Xu Bing

I love an artist who loves to subvert expectations. Background Story series looks like a traditional chinese ink paintings but they are actually shadow play paintings.

I love that you can go and look behind the scenes. The detail on these is amazing.

He also has done a series resembling traditional Chinese characters – Book from the Sky, more subversion and also aesthetically pleasing.

Except that every single character, even in the books is not actually chinese characters at all, mind blowing.

I also like the Tobacco Project’s 1st Class cigarette tiger rug

Helen Pashgian

As a fan of light, and light related work this body of work by Helen Pashgian is right up my alley. A sprinkling of otherwordly, ethereal and sci-fi round it our for me. Her practice is very much focused on the physical. This deliberate meticulous focus on the material yields an ethereal experience seemingly concerned with anything but. Her work is part of the Light and Space Movement of the 60’s.

Debra Butterfield

I’m not a fan of horses. I like the animal just fine but not really into horses in my art. But I just love these pieces by Debra Butterfield. My feelings compounded by the fact that they are in fact not made of driftwood as they look but instead cast in bronze. I think these look like a charcoal drawing rendered in 3d. Instantly recognizable as horse yet so minimal. True artistry. If you live in Chicago you can see one in person downtown in Seneca park just across from the MCA.


Not a Marvel super fan by any means. I watch them occasionally as a fun ride. I heard this show is good but I thought they meant for Marvel fans or even comic or super hero aficionados. I did not think they meant it is a good show period. In fact I kinda wished it was not a marvel thing at all because I enjoyed it so much. I loved the color palette. I loved the steep sci-fi angle. I loved the True Detective vibe? I even enjoyed the Marvel ability to not take oneself too seriously. I am also eagerly awaiting season 2 and I am so glad I took a chance on this show.


I feel like I have to write something about this for posterity. I simply don’t understand all the negative reviews of this movie/film. I’m no film scholar so perhaps there’s something I don’t understand, but I am a scholar or perhaps amateur enthusiast of art and art making. And I quite enjoyed this film or er movie. Christopher Nolan feels like an arteur director who is quite good and understanding the medium. To me film is a visual medium. I would venture to bet whatever genre Tarantino belongs to his followers would hate this film.

In any case I liken this movie to a visual ballet. I feel like Nolan was trying to see how tightly he could choreograph the various timelines and goings on forwards and backwards through time. How tightly can we edit. To further my thesis I feel like all of the “issues with sound” further support my theory that the exposition, dialogue are tangential pieces of the tapestry of a film the text of the script is not an integral part of the telling the story here.

UPDATE May 2 2023
Patrick Willems on Nebula and Youtube calls this a “VIBES” movie. This is the first super positive response I’ve seen to this movie published. For the most part I agree, I think Nolan is working a little harder than just the basics of the genre Willems is outlining but I can get on board with a VIBES explanation as a good way to go into a movie like this and how best to experience it.

see his video essay here (nebula) and here (youtube)