I meet Keith Richards at his office....
Mesopotamia
They shall not return to us, the resolute, the young,
The eager and whole-hearted whom we gave:
But the men who left them thriftily to die in their own dung,
Shall they come with years and honour to the grave?
They shall not return to us; the strong men coldly slain
In sight of help denied from day to day:
But the men who edged their agonies and chid them in their pain,
Are they too strong and wise to put away?Our dead shall not return to us while Day and Night divide--
Never while the bars of sunset hold.
But the idle-minded overlings who quibbled while they died,
Shall they thrust for high employments as of old?Shall we only threaten and be angry for an hour:
When the storm is ended shall we find
How softly but how swiftly they have sidled back to power
By the favour and contrivance of their kind?
Even while they soothe us, while they promise large amends,
Even while they make a show of fear,
Do they call upon their debtors, and take counsel with their friends,
To conform and re-establish each career?
Their lives cannot repay us -- their death could not undo --
The shame that they have laid upon our race.
But the slothfulness that wasted and the arrogance that slew,
Shall we leave it unabated in its place?
-- Rudyard Kipling, Rudyard Kipling: Complete Verse (Anchor; 1988).
I haven't written about the current round of fairs in NY or thought that much about them now that they have closed. I did manage to spend a day at Pulse and Scope. In all they were well executed with Pulse having the stronger group. Somehow in these events, everything manages to blur for me which is why I've never done much on the review side of these events. I've exhibited at Scope twice and the experience was pretty much the same. My guess is overload but I'm never sure if it is my weak constitution or that most of what gets shown really does look and feel the quite the same. Is it cancellation or standardized multi-style? That perplexes me.
"If you're one of the 2 million American families losing your house this year, it's a depression," argues Greg Palast, BBC investigative journalist, author of Armed Madhouse and onetime student of neoconservative privatization guru Milton Friedman. "If you're a mortgage shark, happy days are here again. The difference between the Great Depression and this one is that, back then, everyone was in it. Now, it's a selective mangling. Exxon's profit hit $40 billion, the highest of any corporation since the pharaohs. So how can you say the economy is going down? For whom?"
Palast's point is well taken, even as it is ignored by everyone from the Bush administration to the financial (which is to say, entertainment) media and all the way to homeowners who ignorantly refinance so they can buy that new Hummer: Your life may suck ass, but others around you are sucking you dry. And most importantly, they're crushing the dollar on their way out the door to Dubai, or wherever suits hide in the New World Order's afterlife.
"I'm sorry to tell you this," Palast adds, "but higher oil prices and weak dollars is not a failure of policy. That is the policy. Clinton had a strong dollar policy and Bush hated it. The weak dollar is a way to temporarily hike exports to create short-term pretend juice for the economy. But the weak dollar also made it easier for foreigners to buy up U.S. assets. The capitalists are cashing out of America. They're keeping condos in New York, Palm Beach and Malibu, but their investments are where the returns are fatter: Malaysia, China, India. A weak dollar helps the transfer of capital ownership."
From the jacket The Family is about the other half of American fundamentalist power—not its angry masses, but its sophisticated elites. Sharlet follows the story back to Abraham Vereide, an immigrant preacher who in 1935 organized a small group of businessmen sympathetic to European fascism, fusing the Far Right with his own polite but authoritarian faith. From that core, Vereide built an international network of fundamentalists who spoke the language of establishment power, a “family” that thrives to this day. In public, they host prayer breakfasts; in private they preach a gospel of “biblical capitalism,” military might, and American empire. Citing Hitler, Lenin, and Mao, Doug Coe, the Family’s current leader, declares, “We work with power where we can, build new power where we can’t.”Looks to be a must read for anyone on theocracy watch here in the states. Also, and alarmingly,Sharlet’s discoveries dramatically challenge conventional wisdom about American fundamentalism, revealing its crucial role in the unraveling of the New Deal, the waging of the Cold War, and the no-holds-barred economics of globalization. The question Sharlet believes we must ask is not “What do fundamentalists want?” but “What have they already done?”
The new proposal/strategy mirrors programs in the UK and the Netherlands. (see Bill Gusky)Banks providing the loans will be compensated through tax breaks for corporate art patronage.
Small businesses, too, are to be given greater tax incentives to buy art works and auction houses will be modernised.
An independent study by art market experts Artprice showed France with 6.4% of art sales worldwide in 2007.
China has 7.3%, Britain 29.7% and the US 41.7%, according to the survey.
Figures suggest the French art market is growing at only 13%, compared with 36% globally.
Own Art offers interest free loans (typical 0% APR) of £100 to £2,000, which are repaid in regular instalments, making it easier for people to buy high quality contemporary art and crafts. By encouraging sales in a wide range of visual art and craft including painting, sculpture, photography and ceramics, Own Art aims to encourage new buyers and patrons of contemporary art and develop the visual arts economy through increasing sales, which will benefit both galleries and artists.
Galleries are selected by an independent panel which assesses each application based on certain criteria including the quality of work on sale, their professional relationship with artists, the quality of exhibition space and the knowledge and training of staff.Blogger Katherine Tyrrell adds more detail on the Own Art program.
The schemes were set up by the Arts Council and, as my post makes clear, the intention behind it was threefold ie that they should:Ed's dilemma on the subject and from the comment thread:
* enable people from all walks of life society to access and own original works of art - by having an affordable means of buying art
* help artists to live by means of their own creative endeavour and output - by helping more people to buy their art
* support galleries which sell high quality contemporary art - and stimulate local and regional economies through promoting the small-scale gallery network in the regions – with a particular focus on supporting the tourist economy.
But back to my originally stated uncertainty about this. I'm not a raging free market nut by any means, and I appreciate that one goal of such programs is to help emerging artists, but there's a little voice in the back of my head saying there's a longer-term side effect of this that will possibly do more harm than good. Also, I'm also not so sure the nationalistic pride component that's driving France to this measure isn't antiquated in the global market.My take on these schemes is a basic one. If it keeps artists producing and generates a wider audience then this is sound investment for the countries involved. These countries are basically getting on board with what most banks and the high net worth set are already invested in - the new asset class is global contemporary art. It's a lot less messy than oil or arms, and it is a sector that is basically the last outpost of unfettered, unregulated capitalism. Look at how obsessed Dubai and Abu Dhabi are at getting in on the action. There is a lot of money to be made and a lot of structuring to be implemented, which in itself sets up new and unknown market niches.
If nationalism has to play a role (because that's what politicians do), then rather than put energies into making it easier to buy or sell the art France is producing (which, quite frankly, can be seen as somewhat insulting on one level...the notion that French artists needs a government program to help them compete), why not put the money into promoting it to a wider audience instead?
The text reads: “In the name of ensuring stability and harmony in the country during the 2008 Olympic Games, the Chinese Government continues to detain and harass political activists, journalists, lawyers and human rights workers.
Indeed, what does happen when there is publicness without a public sphere? When the language of philosophy and politics is used everywhere, at all times, but without referent? We are afloat in a world in which the endless invocation of theoreticians, philosophers and political theorists serves very little purpose other than to bolster the cultural capital pretensions of an artworld detached from anything other than its communicative connectivity and its obscure economic value in an economy of fleeting and faddish desires.......continue reading at Long Sunday
Pick up any gallery catalogue, read the blurb stuck to any gallery wall and this conflation will come back to you: creativity is communication, and vice versa, and all is well in the world. Whilst there is no doubt a real immaterial practice that corresponds to the happy belief that creativity is communication, it is increasingly the case that the artworld simply is the unfolding of a series of ‘creative communications’ – and that it is in fact quite pleased to think of itself in this way.
'Many Iraqi politicians say that Mr. Maliki’s political capital has been severely depleted by the campaign and that he is now in the curious position of having to turn to Mr. Sadr, a longtime rival and now his opponent in battle, for a solution to the crisis.'
With the cease-fire of the Sadrists now officially over, we will see afresh how degraded things are in Iraq. The civil war will now come to light and there is no catch phrase or false flag to spin around this moment. Links below are well worth reading about this bad development.
Police mutiny at Juan Cole
Who's who in the battle for Basra
Sadr's defense strategy
Iran's doubt's about Sadr?
As reporter Jeff Manning described Thursday, a JPMorgan Chase employee distributed a memo called "Zippy Cheats & Tricks," which reads like a tipsheet for beating a video game. It advises employees at the banking company how they can help mortgage brokers jigger the in-house system, called "Zippy," that evaluates loan applications. Overstate the borrower's income, it suggests. Don't mention that some borrowers are relying on gifts to repay their loans. Inflate assets. "Never fear," the memo reads. "Zippy can be adjusted . . ."
There's plenty of blame to go around in this debacle. But it's not overstating things to say that a set of financial sophisticates figured out some ingenious ways to profit from the desires of would-be homebuyers. Along the way, the system of incentives and accountability that used to characterize mortgage lending was unmoored and sent floating away, never to be missed until it crashed into the dock at the U.S. Treasury.
The JPMorgan Chase memo emerged from an environment in which wealth was generated from the size -- not the substance -- of the transaction. If a bank could sell a $600 million bundle of mortgage-based securities, instead of just $400 million; if a homebuyer could be delivered into a $550,000 house, instead of just $255,000; if there was always a willing lender somewhere in the chain; why should anyone worry about the risks?
Continue on at the Oregonian
tip via Kevin Drum
White Democrats who hold unfavorable views of Obama are much more likely than those who have favorable opinions of him to say that equal rights for minorities have been pushed too far; they also are more likely to disapprove of interracial dating, and are more concerned about the threat that immigrants may pose to American values. In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim. - Pew Foundation.NOW on PBS tracked this smear campaign back in January - Anatomy of a Smear.
Timeline of a Smear
2006: The first chain e-mail circulated on the Internet contending that Obama is Muslim. (Politifact and other fact-checking websites have been unable to pinpoint the exact date)
Jan. 17, 2007: A discredited news story from InsightMag.com, "Hillary's team has questions about Obama's Muslim background," reported that Obama had attended a madrassa, an Islamic religious school, as a child.
Jan. 19, 2007: Fox News' Fox & Friend First and Fox & Friends highlighted the report from InsightMag in its coverage without discrediting it. The weblog Think Progress noted that Fox even took caller comments about the allegations.
Jan. 20, 2007: New York Post article titled 'Osama' Mud Flies at Obama quoted Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson saying, "We have no connection to this story."
The week of Jan. 20, 2007: CNN, ABC-TV and the Associated Press sent reporters to the school Obama attended and reported that it was not a religious school but a public school.
Jan. 23, 2007: Washington Post article by media columnist Howard Kurtz, "Headmaster Disputes Claim That Obama Attended Islamic School", reported that the school Obama attended was not a religious school but a public school.
March, 15, 2007: A Snopes.com website article titled "The Enemy Within" dispelled the claim that Obama is a "radical, ideological Muslim."
Sept. 16, 2007: A photo of Obama that would later be used as the basis for anotherTime photo read, "Respect: Senator Barack Obama, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Hillary Clinton and Ruth Harkin stand during the national anthem."
Oct. 2007: The first chain e-mail accompanying some version of an e-mailed photo circulated on the Internet questioning Obama's patriotism based on its contention that Obama refused to put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. One of the e-mails read: "He refused to not only put his hand on his heart during the pledge of allegiance, but refused to say the pledge ... how in the hell can a man like this expect to be our next Commander-in-Chief?"
Oct. 27, 2007: Snopes could not find any information substantiating the claim that Obama refused to put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. However, they did say that the following claim, "Photograph shows Barack Obama without his hand over his heart while the U.S. national anthem is being played," is true.
Nov. 9, 2007: The St. Petersburg Times publishes an article "E-mail assailing Obama's patriotism misses mark" pointing to the original Time photograph as evidence that the e-mail rumor makes a false claim. The article also discusses the new phenomenon of chain e-mails "ricocheting" around Internet.
Nov. 11, 2007: A video from ABC News confirmed that the photo was taken during the singing of "The Star-Spangled Banner."
Nov. 29, 2007: The Washington Post publishes an article, "Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him", by political reporter Perry Bacon Jr. exploring the rumors that Obama was Muslim. The article did not explicitly dispel those rumors.
Dec. 9, 2007: In response to "ferocious" criticism from readers and others, Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell addresses Bacon's story in a column titled Refuting, or Feeding, the Rumor Mill. She writes: "My problems with the story...were that Obama's connections to Islam are slender at best; that the rumors were old; and that convincing evidence of their falsity wasn't included in the story."
Dec. 13, 2007: Despite being debunked by mainstream news organizations, the claim that Obama didn't place his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance is repeated on Bill O' Reilly's show. In response to a caller who says she's disturbed by Obama's alleged action, O'Reilly doesn't correct her and, according to MediaMatters.org, replies: "I think that Obama needs to answer some questions about his point of view, not only on the USA, but on a lot of things." negative rumor was taken in Indianola, Iowa, at the Harkin Steak Fry, an annual political event hosted by Sen. Tom Harkin. The caption on the
Obama warned of the impending mortgage crisis a year ago. Here's the relevant letter on March 22, 2007. On this and on Iraq and on Pakistan, his actual judgment simply put him on a level far beyond Clinton and McCain, let alone the current president. Judge for yourself:
Dear Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson,
There is grave concern in low-income communities about a potential coming wave of foreclosures. Because regulators are partly responsible for creating the environment that is leading to rising rates of home foreclosure in the subprime mortgage market, I urge you immediately to convene a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses to the challenge.
We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of American families face the risk of losing their homes.
continuing...
I would also urge you to facilitate a serious conversation about the following:* What standards investors should require of lenders, particularly with regard to verification of income and assets and the underwriting of borrowers based on fully indexed and fully amortized rates.
* How to facilitate and encourage appropriate intervention by loan servicing companies at the earliest signs of borrower difficulty.
* How to support independent community-based-organizations to provide counseling and work-out services to prevent foreclosure and preserve homeownership where practical.
* How to provide more effective information disclosure and financial education to ensure that borrowers are treated fairly and that deception is never a source of competitive advantage.
* How to adopt principles of fair competition that promote affordability, transparency, non-discrimination, genuine consumer value, and competitive returns.
* How to ensure adequate liquidity across all mortgage markets without exacerbating consumer and housing market vulnerability.
This looks like a good panel topic at MOMA this coming Saturday.DAA Collectors' Forum Is the Killer Art Market Killing Art?My guess is of course it is if you are visible in that market. At minimum it affects the time artists have to give to their work which is why a lot of things look rushed and incomplete these days. I can't help but notice that Lehman Brothers is the sponsor ;)
Saturday, March 29, 2008, 10am - noon
Are the extravagant prices and record sales of the current art market affecting the creation and presentation of contemporary art? ADAA brings together curators, artists, and gallery owners to discuss the implications of today's "killer market" and its influence on how we look at art. The panelists will discuss such questions as: How do market forces impact the art being made today? Do these forces change the way the public approaches work? How can we make a distinction between art, fashion and design when confronted with the overwhelming commodification of culture? How does one find meaning in art if its significance is equated with its price?
I'm not an IPhone owner, and have plenty of problems with the AT&T aspect of the device, but I got say reading this LA Times piece makes me shrug even more about owning one, in a lighthearted sort of way. Just listen to how one customer has enhanced his life and probably managed to irritate the hell out of everyone in the grocery store ...Wil Shipley, a Seattle software developer, uses his iPhone at the Whole Foods fish counter to check websites for updates on which seafood is the most environmentally correct to purchase. He quizzes the staff on where and how a fish was caught. Because he carries the Internet with him, "I can be super-picky," he saidOh I bet you are!
Note :Fewer than 1% of the 219 million cellphones in the U.S. are iPhones, according to M:Metrics. (One possible reason: An iPhone costs about $400.) That hasn't been enough to trigger a broader boom of Internet browsing on hand-held gadgets. The percentage of U.S. mobile phone users surfing the Internet over the last year has stayed flat at 13%, M:Metrics found.
more reading at National GeographicSea levels have been rising for decades, due mostly to global warming caused by greenhouse gases.
The oceans are on average about 6.3 inches (16 centimeters) higher now than in 1930, when they started a noticeable upward climb. Melting glaciers and ice caps, along with ocean warming—water expands as it heats up—are the main culprits behind the increase.
But the new study shows that reservoirs are also an important factor. Rather than adding to sea-level rise, however, they have counteracted it by storing more water on land.
Since 1930 the storage of water has prevented a total of about 1.2 inches (3 centimeters) of sea-level rise.
Without dams, sea levels would have risen 30 percent more than they already have, according to research led by Benjamin Chao of National Central University in Taiwan.
Chao and colleagues report their findings in tomorrow's issue of the journal Science.
we used to ask what might become after the orgy - mourning or melancholia? Doubtless neither, but an interminable clean-up of all the vicissitudes of modern history and its process of liberation (of peoples, sex, dreams, art and the unconscious - in short, of all that makes up the orgy of our times), in an atmosphere dominated by the apocalyptic presentiment that all this is coming to an end. - Baudrillard
Five years of Iraq lies:" How President Bush and his advisors have spent each year of the war peddling mendacious tales about a mission accomplished. I posit that each year of the war has been characterized by a central lie by the Bush propaganda machine....continuing at Juan Cole and Salon
Year 1: "There is no guerrilla war."
Year 2: "Iraq is a model democracy."
Year 3: "Zarqawi is causing all the trouble."
Year 4: "There is no Civil War."
Year 5: "Everything is calm now."
I also suggest that John McCain is pushing for:
Year 6: "Total victory is around the corner."
Posts
All Comments
