The New York Times ran an article in February of this year, titled, Gauging the Power of the Print, an art review written by Ken Johnson. He reviews an art show called “Print/Out” at the Museum of Modern Art. He did not like this show, and called it overbearing, and felt as though he was being yelled at by the art work. He continues to say the show presents printed works by 40 artists and artist groups, prints from the past 20 years. He states the majority of works involve technology and public modes of address borrowed from the worlds of advertising and design, and they express critical suspicion of mainstream media, culture and society. He states this show is a mix of Pop and propaganda. Johnson clarifies by saying, Daniel Joseph Martinez, used declaiming thoughts like “Probes your head like a prolonged accusation” in one particular piece. He adds, “which is apt under the circumstances.” He also highlights an artist by the name of Damien Hirst, who’s art represented an “evil confluence of food and pharmaceutical industries.” Another piece of work, “by the Slavs and Tatars collective proclaiming: What’s the plan, Uzbekistan? I’m your man Azerbaijan!” Johnson’s critique covered the words, “hideously louche posters”, and “mixed-up”, and “corrosive.” He states there was an artist who took the propaganda theme to another level; the artist, Aleksandra Mir, used 100 mundane tourist postcards, superimposed cheerful lettering advertising Venice over them, and distributed a million of them at a 2009 Venice Biennale. Johnson concludes this article by saying an artist by the name of Felix Gonzalez Torres will be highlighted on billboards around the city as part of the show, using a photograph of an unmade bed with two recently slept-on pillows, he says is a “visual elegy about love and  death.” He adds, "Whether the masses will grasp it's import, is hard to say."

I enjoyed reading Johnson’s critique on this show. He was very opinionated, and did not like the show at all. He compared it to another show, “Printin”, which he liked. He suggests this show copied the other. He makes it clear, he does not like the Pop and propaganda. All propaganda is, is the deliberate spreading of information or rumors. And by Johnson’s article, this show did that. It was unfortunate that he did not like it. I think he supported his opinion with many examples as to why he didn’t. However, I do think, that the show made him think a little harder.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/17/arts/design/print-out-and-printin-at-the-museum-of-modern-art.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=propaganda>