Viewing page 8 of 13


Transcription: [00:16:28]
{SPEAKER name="Ed Ruscha"}
Favorite artist, and ah

{SPEAKER name="Jan Butterfield"}
Sure, I mean you could kind of do it

{SPEAKER name="Ed Ruscha"}
it was a foundation of platform, for the voice of those artist,
through the writers eyes

{SPEAKER name="Jan Butterfield"}
And you know, that's OK too, in a funny kind of way, as long as there are enough magazines and there is enough voice there is really nothing so negative about it or is anything more then for a given critic to have an eye or a group of artists.
My students are starting to say "hey, how come you only write about the old establishment guys".
And that's weird to think that I would finally be at a point in my life where the people I write about are no longer younger artists, and I am no longer a younger critic either.
And yes, it's true, I do only write about old establishment guys, I didn't mean [[chuckle]] for it to be that way, you know. But, I'm not writing about the Punk artists. Somebody else has to do that. I don't even know where they are coming from.

{SPEAKER name="Ed Ruscha"}

{SPEAKER name="Jan Butterfield"}
I mean to, I would like to feel that I do - but I don't.

{SPEAKER name="Ed Ruscha"}
If you don't see their art, then there's no real sense in trying to invent an enthusiasm for it.

{SPEAKER name="Jan Butterfield"}
And advocacy in criticism is very important to me. I'm not seeing the point in wasting hours and tons of space in negativism, it's not interesting. It's beside the point.
Not that you wouldn't take a strong attack on whatever of terms of...
I encourage the magazine to take a strong negative attack on racist Californiaship LAship because it is so blatantly bad.
Then I think there's a real reason to just jump in and say hey. You know. But that's a separate issue from a single artist.

{SPEAKER name="Ed Ruscha"}

{SPEAKER name="Jan Butterfield"}
You know and even then I think it is unusual that you would do that mostly. Maybe when Peter Plagens spelled that out in his - when he denied America by saying look you can always sign your show [[air currier?]] director - but that gets to be old hat.
But once in a while it's really deserved [[laughter]] in this case. And it is true, you know. You get into that..
Somebody has to correct that shit. You know if that goes down as a resounding... you know those catalogs stay. You know particularly that it's creating art history. And it's wrong.
But, you can correct it by getting enough in print that, you know, hard all that stuff.

{SPEAKER name="Ed Ruscha"}
What's the latest thing he's written?

Transcription Notes:
Peter Plagens - art critic for over 50 years

Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact