Smarkland: Nic Rad
If you're looking for publicity, getting other people to do the work for you is a pretty good trick. In the case of Nic Rad, he simply painted portraits of people who are known for self-promoting. It appears that The New York Academy of Art grad subscribes to an age-old adage: If you rank people, they will care.
For an exhibit called PeopleMatter, closing tomorrow, Nic*Rad, as he styles his name (Mr. Rad?), spent the better part of two years depicting people who are in or related to the media, and matter to varying degrees: Some are recognizable, some wouldn't make it on most people's lists of important media members. Yet it's the paintings of people of somewhat questionable importance that have gotten many people to pay attention to the exhibit, and prevented it from being just some dude with a collection of often odd portraits of famous people.
It turns out that people who are accustomed to promoting themselves on Tumblr, Twitter and anywhere else they can have done as much for the exhibit.
If nothing else, they are guaranteed audience members for a show by an artist no one had heard of before. That's because Nic chose his subjects based on their proclivity to share information online.
According to Nic, "subjects were chosen based on personal Googling, Twittering, hyperlinking, Facebooking, RSS culling and otherwise staggering around the internet and media cyberscape."
That means that among portraits of people like Salman Rushdie, Clay Shirky and Anderson Cooper will be someone who might be best known for lingering for too long in a Manhattan bar with a small group of people that blog.
Admittance to the project is purposely vague. Freelance writer Matt Shepatin, for instance, met Nic at a bar and gave him some names of people who should be on the list for People Matter. That advice qualified him for a portrait.
Is the art good? That seems besides the point. Rad's exhibit is as much social experiment as art project. Some portraits are more flattering than others. Most lean toward caricature.
The surprising thing is that few people have had negative things to say about him, at least publicly. A project like this is sure to raise the ire of people who either disagree with the ranking or find the whole experiment useless. But maybe admitting to care about it at all is gauche (oops!). Or maybe there will be criticism in the comments here! (Maybe? Ha.)
It doesn't hurt his cause that Nic Rad is a very amicable fellow. Derisively calling someone a starfucker loses some of its heft when the person already does that himself.
Regardless, it's an interesting shift, to see that people who shamelessly self-promote are now being maneuvered to promote others. It's a simple modification. Everyone's become their own brand manager on sites like Twitter. And if you can corral people who have large followings online to discuss and share your own work, the audience will grow with seemingly little effort. Even the New York Times has caught on.
The artist's questionable rationale for choosing his subjects is supposed to be part of the show's charm. Nic recently told Guest of a Guest: "I want each painting to be barely interesting enough in its own right, and incredibly interesting relationally."
And while these paintings may not all be attractive, Nic is following in a tradition of artists tying their career to the cart of vain and competitive people. Andy Warhol, for one, funded his livelihood for most of the 1970s by painting socialites and charging them upwards of $25,000 to own stylized versions of their faces.
Being put on a list, no matter how confusing the criteria, brings a sense of accomplishment to many people. It also rankles those who feel that they are deserving to be on such a list.
That's why other people have since worked their way into Nic's project. Originally planning to give away all the art in this series, Nic shifted his model after making the art public, allowing new faces to talk their way into the exhibit.
But because his list had been arbitrarily capped at 99 faces, newbies had to choose a person who their portrait would boot off from the show.
The subjects kicked off the list were sent to a "pay wall," where fans have to pay anywhere between $400 and $900 to own them (sorry, blog owner Lockhart Steele, no free portrait for you!).
It's not clear why people would pay for something that was recently free. But some people did. An owner of Rare Gallery says that the Pope portrait is one that sold.
Rumor has it Nic is not in need of income. At the very least, revenue was definitely not a goal of this project. "I wasn't thinking I'd sell any, so a few is good," he said.
The artist seems more interested in what people take away from the exhibit. He's already contemplating the next iteration, which will involve ranking and documenting a new subset of people.
As for PeopleMatters, the whole thing ends now. Nic's friend Topher Burns told him to throw another party to end it all: "When he told me the philosophy behind all this, I said, ‘If you're being honest, you should have a fellatio party.'"
That sounds more dubious than the rest of the project. Topher went on to explain what it would entail: "Mostly people sitting around telling dick jokes."
That's happening tonight at Nic Rad's apartment in Williamsburg. It's called "Oral Relations: Work Hard, Make it Big." According to the invitation:
This evening is perfect for anyone with a vested interest in career advancement, getting the most out of each and every social engagement, and total satisfaction. A short instructional session will proceed drinks and a tasting tray.
So, you know, if that's your thing, shoot Nic Rad an email.
Considering that I've spent more time thinking about this project than I probably should have, I decided to get Rex Sorgatz's opinion on the matter. In part because I figure he sits in his apartment with his Rear Window-style camera pointed out toward the World Trade Center waiting to be asked such things. Also, he wrote a blurb about the project for Wired, and his portrait is among the group. (Also – I just learned – his is the most recognizable portrait in the project. Take that as you will.)
Rex's take:
The way he's mashing up the economics of the art world with the egos of social media, creating "products" of itself, is… well, it's something. The entire idea that these people need physical artifacts, and that they are attained for free, but not exactly, because it requires a social media exchange ("a request")… well, that's something too!Also, I was intrigued by how many of the people wanted portraits of themselves. This just seems odd. But also exactly right.
A Nic Rad painting may not have the cache of a personal Warhol on the wall, but the people he painted came out in droves to pick up their faces or those of others on April 29. That's when Nic held a Gift Party for his portraits at Rare. If you know any of the faces in the exhibit, you'd know most of the ones who appeared there. After going to the party, I now own one of Nic's brown paper wrapped paintings. When I started reading more about the exhibit, I noticed my friend John Carney's portrait was available. Something about an unclaimed Nic Rad portrait seems especially sad. I sent Nic an email, and now I have a painting I haven't decided what to do with.
Paintings taken from the wall were replaced by a Polaroid of the recipient holding their new souvenir. Richard Blakeley was taping the whole thing. Dennis Crowley was there to pick up his painting of Rex. He also posed incognito as Jason Kottke to get someone else's portrait. There was a lot of that going on.
But people who had requested to be on the list definitely showed up in high percentages. I asked Damien Basile if he had any feelings about jockeying to get himself into the exhibit. On Twitter, Damien describes himself like this: "Communications strategist. Digital Something. Connector." He seems to have connected with Nic Rad, who explains his placement on the list like this: "Damien Basile rolled in high style and on his way to about ten other things, quickly negotiated his way into the project, and was out the door about as fast."
Did asking to be among the faces painted lessen his stature on the list? I asked. "No," he said.
Damien didn't have time to talk to me. He had important things to do. Like pick up his portrait. That's what most people were there to do. Pick up their portrait. Some jockeyed for a free painting of a famous person. Others took those of their friends. Some realized that if you wandered into other art exhibits in the building, you could score better free wine.
At one point, Matt Shepatin was explaining how to do this when Dennis Crowley interrupted him and pointed to the brown paper package under his arm.
"Whose painting did you get?"
"Mine!" Matt said.
"…Of course you did."
Meghan Keane now has a painting.







My god… that bloody asterisk!
Nic also went to SCAD. Don't know if he graduated. This comment is not about me.
Something about his candor and blatant whoring makes me not hate this.
Shrewd, and frankly I wish I'd thought of it first.
Who has the Lacey portrait of Denton now?
http://www.nic-rad.com/#322952/Mary-HK-Choi
#HOW TO DRAW ASIAN WOMEN
I really like the David Karp one, though.
Parties about career advancement are the new Tupperware parties.
I think it's a very interesting and timely project. I'm a little saddened for the subjects, the people who have turned the social part of their lives into work – whether or not they make money from it. All of that naked effort, it can't be comfortable to live that way. Exciting perhaps, at least at times.
But that lifestyle sounds like a race to nowhere. It's not a new phenomenon, people have been racing around (especially in NYC) chasing all sorts of nothings for loads of history. It's one of the worst temptations of modern life, in my opinion, especially because the rewards of resisting it are so equivocal, while the rewards of giving in are immediate and obvious: numbers of followers, numbers of comments, numbers of invites to parties, numbers of hits, numbers of attractive people written on paper napkins. It's a totally seductive lifestyle, it plays like a game and it hides the cost well.
So how do I know there actually is a cost? Hmm. Maybe there isn't? But my intuition tells me there's something to be lost and it's valuable enough that I'd rather not be a part of this attractive glittering than risk losing whatever it might cost to join.
Could it be as simple as I fear it will cost me my dignity? If so, then it boils down to proud vs. shameless and I can debate myself forever on which of those vices I prefer.
"numbers of followers, numbers of comments, numbers of invites to parties, numbers of hits, numbers of attractive people written on paper napkins."
So… you're saying nothing has changed?
I wonder if any subjects requested the removal of their likeness (from the exhibit, not as the walk-away trophy).
It's so much harder to resist once they show you the dessert cart.
Yes and no. "Numbers of invites to parties" and "numbers of attractive people written on paper napkins" hasn't changed much. But the fact that it's in vogue to tally up those numbers and broadcast them to the world certainly is new. The guy who would actually quote, in public, the exact number of paper-napkin-digits he collected over the course of an evening used to be creepy and it was kind of understood he was missing the point. The climate created by places like Tumblr and Twitter, with the bald gathering of followers like worms after the rain, normalizes the ranking system that Meghan talks about above, and it's that ranking system that I think has put into play a new temptation to avoid.
It's not that people are chasing/collecting different things. It's how they're self-presenting and the outlook that's fueling the chase. It's wanting followers (or paper napkins) just so the number is bigger, and not giving a shit about who might answer the phone if you ever called because you'd never dream of calling; it's collapsing all levels of human connection until the feeble is of no higher value than the fervently heartfelt so that relationships can become direct, quantitative measures of self-worth.
Beside the fact that it breaks the first rule of self-esteem (don't look outside for your value, look within), which has been a problem with the "hey I got her number!" type of self-validation since the invention of the telephone, the new ranking culture is corrupting not just the result of "talking to a girl" but the impetus to do so. People now talk openly about what will gain you followers and what will lose you followers and censor themselves and plan the content of their supposedly "personal" blogs accordingly. Talk about the opposite of "look within." The ranking culture at least passively encourages users in the exact opposite direction.
So that's another new facet – that we're giving up even an attempt to say, "What I think about myself matters more to me than what others think." In a culture with quantitative ranking I matter more when I matter to more people. And that's why I think Nic-Rad called the exhibit "People Matter."
-shakes head, facepalm-
1. yes, lol, let's spend our time on the concept, and not the execution.
2. Ms. Yucko and several friends showed some work at Rare once, and all anyone could ask them was "So when are you moving to New York." Hearing about this made me not give a shit if I ever showed anything in NYC, ever.
3. Not to be a hater, but honestly I'm surprised Rare was able to survive last year's economic bust. Must have had something to do with that big Polar Bear that was in the window!
4. also noted, heh: Choire Sicha 1, Alex Balk 0.
I know! And _I'm_ the cute one!
What about the execution don't you like? Are you talking about the painting technique, the way the portraits look? Or are you talking about the execution of the concept?
These all look as if there were painted by Francis Bacon's unicorn in the manner of Velasquez's younger cousins' bunny rabbit.
What on earth is little Zachy Cohen doing there??? (head explodes)
ive got NO idea….seriously tried to talk my radkowsky out of it. he would have none of it.
also, who told you i was little? I'll kill them! i mean, jewish, sure, but im a grower not a show-er
just checked out your social media consulting business' website. Looks very cool. Congrats!
I'm in your family and older than you, so that's why I call you "little". (think step-brother-in-law, if that makes sense?)
that makes sense!
I was at the PeopeleMatter exhibit last night to hear Nicole Atkins playing. Met Nic Rad, the artist, briefly. He seems like a nice enough guy.
I do! And all of these portraits could do with at least a couple of pancakes.
"…"
I can has Web 2.0 bubble burst plz? Already? NOW!
fsgt