
ALMOST FAMOUS: a shortlist exhibition
Detroit's Kresge Prize Finalists Go Down for the Count
by Richard Krug for Art Times
DETROIT - The very first Kresge Prize exhibition looks like a dud. The six shortlisted artists on view at Detroit’s Museum of New Art (MONA) struck me as unusually similar. Normally such outings try to create some variety or change of pace if only because the exhibition that accompanies any prize is made livelier when there is a good mix of painting and sculpture as well as film, photography and installation art in it. That means that this first shortlist, titled Almost Famous, focuses on one kind of art-making in Detroit to the exclusion of all others. And that would be painting.
But are these even paintings?
An odd decision was made before the Kresge jurors even met: to make the work more palatable for this conservative art town, nearly all of this exhibit’s work has been digitally captured and transferred onto canvas, no matter what its original medium – all stretched, varnished and presented as rather traditional paintings.
An object reduced only to an art context – IS IT STILL ART?
By displaying all the entries as “art”, by exhibiting everything as “paintings”, the Detroit work is stripped of either the sensational or the difficult, and straight-jacketed from using arty gimmicks or hey look-at-me grandstanding. This forced gambit does uncomplicate the chaotic flux of contemporary art and trends, but at the same time casts an eerie quality over the entire exhibition.
ALMOST FAMOUS stands more like a crime scene recreation, with sketch artist renditions of the real thing. Mostly photography based, of mainly realistic scenes, deceptively nonchalant in composition and subject matter – but by way of its “pure” presentation is emptied of implicit meaning or edge. Harnessed to the most traditional medium of all, the exhibit has unintentionally freed itself to become art that no longer depends on the obscure reference to be understood.
What’s left you might ask.
Altogether, it creates the kind of contemporary art spectacle you don't usually get anymore: room after room of miscellaneous paintings, everything very cleanly shown, and with clear space around it. The display is unobtrusive, though not exactly rousing. The works appear like a succession of solid trophies, each one asking above all to be noticed.
DOWN FOR THE COUNT
These first contenders are not "trying to be sensationalists," Cesar Marzetti answered, as to whether he viewed this exhibit as Detroit’s own version of the notorious Sensation show that a decade ago thrust so many young British artists onto the world stage. "Detroit artists are just trying to deal with the issues of the 21st century."
Yet to put all the stress on a failed shortlist, as this show does, is strange. Although the main objective of the Kresge Prize isn't to foster talent through reward, the competitive aspect still becomes an enormous public lure. Obviously one the Museum of New Art could not resist to exploit by mounting this show.
TIGHT SECURITY
"Complete impartiality was the premium set for distinguishing the shortlist from the final winner,” one juror confided.
There will always be compromise voting and favoritism, but to best maintain the prize's impartiality against public scrutiny: jurors were required not to have viewed nor have any personal knowledge of the nominees' work over the past five years; nor, were they allowed to either speak with, interview or visit the artists nor their studios.
THE PRIZE FIGHT
According to Marzetti, "If the Kresge Prize simply becomes a star search for the safe, the old and the established - it will totally cripple its ability to be the benchmark that distinguishes Detroit artists. If it sets out to be Detroit's Nobel Prize for Art, all the top people will be used up in the first five years. It wildly overshoots, and the overwhelming majority of Detroit's best will be rendered ineligible."
When London's Turner Prize briefly dropped their shortlist exhibition in 1988, critics and public alike hated being deprived of the opportunity to compare works, to approve or disapprove of the selections, and the fun of trying to predict who would – or wouldn't – win. In 1991 the Turner shortlist, and exhibition of work by shortlisted artists, was reinstated.
In Detroit there are many who argue that a similar competition is the best way to attract widespread interest, but that the Kresge administrators are half-hearted about attracting media coverage. Such a competition would possibly achieve the impossible here: establishing a Detroit contemporary art event as something of national concern and importance.
Jef Bourgeau, director of the Museum of New Art, holds a slightly different view: "The whole idea of a race and a winner is demeaning to art. I also have particular concerns about the shortlist, since all but one would be seen as losers in a race they hadn't chosen to enter. There is also uncertainty at this early point as to what the Prize is actually for: is it to acknowledge the work of Detroit's most reputable senior artists? Or should it highlight younger but transformative talent? And if you have both types of artist on one shortlist, how do you possibly decide between them?"
Having said that, Bourgeau explained why he eventually agreed to this exhibition: "The shortlisted artists for this prize were told that they should feel honored just to be nominated. I see Almost Famous as giving the shortlisted some small acclamation for their commitment to Detroit and their contributions to its culture.
"And for the general public, such a laudable award should be more than a mere announcement. It should allow us all the occasion to see some of the best art being honored in Detroit. Detroiters need to come to know their artists, young and old, untried or true. And I firmly believe the Kresge Prize and its fellowships will be a first step at correcting this lapse."
With such little fanfare raised during this first selection, there is small hope. And, for some, that means the Kresge Prize has failed its larger purpose: that Detroit art will be discussed in a way it hasn't been for decades.
Two for the price of one
Cesar Marzetti, the museum’s curator, has written two versions of the same essay for the catalogue: one for those over 50 years old, and one for those younger.
“Our audience,” he explained, pulling his gray-tinged hair back into a ponytail, “they are of two distinct groups. One is the young academically avant-garde. Academic because for them art is made not to communicate but to be explained. The other is the old school. Those who take it all at face-value, simple technique and vision. One is hip, one is not."





