We have been hard at work on reviews over here at PORT... till then:

The brilliance of Ocasio-Cortez's design for her campaign.

LACMA's drive to finish their building campaign. I'm all for having more of the collection on display and shaking up the art historical cannon but it takes more intellectual rigor and ideas behind it. The architect simply provides a box and the director should be about making the box and ideas possible through funding... but what I'm not seeing are curator's with interesting programmatic imperatives. Without the intellectual rigor it is simply economic grandstanding. Prove me wrong LACMA... MoMA too? There is a reason the best and brightest curators are consistently working outside of the museums... there is a too big to fail problem with so many of these 300 million dollar plus expansions but it follows the problem of blue chip art as an asset class. Im not certain that museums can be saved from themselves but Ive got clear ideas on how. One thing Govan is very right about is funders of bold museum expansions fund other projects too.

The ICA Water Shed (lol, good one ICA) opens today.

More coverage of Rick Bartow's important traveling exhibition. I have a lot more to say about this but he was a friend and I want to see the show before I comment more.