(link)
The painting we all think needs some championing, some explaining. The pr retracts the title's seeming promotion of vitalism. In fact rightly says “The problem with vitalistic scenarios is their total failure to take the influence of external social and economic factors into account." and "proves to be mere wishful thinking, albeit a form of wishful thinking that is hugely appealing." Yet we get this, the artists in this exhibition don't so much do vitalism so much as do the usual "subvert them, retract them, or carry them to absurd lengths". The attached booklet too reading more like a J Peterman catalog of art-patter copy to get you to buy than providing any further insight, blurbs about your a painting with an accredited art historian. Maybe the coming book has more. A sort of buy my book and this art too type of exhibition. Did any of these painters need critical help? Why do we treat painting with kid's gloves, art historians so kind to painting? Couldn't these paintings take a bit more cutting? Their market success on abusing vitalist premise that we hide under a security blanked called criticality, that there may be no real subversions, retraction, or absurdification only a gesture at it.
Click: “Painting: Now & Forever, Part III” at Greene Naftali & Matthew Marks