Chris K's Open Salon Blog

The last thing you need to read about Tiger...EVER!!

Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:12:54 -0500

All the opinion pieces you've read about Tiger are wrong. (Unless you read one that agrees with me.) Why is Tiger losing sponsors and why all the fuss?

This may be brutally obvious, but bear with me: Tiger is driven by golf, to the point of obsession. Being the best at golf is all that matters, winning is the only thing. The obsessive side of his personality led to hundreds of millions of dollars and worldwide fame.

And the availability of almost endless poontang. Tiger is obviously driven by sex in the same way he is by golf. Winning is the only thing. Sleeping with porn stars and strippers and hostesses is evidently "winning" in Tiger's book because they're supposed to be the most desirable women (my book reads differently, but to each their own). The obsessive side of his personality led to lots of sex, as well as the loss of a marriage, millions of dollars and eternal public humiliation.

James Surowiecki, in the New Yorker, gets it half right. According to Surowiecki, "Woods has been presented as the embodiment of bourgeois virtues: dedication, hard work, single-mindedness." That's pretty much on the nose.

"The current scandal has disrupted, if not shattered, this image of perfect control. Scandals that aren’t out of tune with a celebrity’s image are often surprisingly easy to bounce back from..." He cites Michael Jordan's gambling as being consistent with his image as a fierce competitor. And sex was a form of competition for Tiger; he possessed the same "dedication, hard work, single-mindedness" on the prowl as he did on the course.

To view his sexual behavior as an aberration in his life is misguided. His sex life was a logical extension of his drive to win. As Surowiecki describes him, "Woods never seemed warm or even especially personable. Instead, he seemed resolutely businesslike." In terms of endorsements, this made scads of money for Woods. But it seems to apply to sex as much as it does to golf for Tiger.

Could it be that people are shocked that Woods is the same in his personal life as in his professional life? Prior to this scandal all we knew about Tiger were the benefits of his obsessive personality, and could thus view him "as the embodiment of bourgeois virtues". Nobody cared about his personal life. Now that people see the negative effects of obsession, it doesn't look so great. Maybe those bourgeois virtues aren't all they're cracked up to be.

Surowiecki implies that Tiger's sexual escapades were out of control (and thus not bourgeois virtues), but Tiger had an amazing amount of control over the situation--he went for years without getting caught. The control that Tiger showed over his two, perfectly parallel lives may be the scariest thing.

The real loss of control that we're seeing now is Tiger's inability to take command of the situation. Had Tiger gone on Oprah asap he wouldn't be in nearly the spot he is now with the public or maybe even with his sponsors, though he'd probably still be getting divorced. Tiger lost control of his image, and image is everything.

Malcolm Gladwell is a dumbass

Sun, 20 Dec 2009 19:12:47 -0500

Ever since I read Malcolm Gladwell's magnum opus of pseudo-intellectualism, "The Tipping Point", I've hated him. Gladwell's essential method: a few colorful anecdotes + a few quirky experts + self-help homilies - anything that doesn't fit the argument = important and intelligent sociological musings.

Which brings me to Gladwell's recent New Yorker piece about football and concussions in which he equates football with dog fighting. I was familiar with many of the general facts and ideas about concussions in the piece, from articles in the New York Times and other places. But how are fighting dogs and football players alike? Both groups get injured while entertaining people and both are trained to be violent. And...?

As I scanned Gladwell's essay, I couldn't help but notice that he left some things out. Like: "How are football players not like dogs in dog fights?" I mean, duh. So I came up with a list of ways in which the two groups differ.

1. Football players have opposable thumbs. Dogs have paws.

2. Football players wear pads and helmets. Dogs have fur.

3. Football players have language capabilities. Dogs bark.

4. College players get scholarships, social prestige and lots of ladies; pro football players are paid hundreds-of-thousands to millions of dollars. Dogs likely are killed if they lose and are badly injured if they win.

5. Football players choose to play football and practice. Dogs are trained and forced to fight.

In other words, football players and fighting dogs are pretty different in lots of ways. Like, pretty much every way. But if you can connect the two in some facile fashion--and draw in dog fighting-enthusiast Michael Vick to the story--you could be Malcolm Gladwell!

I'm in Buenos Aires and soon people will shoot each other...

Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:09:26 -0400

Because I tell them to! Yes, people will do violence to each other at my whim. Oh, the power. It's all in the name of art, of course. And sadism. I have convinced 6 people to play a game (which is a "performance art" thing)--they won't know the rules in advance and have agreed to follow whatever rules I set. So, that kinda makes me god. Oh, the POWER! I'm drunk on it.

They won't be using real guns--apparently that's illegal even down here--they'll be using paintball guns. But from what I hear, those things hurt pretty bad. There's more to it than the shooting though. The whole thing is going to be a ridiculous, over-the-top, all-too-brief extravaganza. I'll be sure to link to the video, when it's done.

In the meantime, here's a pic from Buenos Aires.

Buenos Aires Bonanza!

Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:08:46 -0400

I'm head back to Buenos Aires in less than a week, and I'm quite excited. I'll be there for another 3 months and I'm going to have a big solo show. Here's some pics from last time I was there.

A delivery truck, "My Dream"

The entry to an enormous building that was once a house. My friend told me that every piece was imported from England. It is an amazing building.

This box measured the air quality. I can assure you it is not good even without using the box.

More photos from Buenos Aires

Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:07:29 -0400

Here are some pictures from my ongoing adventure in Buenos Aires. Hope you enjoy.

PS My drawings are in the art fair in Lithuania, ArtVilnius. You heard me: Litha-frickin-wania. The gallerist I work with here in BsAshere is in Vilnius now. Weird.

A view of the city from Puerto Madero.

Reflections on a building in Purto Madero.

From the roof of PROA, a museum of an art foundation.

There was a great show of German photography at PROA, Andreas Gursky, Thomas Ruff, Thomas Struth, Alex Hutte. It's a small museum, but the show had over 30 photos, including some important ones. I had to sneak in with my backpack even though women were allowed to go through with those enormous purses.

I was there with my friend Miguel, who works in the art world, and we met up with one of his friends. Miguel's friends are all rich. This is not an exaggeration. Except me. Anyways, his friend was apparently the most important collector in Argentina. She was cool, not really pretentious, excellent style. She treated us to lunch, then we all went shopping and she was asking us which color dress looked better. So, yeah, that was kind of strange. Maybe she'll buy a drawing some day.

BTW, PROA has very good food for a museum. And reasonably priced. I highly recommend it.