HalFoster

Congrats TJ! I think it's gonna take a bit more than a few silly posts on a grad thread to tarnish my reputation in the Chicago art scene. Maybe not, maybe it's over for me. Outside of online living though there is this thing called reality where honest relationships free of online personas and code-names exist. I'm actually a really nice and thoughtful human being and I work really hard each day to connect regular non-art viewing/caring people with the subject we all love. I literally work to make what we do valued more in the dominant culture (not that it matters, but it may go to my real passion and it could lead you to see what I really care about). My posts have been off the cuff responses to the hostile reactions. I must say most of my writing has been a reaction to your reaction to me and I played a pompous character here (perhaps I got carried away in being immature). I will admit to not being myself. The post about the book was meant to get under your collective skin. I am sorry for some of the things I've said here. In all seriousness, I do regret disrupting the harmony of your routines. I have those regrets, but what hurts me most is being labeled misogynist. I respect our gender positions, but it is hard to ignore the gender binary through the harsh treatment. I was just calling the tone as I felt it. I am insecure, I think we all are and I'm okay with that. My website is a free one, so I know the template is not "rad". It's not meant to be great (cheap shot). I am really sorry though gang (no sarcasm), I hope you can accept the apology. Good luck on those apps.

Thank you Lefils- I finally heard something yesterday and it was the sound of rejection. Northwestern said no thanks. Best,

Dear All, Yes, I do realize that there are other areas of study in art history and that people can and do choose to study these different subjects. I have a tendency to (appropriately) access my own experiences, knowledge, etc. when writing here. This may not be the approach of others, but it is mine. My little listing was by no means meant to be comprehensive or to reflect the absence of people of color. It was off the cuff to support my point that one can shake things up a bit, remain field relevant, and have a job/career of their dreams. My message if it had to be summed would be: Do not be afraid to question authority (politely and respectively of course). These programs and professors can teach you a lot, but do not fear them and obey their every command just because they know more than you and have distinguished credentials. Josephine-Please do not question my experiences at the graduate level. I understand what you are saying and I agree with it. I do not feel that my comments run entirely counter to what you are suggesting above. When did I ever say ignore the cannon, ignore historical details, ignore your professors, ignore traditional thinkers and the foundations of your content area? I do not recall saying all of that. I was rejected by Northwestern yesterday, so what do I know. If my comments seem as though I have something figured out, it's not true, but I know right from wrong and I do not get scared when professors glare at me over their eyeglasses. I just want you all to be fearless, speak truth to power, and avoid fetishizing these elite programs/professors. Best,

Seeking- I just disagree and I will clarify my earlier point. There is room in the field of art history to stay in line with dominant discourse while also questioning the field and the art world proper. I am not suggesting that you need to argue with everyone and make enemies (I think that would be a problem). The art historians I mention do operate in the field, but made names for themselves by appropriately questioning dominant ideologies and trends. They put forth innovative research because they saw problems. Case in point: Claire Bishop was highly criticized for slamming relational aesthetics and de-skilling. Now that she has basically dismantled and rendered irrelevant the term "Relational Aesthetics" we see her popularity rising (2006-2013). Her lambasting of Relational Aesthetics is what earned her the position of editing the book PARTICIPATION. I don't think Artificial Hells could have been written or funded without her earlier criticality and polemical approach (she's not a phony or an opportunist either, that's important as it goes to integrity). My message is this: You do not get anywhere by thinking safely and sheepishly nodding along with your department chair. You shouldn't be adversarial just to be adversarial either, but you must have convictions, views, questions, and examine all perspectives (that is the academic tradition, it's not our fault academia has been co-opted by corporatism and neo-liberalism). These programs and professors are not your bosses. You earn your spot and you are a student--students should be allowed to question the teacher and disagree. Good teachers allow this and love this. If a professor is aggressive with you verbally or otherwise, you need to report that, students do have rights especially at the doctoral level. Don't allow yourselves to be abused.

Hey Lefils- I applied to Northwestern as well, just wondering how you found out (i.e. email, view decision link on app, phone call etc.). I had some good news in an email from POI, but nothing solid. Congrats Best, Hi Sogni-UofC sends emails only, from what I hear.

None of these art professors fell in line or toe the line today: Most are honored for being at the top of their field. See where a little dissent gets you. Just to name a few of our admirers: Claire Bishop Matthew Jesse Jackson James Elkins W.J.T Mitchell Alexander Nemerov David Joselit Julia Bryan-Wilson Julian Stallabrass Keith Moxy David Levi Strauss Nicholas Mirzoeff I could go on! Even though they perpetuate the common principles, I would add Rosiland Krauss, Hal Foster, Yves Alain-Bois, Benjamin Buchloh, and other mainstreamers to this list as well. You have to fight for your ideas, not because you want a cushy professor gig or book deals, but because your ideas mean something to you!

Hi there, I've been thinking more and I guess I am not considering notions of social justice in postmodern discourse of that of Altermodernity, as I see them as larger cultural currents that no one person decides on per se. I think doing social justice in art history is really interesting because we see so many societal injustices playing out in the art world in art schools, art programs in universities, art museums, art galleries, auction houses, etc. These institutions really do exclude certain voices of color and class. Social justice for me is really looking at political economy and the systems that govern us--these kind of larger than life structures that seem unmovable and exploring how those impact race, class, gender, sexuality, language, age relations among people and the art viewing world. My focus has long been on social justice education, which seems like a more ideal target because education is so tethered to culture and society at large, but we could and should say the same thing about art right? People, culture, society informs and shapes art theory, history, and criticism, so it is logical that we apply social justice to the art world and the field of art history as well. If accepted, I want to focus my work on using a social justice and critical theory approach to critiquing Social Practice and certain performances of art history. Thanks!

Funny how I always seem to agree with the person being down voted on these things, why is that? I agree with Prospectus and throughly enjoy her comments. To everyone else, most art history professors actually see problems with the field and want students who are going to change it. They want students who not only write and research well, but they want people who are going to critically question everything from the political economy to the injustices of the visual art industrial complex. Question these professors, the programs, the white person dominated art world, neoliberalism, race, class, gender, and language inequalities. Question how art history is recorded and written. Why is there such a disproportionate number of white people applying to art history PhD programs in the US, Canada, and Europe? Does that have to with the fact the visual arts has historically been for whites? We are art historians, I bet someone can tell us why there are more women in art schools today and less female celebrity art star artists in the art world. Why is social practice full of a bunch of self-hating white bourgeois missionaries carrying out do-gooder projects in order to gain currency in the art world? Why do Hal Foster and Rosiland Krauss practice International Art English so much? Don't they know that it perpetuates the racial division and minority cliques within the visual arts? Who came up with the idea of art fairs and biennials and who really cares for them outside of being seen looking at art with... fill in the blank big shot? You are going to get accepted if you question your world, the art world, and the institutions that influence the visual arts. You have to speak truth to power and question the present. .

These are good and very difficult questions to answer! I will likely not be able to do a good job here because I need to think a lot more about them (maybe years). I also want to know about your interests as well. Please lay those out if possible. -- I am not an artist anymore. I made my last piece in 2003. If I had to pick what I am, I primarily identify as an art educator. I write about and research artists, art theory, education, and teach as a way of performing art history. As a practice, I am very concerned with social justice and critical pedagogy. Making art became less communicative and writing filled that void for me. The Postmodern and Altermodern are pretty interesting in thinking about different ways of viewing cultural conditions and practices across the Humanities under capitalism. For me they signal a way of thinking about how cultural production and artist projects inform how we interact at various levels of culture. They serve as broad systems of historicizing and situating moments as being on some kind of trajectory. Postmodernity was viewed as a moment of confusion and contradiction and the Altermodern as examined by Bourriaud, is an attempt to say that culture has kind of picked up where capitalist modernism left off--a kind of continuation of a more linear project under new sensibilities put forth by decades of postmodernity and globalization. Jameson wrote "postmodernism or the cultural logic of late capitalism," which directs this idea of modernity/postmodernity/altermodernity towards a condition being smacked by the confusion and disorientation of global capitalism. For me, notions of social justice and race, class etc. cannot be separate when discussing cultural fields like art. Art and life are inextricably linked, they inform one another, so in following that logic--one's context (background) in conjunction with more external systems like political economy (capitalism and institutions) must be considered too. Art is made by people--people make up culture and the images, forms, circumstances, organization, and material in a given culture community. There are really strange large confusing systems that govern us in the world--namely institutions that feed authoritative capitalism. In these institutions there are power holders with tremendous influence. In the art world, we can see this very clearly. I recently asked a really open and general question around social practice: Can art (or should art even try to) provide a way out of this strange life under capitalism (and the current art world)? What is the role of art today? What should the role of art be today? A friend responded with points in which I enthusiastically agree: "I am disinclined to divide discussions like this from class and race. What I mean by this is that so many power positions in US art schools, museums, galleries are held by people who are power evasive around these issues--color-blind racists, pro-capitalist exploitation (without admitting this) etc. Why would we expect this to be different in a country like the US with such an incredibly reductive electoral political system and such weak working class/racial justice/economic justice social movements? The whole movement to create the label "socially engaged practice" seems like a power evasive move designed to not deal with the realities of political economy. There is a really strong- and really weird new-agey quality to a lot of "socially engaged" practice that feels creepily akin to Scientology. While, I am certainly not against art moving out of the "art world"- I also think we need to focus energy on invading/occupying the institutions of the art world in ways that lead to dramatic changes in the power structures. Art Schools/departments would be great places to lodge a full scale democratization practice that seeks to de-corporatize the university." Again, I am not doing a very good job here. I may have to revisit these after more thought.

Hi All, This topic is for those who wish to openly engage in dialogue on research interests, why the PhD in art history (why not cultural studies, continental philosophy, or media studies), and any tangential discussions that break out. To break the ice, I suppose I should go first, briefly. As an artist, art educator, and art writer, I found art history in undergrad as an artist. It was really Dada, Surrealism, The Situationists, Joseph Beuys, and Andy Warhol that had a profound impact on my thinking. Reading, writing, and looking at art have long been important and art history has been a fascinating outlet for going deeper in cultural knowledge. My interests are: Postmodernity Altermodernity Visual Studies Critical Pedagogy and Critical Theory Race, Class, Gender, Sexuality, Age, Ability, Education, and Language Social Justice Art Education The Educational Turn Artistic Research Social Practice

Oh, do you guys need me to log off so that you can post things about me behind my back? That's cool. I'll log off now.

I down voted myself too. It was fun, who knew. I must really suck.

Hey Gang, sorry for the Bolded Text in my letter to you. I wrote you that in a Google doc. and then when I copied it into the Reply Box, it just went bold, I could not turn it off (so funny that someone mentioned it), so I sent it as was. The worst part of these comments are people who think my posts are too long (sad to see art historians who don't like reading). Have you ever been on any other Forums? What you write is actually meant for the Chat Section. Who wants to check in on a forum full of back-and-forth anxiety ridden one-liners? That's part of the reason I am leaving this thread. It's called "Fall 2013 Applicants" and people shoot one-liners all day long about getting in and not getting in. No one talks about their passions, why they applied, or what the PhD means for them, I tried and look what happened to me. When you all get accepted to your dream programs you will be reading texts much longer and tougher than what I have written on this thread. Are you up for Benjamin, Foucault, Freud, Lacan, Marx, Kant, and Hegel? You might want to practice reading more than one line of text and posting cute animal photos. For the record and just to kind of brag last minute--do keep an eye out on Amazon for a book in which I contributed called Theorizing Visual Studies: Writing Through the Discipline. I am 1 of 60 international graduate students chosen for the book, it was something I did while I was earning my second masters in education. It was a lot of fun! Maybe if you read it you'll learn my true identity, how wild and crazy would that be! Lastly, if anyone wants to engage an open online dialogic community where we discuss our field, contemporary art, who is reading what, and why we want PhDs in the first place--I might start that thread topic some place if there happens to be interest. It might be fun to discuss these things while we wait for rejections and acceptances. Unlike some here, I'm an artist, art educator, and art historian with or without the PhD. It's what you love and learn, not what school, program, or degree you get. Love you guys! Hang in there.

@this fun forum: Yesterday I was accused of being pompous and condescending on the forum because I posted about my field interests, interacted in an apparently not so smooth fashion, and shared a video of Hal Foster at the Clark (which is really great by the way--I did it because I thought people might like it!). Sorry to offend. I was accused of and interpreted as a condescending a--hole, which seems strange because you are all my contemporaries, peers, and worldwide colleagues. We are all PhD applicants, why would I be trying to talk down to you or anger you? I thought I was preaching to the choir (solidarity anyone?)--an online group who is just as nerdy about art as I am! It was really strange to see the responses and unpopularity of what I shared. There was a series of childish "down voting" and popularity scoring. I could not help but feel like a child being scolded by a group of parents. If you do not like what someone posts either address them or move on, do not click a button in disapproval (lame and cowardly). I am truly sorry for disrupting your community, but you folks might wake up and realize how you look to newcomers. You might also consider how you plan to handle the PhD. You will be in seminars with people who tout their experiences--people who have published more than you, taught more than you, curated more shows than you, made more art than you (some historians make art), and will probably say things you disagree with. You will not be able to attack them. You will not be able to down vote their comments and teach them how to interact with you. I look forward to more down votes and my dwindling popularity. Art and art history are not new systems of knowledge--I've been at this since 1998.

I thought we all liked this subject, so I was sharing what I like. I guess I do not get the tone of these forums. I just like sharing ideas and interests. I also tend to share my background and context openly, so that others know a bit of where I coming from. This is feeling less like a space of freedom and more like a secret club with unwritten codes and norms. I was wondering why no one else was doing the same. So thanks, I really had no clue. I didn't know what down votes were until just now. I started posting just this weekend. I thought this was kind of like an online community where we might share things like this. I was asked about art historical methodologies as well, was I not to answer? My mom being a pop culture sample size was kind of a lighthearted response on my part, because she's kind of a mass market gal and does not care much for academia or knowing about schools--which goes to my point that she knows Harvard. I'm an honest person and if you read me one way, I don't really see how I can be blamed for your interpretation. Good luck with your applications. I hope you all get what you want.