The we go all the way across the world, where the LA Times (I think you're gonna need to register to read it, sorry) published last Monday an Op-Ed piece by Thomas Crow. As they say Mr. Crow "is the director of the Getty Research Institute, where "The Business of Art: Evidence from the Art Market," is on exhibit through June 13." First off, I've been watching with more than a passing interest the stats for this site, and it seems that every time I write about the Getty's exhibit, The Business of Art" that every intern at the Getty and their mother are swarming all over this blog - ok, maybe not swarming, but I figure it can't hurt to write something deliberately that will garner me another half dozen hits.

Now I've already written tons about how much I like the idea of the show, and would dearly love to get out there to see it, and just to keep everything above board, Maria Gilbert just sent me a copy of the booklet that goes along with the exhibit, and an offer of a tour, cool, eh? But back to the article, it serves pretty much as high toned fluff that could have been an ad for the exhibit. Some of the better lines are: "The papers of this larger-than-life character provide a portrait of Gilded Age manners worthy of Edith Wharton." And "Looking at a painting and seeing only its price is like going to a film and seeing only its opening gross receipts." Yes, Mr. Crow can write, but the article doesn't add any illumination, pity.

While we're on the west coast, one of the bastions of east coast liberalism, The Nation, paid Abby Aguirre to review "LA's Early Moderns: Art/Architecture/Photography" a book by Victoria Dailey, Natalie Shrivers and Michael Dawson. I'm certain that the folk at the Getty were all over the book when it came out, as for me, the review is a simple enough thing. It duly lists what I assume are most of the names dropped in the book, but doesn't do much about the critical analysis. I'd much rather read Arthur C Danto's articles in the Nation, if anybody is listening.

Then from the Nation to the National Post. Now, I probably should say something nice, because that National Post is reviewing Art. But, unfortunately it is the National Post. And, I probably should save it for tomorrow's review round up. But, this looks like to much fun to save for a rainy day. On Thursday, somebody named Samantha Grice wrote 1,127 words about the Bill Burns exhibit at the Saidye Bronfman Centre called "Safety Gear for Small Animals." She plays it straight, which misses the entire point and purpose of the show. If you're not out there busting a gut with a 95 db belly laugh while viewing the show, you're better off watching one of those Sally Struthers infomercials about saving some malnourished kid from Africa. In a nutshell, Mr. Burns is flipping a mighty large bird at both the current art world, and the petaphiles. Ms. Grice, takes his whole concept hook line and sinker, and reports it straight, which has the effect of turning what strikes me as a mighty tasty show into grist. It just makes me grimace. Ok, enough with the really bad puns.