Here's what to expect from the space at 421 E. Sixth St. between Avenue A and First Avenue... via the EVG inbox...
The Brant Foundation is pleased to present Basquiat x Warhol at the Foundation's East Village location, curated by Dr. Dieter Buchhart and Peter M. Brant in collaboration with Dr. Anna Karina Hofbauer. On view from Nov. 1, 2023, through Jan. 7, 2024, this is the first time the collaboration has been the subject of a major New York exhibition since Andy Warhol & Jean-Michel Basquiat at Gagosian Gallery in 1997. The exhibition is traveling from Fondation Louis Vuitton in Paris and has benefited from the collaboration between the two institutions.
The Brant Foundation's first show here in the spring of 2019 featured work by Basquiat — some 70 works collectively valued at $1 billion. A career-spanning Warhol collection was here back in the spring.
Tickets for the new show are $20, and $15 for EV residents. (Kids under 12 are free, etc.) Find ticket info here.
$15 ? Way too much, even for such amazing art. Prefer food on the table.
ReplyDeleteWhat year are you in right now?
DeleteLet the complaints about the Brant Foundation and the admission charge to this world-class exhibit traveling from the Louis Vuitton Foundation in Paris to the EV begin now. Pls. enter your gripe below. Extra points if you criticize Brant personally, mention his past criminal conviction, comment on his tax returns/tax deductions, protest the admission charge to this exhibit, and argue that the exhibit has no roots in the East Village (even though Basquiat lived here).
ReplyDeleteThe comments section here is like a comically inverted version of the NY Post's. Same level of antipathy, just pointed in a different direction. Anything actually good (and the art shows at the Brant Foundation are great) is bitterly harangued for being corporatist, tied to nefarious capitalist machinations, or another example of the onslaught of gentrification. But maybe that's right. Better to spend $15 on a pre-roll from one of the dozen weed shops in the neighborhood and use the change on a $1.50 slice (inflation—sheesh). At least that would support small businesses—shop local!—and one can sit in the park and stew for free.
Delete$15 can feed a whole family of four the entire day! What kind of people can afford to shell so much money just to see an art exhibition once? Probably the kind of people that replaced those who where pushed out of the neighborhood by their land owning lords... Do art organizations reflect on their role in communities, or is it merely marketing.... sad...
DeleteOne of these artists killed modern art, the other gave it a new life.
ReplyDeleteSounds like you've griped enough to cover everybody else.
ReplyDeleteThanks!
"if you criticize Brant personally, mention his past criminal conviction, comment on his tax returns/tax deductions"
ReplyDeleteI mean, if you're a rich guy who dodged his taxes criminally and is now exploiting the ridiculous "foundation" tax law loopholes to do the same in a more legal but less ethical manner still, you probably deserve to hear about it every time your name comes up in public. Not sure why any EV resident would be running around stanning freelance (I hope) for a rich old criminal capitalist, unless you're Stephanie Seymour, in which case, hi!
NONETHELESS, these shows are a good thing to have (Warhol is a symbol of Boomer self-fetishization, but he has undeniable historical importance), and I'm glad the building was preserved for a use beyond condos.
See? You can have nuance and keep your self-respect!
Andy Warhol was a full generation older than the baby boomer generation. He just missed being in WW 2. Just for the record.
DeleteAfter the Wsrhol Exhibit here i am genuinely looking forward to another look at the magnificent space that is his showroom.
ReplyDeleteworth every penny
Agreed! We’re pretty fucking lucky to have these shows right here in such a nice space.
DeleteInteresting juxtaposition. Warhol, an uncommon genius. The other one, a one trick pony.
ReplyDelete8:00 PM: Touche, but his most famous stuff is mid-60s, so I count him in there. Or, to put it another way, Boomers won't shut up about him, Gen X doesn't care.
ReplyDeleteThis is 9:50 above, to Sarah/1:53:
ReplyDeleteYes, I'm "freelance"/zero connection to Brant & the "Foundation"/I don't know anyone affiliated with it.
The exhibits these guys put on are amazing (and the building renovation is a stunner). I've seen all their shows. I had seen the original Basquiat show at the Louis Vuitton Foundation in Paris, and shortly afterward in 2019, these guys debuted their inaugural show, Basquiat, that was almost as good, albeit smaller. Their recent Warhol exhibit was also a stunner. Because the upcoming show also comes from Vuitton/Paris, I'm sure it'll be amazing.
I stand with the other commenters here eagerly anticipating this upcoming Basquiat/Warhol show. My POV is that this "Foundation" puts on super shows in our backyard; I myself genuinely don't care about why/how the "Foundation" got here or about Brant's personal backstory, criminal record, or tax returns. I'm not stanning him, I just (A) appreciate having the "Foundation" in our neighborhood (even though Brant absurdly mis-labeled it a "Study Center"), and (B) I genuinely don't care about Brant, his taxes, or criminal record. Indeed, I scratch my head over the other commenters here so completely obsessed with what happens/happened behind-the-scenes at this "Foundation" while so profoundly uninterested with what they hang on their walls.
Re-read my original (9:50) comment--it's consistent with this.
This said: Their recent Warhol exhibit showcased a big wall of Andy's Polaroids--and one out of every three of them (or so) showed Peter Brant in it. Also, lots of the canvases were labelled something to the effect of "Courtesy of the Peter Brant Collection." So I grant that there appears to be some Trump-level egomania or narcissism going on here. But perhaps we amateur psychiatrists are bound by the Goldwater Rule.
Anonymous 9/29 @ 6:27:
ReplyDeleteAs to "Do art organizations reflect on their role in communities, or is it merely marketing.... sad," what is your point? Is it one of these? (pick one, if one applies):
A. Brant Foundation admission should be free, so that a family that subsists on a $15/day food budget can get in free (obviously this family can't afford admission). Or at least there should be means-testing, and admission should be free for very needy people.
B. As long as Brant charges a $15 admission, then museum-goers interested in seeing Brant exhibits should be more altruistic: They should stay home, take the $15 they'd otherwise pay as an admission fee, and donate it to needy families (or organizations serving the needy).
C. The Brant Foundation should continue charging its $15 admission fee -- but then should turn all fee revenue over to an organization serving needy families (even understanding that this retaining-no-revenue model might cause Brant, or other "art organizations," to shut down, because many "art organizations" need admission fees to operate).
D. The Brant Foundation should shut down, sell its bldg. and art holdings, and donate the proceeds to orgs. serving needy families; then, the buyers of Brant's art should re-sell that art and donate those proceeds to the needy (and on and on: each art buyer flipping the art to sell, to generate funds to give to the needy).
Pls. let us know which (A,B,C,D) is your point, or if it's something else, pls. clarify. Thank you.
By the way, if your answer is "A" (Brant admission should be free at least for very-low-income people): The Brant Foundation's inaugural exhibit in 2019, a stunning Basquiat show, was free to all/zero admission charge to anyone. I saw that show 3 or 4 times. The crowd it drew was obviously a NYC "art crowd," albeit including some young art-student types who might claim to be starving artists. No one viewing that exhibit, including the fashionable starving artist kids, appeared to be living in a family surviving on a $15/day food budget. The point is that even if Brant offers free admission to the truly needy ($15/day-food-budget) set, that would be pointless, because they would not draw more than a token number of truly needy people in to see the art.
Is it possible to truly enjoy art in a society of inequality and exclusion? In a neighborhood where part of the community is being impoverished and pushed out? What role does art, art commodification, art institutions, their owners, managers, and employees, and their customers play in this? Does art contribute to narrowing the social imagination to mere options of A-D, or can it open the horizon and become an agent of change?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 10/2 @ 6:09:
ReplyDelete"[A]rt, art commodification, art institutions, their owners, managers, and employees, and their customers" never purported to be able to rid our "society of inequality and exclusion" (indeed, they never even TRY to do that, other than by offering commentary from the sidelines).
Social inequality/exclusion and the art world are two wildly different things; we can't fairly insist that the art world stop everything and fix social inequality/exclusion.
Again, a minor exception is that some art sometimes comments, from the sidelines, on inequality/exclusion -- but for those artworks to be seen and for those artists to be heard, their art has to be seen -- such as in art exhibits. So to the (tiny) extent that the art world IS trying to fix social inequality/exclusion, we should promote, not restrict, art exhibitions. In fact, Basquiat, who's being exhibited in this exhibit here, is held up by many (not all) as a lead example of an artist speaking to social inequality/exclusion.
Some art exhibitions can't or won't happen unless the exhibitors charge a $15 admission fee, to cover their costs.
You and I are just quibbling on a message board here. But we're mixing apples and oranges if we criticize the art world and all art exhibits for failing to remedy inequality/exclusion (not to mention poverty, illness, climate change, inadequate education, etc.).
This is the the most pathetic comment board I've ever read. $15 bucks can feed a family of 4 for a whole day??? Lol. If $15 bucks is a problem you've played the life game poorly. Just saying.
ReplyDeleteI’ve seen some wonderful well curated Brandt shows, and the little museum space is a beautiful refreshing hidden gem to our area. However, in all fairness it should promoted as contributions accepted, pay or not, as you wish, allowing everyone to enjoy the work.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the 501c3 educational component of this foundation? Otherwise they are charging the public to access a show that furthers the value of things in their private collection. Tickets are the. paid marketing by the public for the benefit of the collectors, while they get tax credits for their otherwise private party palace and garden.
ReplyDelete