Vindicatrix, The Refusal of Beauty, The Disfiguring Myth

I’ll let Horace D. Ballard’s positively vibrating review of MONUMENTS and his description of filmmaker Cauleen Smith’s installation, The Warden (2025) speak for itself. Just google him and Vindicatrix.

Vindicatrix, which slipped right by me when I read Carolina Miranda’s earlier piece in the NY Review of Books, maybe because my brain was overloaded by her take on Kara Walker’s “aberrant chimera” of a de-reconstructed Stonewall Jackson sculpture at The Brick. Miranda’s description of the Lost Cause, though, it sticks with me as I think about Smith, and about Vindicatrix: “Walker’s surgical reimagination of the Jackson statue instead dismantles the pleasing aesthetics of white supremacy to reveal the ugliness within: the disfiguring myth of the Lost Cause, which has papered over the racist cornerstones of the Confederacy with romanticized stories about sacrifice and bravery.”

I can’t find a video of her whole conversation, but the student paper at Occidental gives an account of Smith’s explanation of The Warden, made with and around Vindicatrix, a decommissioned idealized female allegorical statue from Richmond symbolizing confederate vengeance: “I really had problems with the way her beauty was always discussed in the description of the statue…and I thought that we should be denied some kind of access to her, or that she should be denied the power to project that beauty.”

From both Miranda and Ballard’s accounts, I think The Warden succeeds most fully as an in-person experience—I haven’t seen the show irl. But it’s Smith’s attunement to the weaponization of beauty and how it resonates with the disfiguring myth that haunts me right now.

Continue reading “Vindicatrix, The Refusal of Beauty, The Disfiguring Myth”

‘We had Duchamp’s last readymade!’

a red circle overlaps an identically sized pale blue circle screenprinted onto a black sheet of paper, a color swatch by alison knowles signed by marcel duchamp
Marcel Duchamp [& Alison Knowles], Color Swatch, 1968, screenprint, 7 ½ x 5 ¾ in., unique, selling at Christie’s in May 2026

When this little Duchamp was sold at Grisebach in 2016, it was, Untitled (from Coeurs Volants), and Alison Knowles was only listed in the provenance.

It’s a color test for the Something Else Press screenprint edition of Coeurs Volant, a collage Duchamp made for Christian Zervos which was printed on the cover of Cahiers d’Art in 1936. Printed and signed in the spring of 1968 before the Duchamps left New York for Spain, it turned out to be the last work Duchamp put out before his death on October 2nd. [Obviously there was Étant Donnés, and he did make some 3D drawings of a fireplace in the house in Cadaqués, but the point here is, on the ground in NYC, it seemed like his last work.]

this screenprint of marcel duchamp's coeurs volants, or flying hearts, is four unevenly sized spaced and cutout hearts set within each other asymmetrically in alternating red and blue, with the intent to reference an optically dynamic effect, if not to actually reproduce it, on black paper. this copy of this edition belonged to andy warhol, who probably bought it as soon as he heard duchamp had died. just a guess
Andy Warhol’s Marcel Duchamp Coeurs Volants, 1968, 24 x 18 in. framed? ed. 11/24, sold at Rago in 2022

Knowles worked at Something Else Press. On her website, here’s how Knowles described the work and told its story:

Coeurs Volants (Flying Hearts) (1967) ->
15 x 22″ Silk Screen on Black Coloraid Paper
Alphabet Edition of Twenty Four.
Color Swatch, 4 x 5″ Silk Screen on Black Coloraid Paper
by Alison Knowles signed by Marcel Duchamp.
Collection Wolfgang Feelisch, Remscheid

Through Daniel Spoerri, the Something Else Press arranged to meet Marcel Duchamp. This screen print was preceeded by a four by five color swatch showing two circles one red, one blue. He selected this color swatch one day while we are having tea at his tenth street apartment in New York. There were eleven color swatches, each showing blue and red circles but in different intensities. He selected one and lefted it out on table saying “Oh, that’s it.” I put the others in my brief case and we kept talking. Teeny Duchamp walked by the table, saw the color swatch and said “MARCEL, when did you do this?” He asked for a pencil, smiled and signed the color swatch. This color swatch was quickly framed and the rumor quickly spread through New York that we had Duchamp’s last readymade! I kept this little swatch for about a year and then sold it to a collecter in Remsheid. Richard Hamilton, to whom I gave a copy of a final print, called this work a piece of memorabilia, not a readymade. Duchamp died the following year but I am sure he would have agreed. I like the story very much because it describes the process as important as the product according to a master.

Which, a lot going on here, starting with Richard Hamilton of all people being kind of a bitch about Duchamp memorabilia, especially after getting a copy of the print. But they’re both not wrong, and I’m sure Duchamp would have approved of the mess.

I don’t think I’m so into Knowles’ takeaway from the story, though I am very interested in what she took away from the meeting, namely the other ten other color swatches that she made, and Duchamp touched but didn’t sign. That Duchamp memorabilia sets my heart aflutter.

But let’s put all that aside and conjure up in our minds the world inside the sentence, “the color swatch was quickly framed and the rumor quickly spread through New York that we had Duchamp’s last readymade!”

19 May 2026, Lot 143: Marcel Duchamp & Alison Knowles, Color Swatch, 1968 [?], est. $15-20,000 [update: sold for $50,800][christies]
Previously, related, and also from an auction in 2016: World’s Greatest Richter or World’s Greatest Non-Richter?

Marian’s Richter Goes Both Ways?

The main thing to point out is that the entire gerhard-richter.com website has been down for months, and there is no information about it. The website was always a project by/for/with collector/lawyer/facsimile object printer/eventual HENI founder Joe Hage. I’m sure there other people in Richterwelt–dealers, wives, kids, archivist/catalogue raisonné editors, studiovolk, foundations—with views about the website, and maybe even plans for it. In the mean time, there’s now a giant, website-shaped hole where exhaustive, open, authoritative information about the artist’s work, publications, exhibitions, and chronology used to be. [UPDATE: Somehow I missed Kenny Schachter’s April 14 column, where he mentions Hage taking the site offline in January, and pegs the whole thing to the introduction of David Zwirner to the mix. greg.org regrets being offline for even a day.]
[WEEKEND UPDATE: via Wayne Bremser‘s forensics, it looks like the website had a security breach sometime soon after Nov. 7 when I got Lobby Art images from it; Nov. 9 has a security notice, and the site’s been gone since.]

a rendering of a male figure with short dark hair dressed all in black standing with hands behind his back in a gallery space to show the scale of a 2-meter tall 1.4 meter wide squeegee painting by gerhard richter
Christie’s scale rendering of Marian Goodman’s 1995 Gerhard Richter painting, Poppies/Mohn [CR 830-1] in vertical orientation

Which means when Marian Goodman’s Richter paintings turn up for sale at Christie’s, there’s no easy way to research which way this incredible 1995 squeegee painting, Poppy/Mohn [CR 830-1], is supposed to go. [update: however it goes, it went for $20.07m.] Because Christie’s shows it in vertical orientation, with dimensions of 200 x 140 cm. And the essay talks about the artist meticulously balancing “the horizontal thrust of his squeegee with the vertical pull of his spatula,” and attacking “the left side of the canvas with verve, exposing myriad underlayers of vibrant pigment.” Which is what it seems we see.

a vertical image of the verso of gerhard richter's 1995 painting CR 830-1, with a lattice of stretcher bars, and 830-1 in the upper right corner and richter 1994 in the lower left corner, except that both of these are sideways, and designed to be read by rotating the canvas 90 degrees. via christie's
Gerhard Richter, Poppy/Mohn [CR 830-1], 1995, verso, via Christie’s

But then the verso is shown vertically, but not only has D-rings on the top and bottom [sic], it’s signed sideways. And that’s exactly how Marian hung it, rotated 90 degrees clockwise. With vertical thrusts and horizontal pulls? Does the way it was made determine the way it is hung? [By the time Corinna Belz filmed him in the studio, Richter was pushing, pulling, and squeegeeing in both directions.]

in the late marian goodman's well appointed home a supposedly vertically oriented gerhard richter squeegee painting hangs horizontally on a white wall above a small dark multidrawered chest, and all we know is the caption that says "alternate orientation," which, when has that been a thing? always? never? just for marian? we should not be learning about this kind of thing from an auction catalogue photo caption is my point
Gerhard Richter “(in an alternate orientation)” in Marian Goodman’s house, via Christie’s

And literally all Christie’s has to say about it is in the caption for the photo from Marian’s house, where it’s described as being “(in an alternate orientation).”

Which is where the artist’s website would come in, to clear things up. And so however he signed it, and however it hung for thirty years, on the Internet Archive Richter had this painting catalogued as vertical. There is no universe where I’m going to call out either Goodman or Richter for this. But I do think the implications of a bi-orientated squeegee painting at the dawn of the mature squeegee painting era have been seriously under-considered. And I am certain I’m not the only one around here who’s curious.

Previously, related, from 2010: The Gerhard Richter Website Reveals All. Almost All.

‘A granular texture and a gunmetal sheen’

a grey lithographed flag by jasper johns painted over 20 years later with a brushy wash in a different color grey, being sold at christies in 2026
Jasper Johns, Flag, 1972/1994, carborundum wash over lithograph on paper, 17 1⁄8 x 23 3⁄8 inches, selling at Christies in May 2026

In 1974 collector Victor Ganz told Jasper Johns that a couple of prints had been damaged by a water leak. Johns said to send them, and he’d see what he could do. He then reworked them with gouache, pencil, and pastel into new, unique drawings. “Victor naturally called Johns to thank him, and when asked what he had been up to, Victor replied, ‘I am pouring water on all the other prints.’”

That story came from modern print dealer Susan Lorence, and it was included in Pepe Karmel’s essay for “Drawing Over,” a 2010 show of Johns’s overdrawn and overpainted prints at Castelli Gallery. [The gallery has a PDF of the catalogue.]

six flags heh by jasper johns installed in a row along a gallery wall at castelli gallery in 2010
Six Flags: installation view of Jasper Johns: Drawing Over, at Castelli Gallery, Nov-Dec. 2010

Lorence’s Flag, above, was one of six reworked Flag lithograph proofs included in that show. Karmel explained the process, where, in 1994, Johns painted and drew over a set of proof prints from the upper stone from a 1972 lithograph, Two Flags, in a variety of mediums. Several, including Lorence’s were repainted with a corborundum wash, a material used in intaglio printing, that, like the graphite washes Johns used in the 1960s, had “a granular texture and a gunmetal sheen” that stood apart from the lithograph ink’s matte surface.

The other corborundum wash Flag in the show sold at Christie’s in 2016. I saw another one at Matthew Marks in 2024. Christie’s says Johns reworked seven 1972 Flags, though I don’t know if that’s the Castelli six plus one, or if they mean he did seven corborundum wash ones. They’re all in the CR, though, so you’ll have time to research it before the Contemporary Day Sale on May 21st. I’m just happy for the granular texture and the gunmetal sheen.

21 May 2026, Lot 429: Jasper Johns, Flag, 1972-94, est $1-1.5m [update: sold for $1.245m][christies]

Untitled (USS Sturtevant), 2026

a conical silver vase with an undulating flat wide rim is engraved from the crew of the uss sturtevant, 30 june 1926. and is being sold at auction in tampa in may 2026, probably to be melted down. it is here presented as a work of art whose object will thus soon cease to exist.
Untitled (USS Sturtevant), 2026, engraved silver presentation trophy vase, 11.5 in. tall. photo via an auctioneer who believes in leaving the patina of neglect on [update: sold for $1,000]

If I were ever in the navy, I would serve on the USS Sturtevant, just for the swag.

Then after three years of command and successful torpedo destroyer training maneuvers off the coast of Virginia, maybe my fine crew would present me with an engraved silver trophy vase like the one they gave Lt Cmdr Freeland Allyn Daubin at the end of his command, a hundred years ago this summer.

But alas, the USS Sturtevant is no more. While patrolling the waters off Key West in 1942, the Sturtevant hit a mine the US Navy had not disclosed to itself, exploded, and sank, killing fifteen.

This trophy vase is being sold by the heirs of an antique store owner in Tampa, and the uncertainty about the weight of its weighted base vs the 10, 15, or 20 troy ounces of silver the auctioneer speculates it might yield when it is melted down.

If I were to make it into an artwork, a found readymade that namechecked one of Duchamp’s great interrogators and one of my own heroes, and which turned out to have a previously undiscovered familial connection to lay alongside Sturtevant’s ex-husband Ira, who went on to sexually revolutionize the world by introducing his next partner Meg Crane’s home pregnancy test to market, we could lock in a more prolonged cultural appreciation, for this battered uterus diagram-shaped trophy vase, if not a greater market value.

But a genealogical search yields no apparent relation between the home pregnancy test/conceptual artist-divorcing Sturtevants of New York and New England and the family of Ensign Albert Dillon Sturtevant of Washington DC, after whom the destroyer was named. And my art practice is unlikely to produce a five-figure object in the next two weeks. So unless and until I end up having to repeat this vase in the future, this blog post will soon be the only thing holding this concept together, and this will be [yet] an[other] artwork whose object has ceased to exist.

The Wives of Genius Club

a top down photo of small flowers growing in dark soil: purple, red, pink/white, light blue, a 1992 work by felix gonzalez torres of alice b toklas and gertrude stein's grave, this img via christie's 2005
“Untitled” (Alice B. Toklas and Gertrude Stein’s Grave, Paris), 1992, ed. 1/4+1AP plus some other prints now considered non-work, but which are conceptually very fecund, this one sold at Christie’s in 2005

One of the great surprises in the exhibition catalogue for Felix Gonzalez-Torres (Always To Return)—which I brought up to curators Charlotte Ickes and Josh T. Franco in our conversation yesterday—is the essay by Joshua Chambers-Letson about Felix’s 1992 photo of flowers, “Untitled” (Alice B. Toklas and Gertrude Stein’s Grave, Paris). Chambers-Letson discusses the work as portraiture, and in the context it’s traditionally been seen in, of “queer death, queer grief, and queer love.” But then pivoting to the work as an affirmation of queer life, he proceeds to expand on Stein and Toklas’ relationship as a complicated but revolutionary and rather boldly open example of queer companionship in a hostile world.

Chambers-Letson traces the contours of Stein & Toklas’ relationship IRL and in The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas. Its queerness stands as “the open secret at the heart of the book” in which Stein places Toklas “among the ‘wives of genius.'”

Continue reading “The Wives of Genius Club”

And I Alley Oop

a vertically oriented orange painting has a three row comic strip in the center of the upper half, painted over in colors that obscure but roughly match the scenes underneath. jasper johns' alley oop was made for robert rauschenberg in 1958.
Jasper Johns, Alley Oop, 1958, oil on newsprint and paper on cardboard mounted on masonite, 23 1/4 x 18 in., selling from the collection of S.I. Newhouse at Christie’s on 18 May 2026 [update: sold for $5.8m]

Some of the most amazing artworks in S.I. Newhouse’s collection are coming up for sale, and of the sixteen works at Christie’s next month, Jasper Johns’s Alley Oop is the one I’d place an insider petroleum futures trade about the reopening of the Straits of Hormuz for. Actually, no, but it is l0w-key the best, even among some greats.

the page from a color comic book showing the 22 june 1958 comic strip alley oop, four rows of panels in which a caveman in a fur loincloth discusses a time machine with a couple of older bougie white guys, mostly while sitting in various rooms of a house. via christie's
Christie’s has a cleaner image of the 22 Jun 1958 Alley Oop comic strip that Johns painted over than that guy who’s so mad about Lichtenstein. Johns also either reformatted the panels to fit his form, or had a version printed wider than this onw.

Though it is similar in form to Johns’s two Flag on Orange Field paintings that precede it, it’s based on an entirely different found image: a comic strip about ae thrown-out-of-time caveman named Alley Oop, collaged onto a piece of cardboard, and abstracted with gestural brushstrokes in oil.

The provenance is tight, not because it was in S.I.’s collection, but because Johns made it for Rauschenberg, and it stayed with him until Newhouse bought it in 1988. Rauschenberg sold his art collection to finance ROCI, his multi-year international initiative to foster cross-cultural understanding and appreciation of differences through art.

a 1958 comic strip about a shirtless caveman in modern times, reformated from four rows of panels to three to match the version jasper johns used in his painting alley oop
Alley Oop from 22 June 1958 reconfigured to match the 3-row layout Johns used. Newspapers regularly edited comic strips, so maybe this is how Johns found it? Or did he reconfigure it himself to make it more flag-shaped? Why not buy Alley Oop and have your conservators study it and see?

It was first seen in public in 1964, in Johns’s show at the Jewish Museum, but it is a painting for one person, or rather, for two. Jonathan D. Katz did important work tracing Alley Oop to comic strip references in two of Rauschenberg’s early combines made in 1954—Collection and Charlene—artworks that the artists lived with throughout their time together. Rauschenberg actually used three copies of the same comic strip, from multiple copies of the same day’s newspaper, in the two works. But the twist is, the comic was called Moon Mullins, and it used the original acrobat-related meaning of Alley Oop as a punchline about the reckless things a boy does to impress a girl.

Whatever its meaning—and Katz floats several possible queer theory-based interpretations as he maps out the context of these artists at this moment in their lives, and at this moment in their homophobic culture—Alley Oop was a reference Johns and Rauschenberg shared. It’s an example of the private language of couples that appeared in both of their work at a pivotal point in their practices, when such personal, autobiographical, and expressionistic content was supposedly stripped from their art.

It turns out it’s there, but it was just not meant for you, or me, or anyone else to recognize. And I love that for them.

Hartley and Duchamp On Background

marsden hartley's 1914 painting the warriors is mostly horses' asses, a field of pale white soldiers with plumed hats mounted on mostly red horses, heading away across mostly orange ground, toward the top of the image. in the center is a pyramidal, or perhaps fountain-shaped composition of one figure on horseback at the top and three figures on horses  below, in profile, standing amid clouds of glory on a curved red base. via the mhlp
Marsden Hartley, The Warriors, aka No Title #68, aka Warriors, aka Pt-0159, 1914, 47 1/2 x 47 1/4 in., oil on canvas, photographed for the Marsden Hartley Legacy Project by Joshua Nefsky

Speaking of Marcel Duchamp, it’s always wild to me that the Alfred Stieglitz photo Marcel Duchamp used to introduce Fountain to the world set the urinal against Marsden Hartley’s 1914 German-era painting, [The] Warriors.

alfred stieglitz's 1917 photo of duchamp's fountain is black and white portrait of a urinal turned onto its back sitting on a pedestal that it overhangs. the shape of the urinal is like a seated cloaked virgin mary or the buddha. the busy dark background turns out to be marsden hartley's painting the warriors. the photo is published in a page of the blind man, no. 2, in may 1917, with the caption: the exhibit refused by the independents
Alfred Stieglitz, Fountain by R. Mutt, The Blind Man, May 1917, via Wikipedia/The Met

What Richard Schiff wrote about that Jasper Johns ink drawing of Flag on Orange Field applies here, too: “It need not be orange anymore than a monochromatic photograph of a rainbow need be multicolored. The medium determines how the qualities of a work appear.” But seeing things in color sure does change things. I got kind of annoyed by the end of the podcast and am not going back, but I think Helen Molesworth was talking about how Duchamp’s Fountain was an image before it was an object.

Now I wonder what the relationship between Mutt’s urinal and Hartley’s painting was like when they were photographed together. I’d assumed it was just lying around 291, but the Marsden Hartley Legacy Project notes that in March 1917, Warriors was exhibited at Ardsley Studios in Brooklyn, alongside paintings by Morton Schamberg. That was a month before Fountain was submitted to the Independents. Ardsley Studios was the project of Hamilton Easter Field, a rich, gay Brooklyn Quaker whose family’s estate on the North Shore was apparently inspiration for the site, if not the style, of Fitzgerald’s West Egg.

martin schamberg's sepia photo of a scarred sink drain trap mounted upside down to a white board at the bottom of the image. the background is a neat machine like drawing or painting by schamberg himself, though he has been long wrongly credited with the sculpture as well. it is by elsa von freytag lohringhoven. this 1917 photo is at the met
Elsa von Freytag-Lohringhoven, God, 1917, pipe on mitre box, photographed by Morton Schamberg with one of Schamberg’s paintings in the background, collection: metmuseum.org

But more to the point at hand, perhaps, is Schamberg, who, also in 1917, photographed a sculpture made from plumbing in front of a painting. One of Schamberg’s own paintings was the backdrop for at least one of the pictures he made of God, Elsa von Freytag-Lohringhoven’s drain trap mounted on a mitre box.

a digital collage of stieglitz's black and white photo of duchamp's urinal sculpture fountain overlaid on the color image of entire painting by marsden hartley  that's in the background. which makes apparent the similarities between the outline of the urinal and the triangular composition at the center of hartley's painting, a detail it is not possible to discern from the version duchamp published in 1917
I was just thinking of the color, and did not expect to see the form of Duchamp’s Fountain echoing the composition of Hartley’s Warriors, but here we are. William Camfield figures this is why Stieglitz chose the painting, which is several assumptions.

Anyway, this hacked collage is of little help to understanding the site of Stieglitz’s photograph, but maybe it’s a start. I think there was more going on in the background than it seemed.

[A few minutes later update] As noted above and surprising no one, Fountain expert William Camfield noted the two works’ formal similarities. From Warriors‘ exhibition history, I think the first or even only time so far that the painting has been exhibited in the context of Fountain is Sarah Greenough’s 2001 show at the National Gallery, Modern Art and America: Alfred Stieglitz and His New York Galleries. The checklist included both The Blind Man and the painting, but also a 1964 Schwarz replica of Fountain. I’ll look for an installation shot.

The Image As Object Is Inevitably Political

a framed drawing of black ink on plastic of the us flag in the top half of a larger vertical rectangle, with the swirls of non-absorbing ink undulating across the picture. a 1977 jasper johns drawing at craig starr gallery in nyc in april 2026
Jasper Johns, Flag on Orange Field, 1977, Ink on plastic, 15 3/4 x 11 7/8 inches, originally a gift to Mark Jenkins

Craig Starr has a show of Jasper Johns Flags organized with the artist, in memory of Agnes Gund. I like the little catalogue and Richard Schiff’s essay about the artist as a subject. But I really love this bit of the show’s announcement text, which sums up where we find ourselves right now on the US flag as a subject:

Across the exhibition, Johns tests how far this familiar symbol can be altered while remaining legible. The flags are stripped of their usual conventions—their singularity, their expected color palette, and even their stable symbolic meaning—turning the motif into a flexible structure whose identity is transformed. These nontraditional treatments activate the associations embedded within the symbol itself. A flag is never neutral: it carries meanings that shift with the viewer’s nationality, historical moment, and personal relationship to the nation it represents. As an emblem of the United States—its government, ideals, and people—the image is inevitably political. It is also a popular symbol that, much like the Andy Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans, can be recontextualized through repetition and display. By altering its palette, multiplying its form, or isolating its structural elements, Johns transforms the flag from a stable symbol into a site where cultural attitudes, anxieties, and projections surface. The motif hovers between familiarity and estrangement, inviting viewers to reconsider an image they thought they already knew.

I also love the little ink on plastic Flag on Orange Field Johns gave to Mark Lancaster in 1977, which is at once a depiction of an image as object—the original 1958 painting—and an incredible object itself.

Where’s My Pepto-Bismol In A Marble Box Content?

screenshot of marios art world instagram post of a 37 in cube of white marble filled to the absolute brim with pink pepto bismol in a large concrete floor gallery in los angeles, where the glass garage door or window whatever and the parked cars beyond are partially reflected in the surface of the pepto bismol, one of charles ray's earlier masterpieces before he started making works out of billionaires' money
Screenshot

Los Angeles, have you all lost your minds? I know you have a new overpass museum and you’re excited to post and effuse about it, but it’ll be there for 500 YEARS.

Meanwhile, Charles Ray’s Pepto-Bismol in a Marble Box just went on view for the first time in ages, and only for a few WEEKS. Why every photo taken in LA is not of this mind-boggling sculpture rn is absolutely beyond me.

[ok five minutes after posting update: As I went about calculating the interior volume of Ray’s cube (1 cu. yard = 201.974 gallons), and shopping for bulk Pepto-Bismol, and finding gallon-size jugs of veterinary-grade analogs that do not have the same red & blue dyes, so the color is not quite right, I decided to look up any previous discussion of the amount of Pepto-Bismol in this thing. And in the related, earlier ink cube Ray made. And Suzanne Muchnic reviewed Ray’s original show for the LA Times. The answer, almost disappointingly, is just 10 gallons of Pepto-Bismol, barely two inches deep.]

[after lunch update: Which means that all the Pepto-Bismol in Ray’s marble cube would fit in a cube with interior dimensions of just 13.219 inches, so say 14 inches on a side. That’s like centerpiece-size. A pedestal objet. Perhaps an edition of 20 that actually fills the entire purported volume of Ray’s sculpture. Only for real.]

an altered screenshot of a charles ray sculpture in a los angeles gallery, pepto-bismol in a marble box is a 37-in cube of white carrara marble slabs seemingly filled to the top with pink pepto bismol. a miniaturized version of the marble box has been added in the lower foreground, a 14-inch box that contains the same amount of pepto bismol that ray's sculpture actually contains: 10 gallons. this is a sculpture proposed by me, greg.org, in an edition of 20, that will thus collectively contain the amount of pepto-bismol ray's sculpture appeared to contain.
Study for Ray Pepto-Bismol in a Marble Box, 2026, 14 x 14 x 14 in., Pepto-Bismol and marble, ed.20 ig

Old Charles Ray is on view at Deitch while new Charles Ray is at Marks, where plenty of people seem able to post photos of the horse. [deitch, matthewmarks]

Marsden Hartley, Walt Whitman’s Houses

the dust jacket of walt whitman in mickle street is white with a black and white reproduction of a sketchy painting of a little two story clapboard rowhouse in camden new jersey with oddly contrasting painted shutters, by marsden hartley. i thought this copy of the book was $15, but it turns out the typeface on the bookseller's website is a jazzy art deco situation, and only when I added shipping and got to checkout did I realize it was $45. still, a small price to pay to advance the scholarship on this tiny painting
Walt Whitman in Mickle Street, 1921, 1st ed. with “Walt Whitman’s House [1908] (sic)” on the cover/dj, now on its way to my house.

In her 2006 chapter on Marsden Hartley’s intense manly connection to Walt Whitman, Ruth L. Bohan noted that Hartley’s painting, Walt Whitman’s House, 328 Mickle Street, Camden, New Jersey, was on the frontispiece of Elizabeth Leavitt Keller’s 1921 memoir about caring for the poet in his last years.

Bohan may have only seen a stripped and rebound library copy, or she would have mentioned that the painting also appeared on the dust jacket of Walt Whitman In Mickle Street, over a tagline from Edna St. Vincent Millay: “There’s this little street and this little house.” The house is now a museum.

a tightly cropped photo of marsden hartley's 1905 painting of walt whitman's last house, a two story clapboard  rowhouse in greens and mushroomy browns, with a sliver of open sky at the top, as published by the marsden hartley legacy project and used fairly, i'm sure
Marsden Hartley, Walt Whitman’s House [PT-0091], c. 1905, oil on board, 9 1/2 x 5 1/2 in., private collection, as published by the Marsden Hartley Legacy Project
Continue reading “Marsden Hartley, Walt Whitman’s Houses”

Back At It Again At Politics & Prose

a screenshot of the politics and prose website with headshots of two smithsonian curators, a white lady with brown hair and a latinx guy in a dark cap, and the cover of the felix gonzalez torres exhibition catalogue they published, with a blue mirror work by the artist on the cover

RESCHEDULED:
SUNDAY
APRIL 26, 3PM

OK, neither snow nor rain or war of night…

Smithsonian curators Charlotte Ickes and Josh T. Franco will be talking with me—and you?—about their extraordinary exhibition catalogue, Felix Gonzalez-Torres (Always To Return), this coming Sunday, April 26 at 3:00, at Politics & Prose on Connecticut Avenue. Come get your questions asked and your books signed, it’s a ravishing, thoughtful, beauty.

[Post-game update] This was a great conversation with inspiring people and big, engaged audience. It was awesome. Thanks to the folks who read about it here and came to listen; you’re heroes. Meanwhile, Charlotte and Josh both have huge fanbases, so I am now on board with hanging with famous people—as long as they’re famous for something amazing like this book or this show.

Meanwhile, there is an unsurprisingly excellent review of the catalogue by Julia Bryan-Wilson at Burlington Contemporary. Check that out.

Venini Clessidre Of The Revolution

an elegant, bulbous modernist hourglass handmade in venice by venini in two tones of blue glass the colors of the sea sits in a featureless lightbox, waiting for a bidder at wright20
Venini Clessidra, n.d., 11.5 in tall, selling 30 Apr 2026 at Wright20

Wright can auction 86 Venini hourglasses over the years, and they just drift by unnoticed. But then one night there’ll be a foot-tall hourglass standing alone in the midst of enough useless silver and gilt objets, tchotchkes, and designer ashtrays to start a revolution, with the blue and blue of the sea on a summer evening, and you’re staying up late, looking up technical glassblowing terms in Italian: clessidra, incalmo,

Lol and then just as you’re about to post, you find the Venini channel on YouTube, and you see the promo for the Peter Marino Collection, and the two-toned capsule-shaped vases by a designer who cites The Matrix which are named after hormones and called Happy Pills, and you’re like, oh right, we need to fill up all the clessidre with gasoline and storm the palace.

Lot 213, 30 Apr 2026, [Fulvio Bianconi &] Paolo Venini, Clessidra/Hourglass, est. $800-1200 [wright20]

Spiraling on BLKNWS

an infographic of short zig-zag lines tallying the numer of black people living in cities of various sizes in 1890, and a long red line, so long it spirals into the center of the page, showing the vast majority of black americans living in rural areas, designed by w.e.b. dubois
W.E.B. Du Bois, data visualization of the rural vs urban distribution of Black American populations in 1890, c.1900, via Smithsonian

I’ve been trying to keep up a pace here, but it is taking me longer than I expected to put some thoughts together about Kahlil Joseph’s 2025 film, BLKNWS: Terms & Conditions. When David Naimon, who hosts Between The Covers, had asked me about it on Bluesky, I thought I knew all I needed from the original 2018 video installation, and from the post-production and distribution wrangling that swirled around its adaptation into a feature film.

a contemporary drone photo of spiral jetty with the parking lot that intrudes on the base, and the lakebed that hasn't seen water in years, and if things don't change, may never? from the sl tribune
A contemporary drone shot of Spiral Jetty, 1970, via SLTrib

But BLKNWS the film is both recognizable, and also totally new. It is what it began as: a non-linear edit of the people, events, and ideas that constitute Black history, culture, and experience in the thin form of a cable news channel. And it has become something else entirely: encyclopedic and personal, autobiographical and universal, historic and prophetic. Joseph and his producer Onye Anyanwu opened BLKNWS up to collaboration—Naimon’s initial teaser was about the spectacular list of contributors and cameos—and they opened the film’s structure, or rather, took on a structure—the spiral—that opens, loops, and expands.

Maybe the logical thing to do is to follow their lead, and spiral, just blog about BLKNWS from now on, and take occasional note of how it turns and returns periodically to the compass points marked here before.

[next morning continuation]

a dark leviathan-shaped cruise ship hovers above the surface of a dark sea, clouds behind it to the left, and sunlit horizon behind the stern, a still from blknws, a film my kahlil joseph
BLKNWS, ‘The Nautica,’ via indiewire
Continue reading “Spiraling on BLKNWS”

Cy Twombly Facsimile Objects

two polaroid sized prints on aluminum sit on a hand rubbed enzo mari autoprogettazione tabletop: a white peony against a dark background, and a section of a large painting with red blossom shapes of thinned acrylic that drip down like blood, in a studio. facsimile objects based on cy twombly photos, the one on the left with the peony is/was propped on the little urn and antlers combo holding twombly's ashes, which appears in the cy, dear documentary, on the top shelf of the foundation office in gaeta.
Cy Twombly Facsimile Objects CT1 and CT2, 2026, dye sublimation print on aluminum, 4.25 x 3.5 inches

I thought I’d try a little something, and then it turns out the minimum width for printing these is 4 inches, so I tried out two little somethings. I like them.

The thing about Twombly’s photos is that they’re rarely experienced as their original Polaroids; they’re either books–or, if you’re fancy—enlarged prints.

I think that’s changing a bit, but in the mean time, I wanted to see what they’re like at real size. They’re nice, and I could easily see why you’d want to collect’em all.