As part of our continuing effort to encourage dialogue among the diverse aspects of the Boston community, Big RED & Shiny asked a variety of culture-makers to respond to the following statement:
We as artists (and critics, theorists, gallerists, etc) love our -isms. They allow us to define an artist and their work, to give them a framework and a historical context.
The histories to which we subscribe are both a necessity and a burden, and often the past is a crutch when reading contemporary art. It seems that we are post- everything, and there is very little discourse around work that is not within that history. What makes Boston so vital and exciting for artwork is the creation of new hybrids for discussion, existing outside our concepts of -isms.
With this in mind: What new artists or works are shaping the future of the arts in Boston (perhaps defining a new -ism)? How could the existing structure of the arts in Boston adjust to better suit these artists and their work?
![]() |
|
by Sarah Hutt, artist and Director of Visual Arts Programming for the Mayors Office of Arts, Tourism and Special Events. |
by kanarinka, Associate Director at Art Interactive and the co-founder of iKatun. |
by Kathleen Bitetti, artist and executive director of Artists Foundation. |
by Nathan Lewis, artist and regular Big RED contributor. |
by Charles Giuliano, the 'Andy Rooney' of Big RED, and the director of exhibitions for The New England School of Art & Design at Suffolk University. |
by Joe Zane, artist and occasional contributor to Big RED. |
by Anneka Lenssen, the president of the board of Mobius and regular contributor to Big RED. |
by Fred Levy, artist and Co-Curator for the Art Institute of Boston's Cyberarts Event. |
by Karine Jouenne, director of NAO Project Gallery. |
by Heidi Marston, artist and regular contributor to Big RED. |
by Ben Sloat, artist and founding Big RED contributor. |
|
- See more at: http://www.bigredandshiny.com/cgi-bin/BRS.cgi?section=article&issue=17&article=RED_ISM_SCHISM_021127#sthash.MYpqZZQ4.dpuf
