2026.03.06
Otto George Lauf's Chess Sets The larger set from the early to mid 1960s, and the portable set from 1972.
received Duchamp's Telegram with today's mail
I was surprised to read the following on page 45 (and subsequently on page 404):
"The urinal in the photo[graph by Alfred Stieglitz] bears the signature, R. Mutt, and the date, 1917, both apparently painted on the object but, according to new scholarship, most likely painted on the photo itself."3
3. A growing number of Duchamp scholars have come to accept the thesis, recently expressed by Jan Bäcklund, that the signature and the date are not written on the urinal itself but on the photo, whether on the negative or on the print. I [Thierry de Duve] was immediately convinced: how could I not have noticed before--or rather, noticed but not registered--that the strokes composing the letters do not follow the relief of the actual object? Once that piece of evidence is taken into account, which is to say, accepted, it is impossible to revert to the theory that the object itself had been inscribed. See Jan Bäcklund, 'Readymade and Fake: The Richard Mutt Case Reitinerated', Visual Arkivering, 13 (2018), pp. 24-45. Although Bäcklund's article contains several factual errors and jumps to unwarranted conclusions (namely, that the object was never submitted to the Independents and that the whole R. Mutt affair amounted to the production of a 'generic fake'), the repositioning of the inscription on the photo--not on the negative, however: it would have been scratched, which is at odds with the smooth and rounded lettering--is quite convincing.
Well, at least I'm not the only one to suspect 'The Richard Mutt Case' as a hoax. Fortunately, Bäcklund's 'Readymade and Fake' is freely available online, and I'll be reading it soon.
2025.03.06
451 Rhawn Gallery
2019.03.06
Mary Boone's 180 hours of community service hour 30
2007.03.06
fetching Ruff Ruff stuff? 071
fetching Ruff Ruff stuff? 072
fetching Ruff Ruff stuff? 073
fetching Ruff Ruff stuff? 074
fetching Ruff Ruff stuff? 075
fetching Ruff Ruff stuff? 076
2005.03.06
In The Future Everyone Will Have...
We know what happened when the 'plane of the present' sliced through the navel, so which future are we talking about here? Are you wondering about when the present slices through the duodenum? or the liver? or the crest of the diaphragm? Or perhaps you are wondering about when the present slices through the heart and the lungs? Or are you wondering about the big age of cutting-off-point as the present slices through the neck? What will humanity be when the present slices through the head?
2002.03.06
Re: Tate Modern Fate Pitied
It seems truly ironic that a building renovation that will no doubt go down in history as a great (art)work of architecture might be not at all good for that which it was (re)designed. In other words, how weird is contemporary architecture culture when an art museum is deemed a great work of art, yet at the same time isn't at all good as an art museum?
I'm thinking more and more lately that what architecture really needs these days is more and more good whistle blowers.
|