike, or that are alike.

Jen-funny but maybe you can't hear the friggin' pot calling for you! And for just how long have YOU been writing-critiquing(?)-posting the same repetitive BS-that narrowly focused,puffed up worshipful crap around this town? Judas Priest! You should win an award (if they gave one) for the single most detrimental force responsible for killing Art in this town with you cliquish antics. Seriously-you really suck! All the more reason to call your crap out!
And do your research, Nan Goldin captures the theater of life-her life-in large format 30x40" (sound familiar miss Wheeler?) c-prints with glossy surfaces and rich vibrant colors. Sometimes presented in slide shows but most frequently in large glossy photos. These also include landscapes (Wheelers are also way TOO similar)), interiors, still lifes, etc. not just what you chose to see myopically-yet again. Goldin's personal journalistic aspects are far too similar to what Wheeler seems to love to boastfully associate about her work in conversations revealing her connections to moments portrayed-the likes of "Kurt this, that girl did that, this concert was that"...you just dont get it. And Tina Barney is not a smart Wheeler comparison.
But we must remember this-your a pop culture slinger and shit talker, not an intellectual.

Well, I'm an outsider to this debate, and am not terribly famililiar with either artist, but #3's description of Goldin's work is so generic as to apply to a number of photographers, maybe even the majority.

I mean, seriously, claiming that glossy surfaces & rich, vibrant colors depicting landscapes, interiors, still lifes, containing journalistic aspects, etc...is somehow the domain of one particular photographer is completely absurd.

If you're the true intellectual here, #3, you need to work on your critiques. I mean, I have no idea who is right, but using such general descriptors of an artist's subject matter & medium is not at all convincing. If Wheeler's landscapes are "too similar," how exactly are they too similar?

Sorry, Jen, I obviously meant #4's description.