[Republicanprofessor]

Here is another review of her work from artdaily.com; I was unable to copy it to add here. I was actually hoping to find a really good review of her work on line, but I had to write up my own instead. But this one is okay.

http://www.artdaily.com/section/news/index.asp?int_sec=2&int_new=15284

This is a rather obtuse review from the Village Voice. Sometimes the critics get so convoluted I lose track of what they are saying. But I make reference to it for those who want as much breadth of opinion on Murray’s work as possible.

http://www.villagevoice.com/art/0543,saltz,69187,13.html

[Republicanprofessor]

Art Appreciation/Education ping.

Let me know if you want on or off this list.

Also let me know if I have opened your eyes to her work. Do you like it? Why or why not? (Also, keep in mind that the images I post here convey maybe 3% of what the power is like when you see the show.)

[nuconvert]

thanx for the ping

[nuconvert]

Do you know the title of that last Kandinsky work (with the bluish/purple background)?

[Rembrandt_fan]

You've made me color drunk today (a good thing). Could've done without the Kruger and Salle reminders, though--their kind of ham-fisted irony and smug, self-congratulatory dreck gets on my nerves in a major way. I would argue, too, that Kruger is more designer than artist, better suited to magazine covers than gallery or museum walls. Salle, of course, wears his angst-ridden sarcasm like a second skin. Who would've thought these celebrated Eighties icons would become so dated and hackneyed so soon after? Warhol, although a kind of one-trick-pony insofar as his consumerism/mass production themes are concerned, still holds up. At least he had something to say, and said it with originality and wit.