Today on Blogcritics
Home » Ink stained fingers, part two

Ink stained fingers, part two

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Howdy!

It was only last week that I came remembered that Radio-Canada has an absolutely kick-ass visual art section, I can only imagine that their dance, book, movie, and whatever else sections are as good. The only things that I can find fault with are minor (drat!). They don’t date their articles, so there isn’t any easy way to id what is new, but in their defense they do a very very good job of keeping current on what’s showing where. And they definitely could make the articles longer. But anybody who publishes three or four reviews, can’t be considered a meany. Actually let me take that sentence back, I know that once I get around to writing about what Nicholas Mavrikakis writes will make me eat it in its entirety. But for the time being back to Rad-Can.

This week the new additions seem to be a review of the Jacques Bilodeau exhibit at Galerie Joyce Yahouda (340 words), Raoul Barré at the Cinematheque Quebecoise (350 words), Trésors anciens et manuscrits de la mer Morte at the Museum of Civilization in Gatineau (300 words), Tanagra: le petit peuple d’argile at the Musee des Beaux Arts (317 words), and Sable at the Musee de la civilisation in Quebec city (295 words). In all of the reviews, they have a selection of pictures of what you’re supposed to go see. And I’ll wait until next week before taking the gloves off and commenting on what Claude Couillard actually writes.

Over at Voir, Nicolas Mavrikakis writes 567 words about the Gwenaël Bélanger at Galerie Graff. Unlike Ms. Tousignant’s piece in Hour, this review actually gets 6 comments from the peanut gallery. And despite the fact that the powers that be at Voir limiting the commentary to 2000 characters, the 6 writers have already combined for 888 words, hmmm, do you think that Voir will eventually start paying people for their comments? Or do you think that perhaps they might realize that Mr. Mavrikakis is too expensive and ditch the idea of paying for content?

As per normal, Mr. Mavrikakis drops names left, right and center. In this case, Nicolas Baier, Alain Paiement, David Hockney and Yan Dibetts all in one paragraph, last week’s review of Bertrand R. Pitt in another, and Stéphane Gilot. The thing that jumped out at me most was this sentence: “La même œuvre dans un musée ou dans un café ne sera pas perçue avec le même regard.” (Or for the blokes in the house – Same work in a museum or a coffee will not be perceived with the same glance.) Duh!

Powered by

About Zeke