old wine in new bottles
May. 27th, 2003 02:30 amDoes everyone remember Mark Kostabi?
He was a very eighties phenomenon in New York. Mark Kostabi was an "artist" who made his living as a brand. He didn't sell his name to a thong manufacturer. He put his name on other peoples' art and sold it.
Kostabi got the brilliant idea that since the target market who were buying most of his work were a pack of status-obsessed yuppie assholes who never got home to look at their walls anyway, he would fob off a 1920s era radical new Neo-Expressionist art Concept on them and convince them that their art could be subcontracted to sweatshops just as easily as their thousand-dollar deconstructed [ed: torn] outfits.
It was all going great - toujours l'audace! - when sadly it was discovered that Electroboy, an artist who was working in Kostabi's studio painting pictures for his signature was trafficking in... counterfeit fake Kostabis!
A sprightly conceptual battle ensued in the press and in various places that sold execrable cappucino over whether it was possible to counterfeit Kostabi, and whether even if it were possible, if Electroboy was the one painting the Kostabis anyway and (as it turned out) signing them for Kostabi, how were his Kostabis counterfeit?
Because, said Kostabi, who was getting huge prices for the art he was paying Electroboy and his coworkers practically nothing/hr to produce, I didn't tell him it was OK to sign my name to _those_ paintings I didn't do.
It was widely felt that Electroboy had trumped Kostabi in the all-important conceptual coolth component of the competition, and Kostabi faded, at least from his height of itness.
I was, for some reason, reminded of the Kostabi debacle when I read Howard Kurtz' Monday column on suspended NY Times reporter Rick Bragg, who is apparently spinning out his 15 minutes by threatening to quit.
Maybe it was this:
"My job was to ride the airplane and sleep in the hotel," the New York Times correspondent said yesterday from his New Orleans home. "I have dictated stories from an airport after writing the story out in longhand on the plane that I got from phone interviews and then was applauded by editors for 'working magic.' . . . Those things are common at the paper. Most national correspondents will tell you they rely on stringers and researchers and interns and clerks and news assistants."
But now what he calls a "poisonous atmosphere" has descended on the Times -- one that prompted the paper to suspend Bragg for two weeks for practices he considers utterly routine -- and the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter says he will quit in the next few weeks.
"Obviously, I'm taking a bullet here," he said of the suspension imposed last week. "Anyone with half a brain can see that." But, he said, "I'm too mad to whine about it."
Clearly that last sentence was slipped in from an earlier interview.
Maybe it was this:
Bragg freely admits he did little firsthand reporting for the June 2002 story about Florida oystermen that prompted an editor's note last week. That note said credit should have been shared with freelancer J. Wes Yoder, who was hired by Bragg as a volunteer assistant and spent four days in the town of Apalachicola. "I went and got the dateline," Bragg said. "The reporting was done -- there was no reason to linger."
He recalls one Times editor telling him: "The problem with this, Rick, is that you wrote it too good."
Such Times stringers and interns "should get more credit for what they do," Bragg said, but in "taking feeds" from such assistants, "I have never even thought of whether or not that is proper. Maybe there is something missing in me. . . .
"I will take it from a stringer. I will take it from an intern. I will take it from a news assistant. If a clerk does an interview for me, I will use it. I'm going to send people to sit in for me if I don't have time to be there. It is not unusual to send someone to conduct an interview you don't have time to conduct. It's what we do.
Who knew?
His shield and bulwark has turned out to be a bit patchy, which has gotta be a bitch, right?
Some Times staffers say that Bragg's case is extreme and that other correspondents don't rely on the reporting of stringers and assistants to nearly the same extent. But Bragg believes that reporters at the paper "have seen their lives kind of twisted and bent" because of the Blair fallout. He feels especially vulnerable because of his long association with Raines, who was forced to declare at a recent staff meeting that he will not resign.
No, that wasn't it either.
The part where Howie talks about how Bragg is being victimized for being white because They're hunting those didn't quite make it either.
Pride of place goes to this, the distilled battle-cry of the pampered office kiss-ass:
"Everyone who ever wanted to get even for a slight or unpleasantry or act out their jealousy now has their chance, and it will continue," Bragg said. "What I don't understand is the callousness of some people who would try to use this situation to settle their political squabbles. It is shameful that some people are using it in a power grab at the newspaper. It's just about the saddest thing I've ever seen.
I'm guessing we've tabled the question of how the power got distributed in the first place.
He was a very eighties phenomenon in New York. Mark Kostabi was an "artist" who made his living as a brand. He didn't sell his name to a thong manufacturer. He put his name on other peoples' art and sold it.
Kostabi got the brilliant idea that since the target market who were buying most of his work were a pack of status-obsessed yuppie assholes who never got home to look at their walls anyway, he would fob off a 1920s era radical new Neo-Expressionist art Concept on them and convince them that their art could be subcontracted to sweatshops just as easily as their thousand-dollar deconstructed [ed: torn] outfits.
It was all going great - toujours l'audace! - when sadly it was discovered that Electroboy, an artist who was working in Kostabi's studio painting pictures for his signature was trafficking in... counterfeit fake Kostabis!
A sprightly conceptual battle ensued in the press and in various places that sold execrable cappucino over whether it was possible to counterfeit Kostabi, and whether even if it were possible, if Electroboy was the one painting the Kostabis anyway and (as it turned out) signing them for Kostabi, how were his Kostabis counterfeit?
Because, said Kostabi, who was getting huge prices for the art he was paying Electroboy and his coworkers practically nothing/hr to produce, I didn't tell him it was OK to sign my name to _those_ paintings I didn't do.
It was widely felt that Electroboy had trumped Kostabi in the all-important conceptual coolth component of the competition, and Kostabi faded, at least from his height of itness.
I was, for some reason, reminded of the Kostabi debacle when I read Howard Kurtz' Monday column on suspended NY Times reporter Rick Bragg, who is apparently spinning out his 15 minutes by threatening to quit.
Maybe it was this:
"My job was to ride the airplane and sleep in the hotel," the New York Times correspondent said yesterday from his New Orleans home. "I have dictated stories from an airport after writing the story out in longhand on the plane that I got from phone interviews and then was applauded by editors for 'working magic.' . . . Those things are common at the paper. Most national correspondents will tell you they rely on stringers and researchers and interns and clerks and news assistants."
But now what he calls a "poisonous atmosphere" has descended on the Times -- one that prompted the paper to suspend Bragg for two weeks for practices he considers utterly routine -- and the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter says he will quit in the next few weeks.
"Obviously, I'm taking a bullet here," he said of the suspension imposed last week. "Anyone with half a brain can see that." But, he said, "I'm too mad to whine about it."
Clearly that last sentence was slipped in from an earlier interview.
Maybe it was this:
Bragg freely admits he did little firsthand reporting for the June 2002 story about Florida oystermen that prompted an editor's note last week. That note said credit should have been shared with freelancer J. Wes Yoder, who was hired by Bragg as a volunteer assistant and spent four days in the town of Apalachicola. "I went and got the dateline," Bragg said. "The reporting was done -- there was no reason to linger."
He recalls one Times editor telling him: "The problem with this, Rick, is that you wrote it too good."
Such Times stringers and interns "should get more credit for what they do," Bragg said, but in "taking feeds" from such assistants, "I have never even thought of whether or not that is proper. Maybe there is something missing in me. . . .
"I will take it from a stringer. I will take it from an intern. I will take it from a news assistant. If a clerk does an interview for me, I will use it. I'm going to send people to sit in for me if I don't have time to be there. It is not unusual to send someone to conduct an interview you don't have time to conduct. It's what we do.
Who knew?
His shield and bulwark has turned out to be a bit patchy, which has gotta be a bitch, right?
Some Times staffers say that Bragg's case is extreme and that other correspondents don't rely on the reporting of stringers and assistants to nearly the same extent. But Bragg believes that reporters at the paper "have seen their lives kind of twisted and bent" because of the Blair fallout. He feels especially vulnerable because of his long association with Raines, who was forced to declare at a recent staff meeting that he will not resign.
No, that wasn't it either.
The part where Howie talks about how Bragg is being victimized for being white because They're hunting those didn't quite make it either.
Pride of place goes to this, the distilled battle-cry of the pampered office kiss-ass:
"Everyone who ever wanted to get even for a slight or unpleasantry or act out their jealousy now has their chance, and it will continue," Bragg said. "What I don't understand is the callousness of some people who would try to use this situation to settle their political squabbles. It is shameful that some people are using it in a power grab at the newspaper. It's just about the saddest thing I've ever seen.
I'm guessing we've tabled the question of how the power got distributed in the first place.