already a subscriber? Register me
Subscribe now See my options


  • We reserve the right to close commenting on specific stories.

Discussion guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use

Limit of 2000 characters, 2000 characters remaining

Sort by
Comment threads per page: 10 | 20 | 50
  1. I think a distinction should be made between "covering the arts" and being an art critic. I may not be up on all the latest, local, online "art criticism" but what I'm seeing seems to be kind of, I don't know, muddled maybe. I'm not sure where you fit in, but I have really enjoyed watching you grow into your position at the Journal. That said, it still isn't clear to me though if you have taken on the journalistic role or the role of a critic.

    Art criticism is a discipline that when practiced well is as creative as making good art. The ability to place a work into a meaningful context and express a clear point of view regarding the success or failure of the work within that context by analyzing a wide range of elements that make up the work is not easy. I have actually seen some of this in your writing but I would like to see quite a bit more. Maybe someone else could do the reporting, the who,what, when, where and why stuff.
  2. when in one sentence Bruce Murphy reduced me to nothing more than a "bozo heaping criticism," i just laughed.

    it's hard not to take the stones thrown personally, but i think we all have our roles to play. Milwaukee Magazine's role has always been to make everybody working hard locally feel like garbage by nit picking his or her every folly.

    when i was running an art gallery and a nonprofit, Milwaukee Magazine didn't have any interest in reporting on the positive things i was doing, but then neither did 88.9, 620 or most of the other traditional local media.

    when i closed the gallery because of the Bronzie or when i threatened to pinch a loaf on an alderman's lawn, they all thought that was worthy of their esteemed audiences.

    but these are also news sources directed at dabblers and suburbanites. people who by definition aren't interested -- who withdraw. these people don't want to know the details of how dirty and sweaty WE have to get to make Milwaukee a city worth living/working in. these folks want extremes -- superstars and explosions, gun battles and public defecation.

    just like they go to Sendik's and buy stuffed skinless chicken breasts, they'll go see Janet Zweig's artwork and be blown away for the 10 minutes it's in front of them. then they'll move on to American Idol.

    if they really knew the details of the gruesome process of getting that delicious dinner to their plate they'd puke! if they knew the gory details of how hard it is to make anything cool happen in Milwaukee, they'd quit their jobs, pack a moving van, and put the pedal to the metal.

    i wear this public criticism like a badge of honor! because if these folks LIKED me, i'd KNOW i was either a poser and a hack... or an advertiser.
  3. Well, fortunately, no one, including you MLS, has to struggle to answer your question of "who" the windbag is...he surfaces with joy at the mere suggestion of his self aggrandizing self... the evidence is obvious and always the same... read "his" comments above and see that it is all "they this, they that, THEY, THEY, THEY... he can't comment without pointing accusatory fingers at EVERYONE he deems not worthy of his.... glorious being... MLS, you say "I actually weed out the windbags" but once again, in this glaring case the evidence is to the contrary... and in my opinion, your unwillingness to do so (and subject us in each and every conversation to him), greatly diminishes your effectiveness and OUR willingness to contribute since each and every conversation devolves instantly to elementary school bullying and bully pulpiting by your friend and infamously obnoxious windbag, mr. brenner. Why can't he keep his word and leave town as promised? Yuck.

    If you want serious contributions you have to maintain a serious environment.
  4. Maybe the above comments have something to do with the supposed sad state of art in Milwaukee.

    Grow up kids!
  5. I think the untold story here is how little the art community mattered. We didn't show up in the first place. Then when things went off the rails the denunciations from the art world had little to say about this particular work. Instead it was about the bad politicians who don't like art.

    Well, if we really like good art, WE would have clamored to get rid of art atrocities, like the the stuff in Gordon Park. What happened here, the reason a worthy project went forward, is that politicians did the right thing despite the unearned cultural superiority of the Milwaukee's art world.

    Regarding Brenner's dismissal of Bruce Murphy's "personal" attack on him, it's hard too take him seriously. Remember, his current claim to fame is the threat to defecate on the lawns of people who disagree with him.
  6. tom, i don't take bruce's comments as a personal attack at all. bruce needs to call me a bozo to separate my antics from the issue.

    i was trying to say that mary louise shouldn't take the REPEATED attacks by you and bruce in milwaukee magazine over the years to heart. it's just what you guys do.

    although the arts community may complain from time to time about JS's arts coverage, we know that NOBODY in the press shows up at more events or puts forth more effort than she does.

    besides... according to, gets only 4000 visits per month and gets over 8,000,000. so in the end her voice is the only one anyone is listening to anyway, it seems.
  7. For the record, I have no memory of writing about Mary Louise Schumacher in Milwaukee Magazine. But I just turned 60, so I don't know as much as I used to. But I am critic and have been critical of lots of things, including art coverage in Milwaukee long before Mary Louise came to town. What's wrong with that? Isn't Schumacher an art critic once in awhile as well?

    Regarding your last point, the relative market penetration of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel v. Milwaukee Magazine.... is very misleading. The real comparison would be Murphy's blog v. Art City. Why doesn't the Journal company make these numbers public? Because it would be appalling how much of their traffic is generated by the Packers.

    Finally, small is not all that bad. About 6,000 people in the Milwaukee area get the New York Times compared to several hundred thousand for the paper. Does that mean that we should stop reading the NYT's or that it is less influential?
  8. i apologize, tom. it must have been other folks at milwaukee magazine giving her a hard time.
  9. the weather is fabulous, we've got the zwieg, the world is full of joy and whimsy ,
    so much to enjoy...
  10. The broader audience on facebook and this blog from Mary Louise Schumacher, you must admit, was the reason anyone knew before hand that there was an issue to respond to. Thanks to constant updates there was time to act. I say Thank God for our arts editor! Thank God for the ongoing conversation. And Thank God for new voices added to the pot!


Design Ideas Column



Art City Asks

An ongoing series of interviews with creative people.


Art City

E-mail Newsletter


Get the Newsletter!

Login or Register to manage all your newsletter preferences.