Adolf Hitler was rejected from the Vienna Akademie der Bildenden Künste in 1907. In 1906 Austrian artist Egon Schiele had entered the school, with the rejection of Hitler it is commonly believed that Schiele and Hitler knew each other, however, there is no evidence to prove that they met or knew each other at that time.
On Cape Town’s waterfront at the southern tip of Africa, the world’s biggest museum of contemporary art from across the continent is being carved from a conglomeration of concrete tubes nine storeys high.
The $50 million (36.7 million euro) project to transform the grim functionality of 42 disused colonial grain silos into an ultramodern tribute to African creativity is driven by an international team of art experts and architects.
Many in the art world were staggered by recent reports that the Italian curator Germano Celant is being paid €750,000 to organise a pavilion for the Milan Expo 2015. Celant’s fee, and the incredulity it provoked, raises questions about how much curators are typically paid for organising biennials and large-scale international exhibitions.
The Art Newspaper surveyed around 40 international curators and biennial organisers; our research shows that biennials usually pay their top curators less than one-sixth of Celant’s total fee.
Das Wunderkind, 1874, Gabriel von Hackl
Let’s start with this: Any cultural institution that has even a smidgen of belief in the part of its mission statement that talks about education and outreach and community service would love to be free. So, all of them.
Warhol portrait of Robert Rauschenberg, location: Andrea Caratsch’s gallery in Zurich. Made in 1962.
Perhaps, this is, the earliest portrait of a living sitter in Warhol’s mature career, and one of his very earliest silkscreens. (not count his movie-star images as portraits). That means this work is a first experiment in the genre that filled the final two-thirds of Warhol’s career.
The 1962 portrait features one of the cutting-edge artists that Warhol was most keen on emulating, and whose friendship he had only just managed to win. Average museumgoers, and even experts, don’t always realize how deeply committed Warhol was to the classic, egghead avant-garde, and how deeply immersed he was in it at this point in his career; this portrait stands as his declaration of that commitment. It also comes at just the moment when Warhol was able to turn the tables on Rauschenberg, by offering to help his elder learn the new photo-silkscreen technique. (Although the tale’s also told that Rauschenberg taught him.)
Rauschenberg was also some kind of model for Warhol of what it was to be a successful gay artist, even if he had once rejected Warhol as too “swish” for his tastes. I think you can read Rauschenberg’s un-swish-ness from the way Warhol depicts him here, in an image that has none of the camp playfulness of Warhol’s Pop works from this era. Drowning in a deep-blue sea, Rauschenberg has stronger echoes in this portrait of his own Black Paintings, or of Warhol’s later “Disasters,” than of Warhol’s “Troy Donohue” or “Marilyn” silkscreens. You could almost read this dour, barely-there portrait as being in mourning for, or at least a token of, Rauschenberg’s closeted life. With its figure small and lost, gazing up into the heavens, this is one of the most wistful images Warhol ever made. All that blackness, and the filmic stutters running down the surface of the work, remind me most of Warhol’s dark and cryptic “Shadow” silkscreens from 1978.
- via Blouin artinfo & Blake Gopnik