Forwarded message:
> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 17:53:32 +0000
> To: kevin@unitcircle.org
> From: 913513sa@udcf.gla.ac.uk (Felix Salmon)
> Subject: A New Art Magazine
>
> Kevin, if this is the sort of thing your list members might be interested
> in, do you think you could forward it on to them?
>
> =46elix.
>
> ***********CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS*********
>
> Just what is it that makes today's artists so different, so appealing?
>
>
> A new magazine is being launched this summer; and this is your
> chance to be a part of it. Taking as its basis what the late _Modern
> Review_ called 'fan criticism', the fundamental idea is that artists, or
> their friends, relations, or admirers, write more or less detailed pieces
> on just why this artist in need of a little publicity is so good.
>
> If there's a serious artist whom you admire, and whose work you
> would like to expound upon to an audience of art lovers, gallery owners and
> collectors, then the _Partisan Review_ would like to hear from you. There
> is a desire in the art world to have some sort of solid basis on which to
> ground one's judgements; the _Partisan Review_ aims to provide, with your
> help, just that basis.
>
> We are not looking for 'this artist's really good'. And '...
> examines issues surrounding time, mortality and ennui' isn't enough either.
> If we read that, we want to know exactly what issues it addresses, and how;
> and what it says on them. Also, ideally, we want to know how the work in
> question fits in to the contemporary art world (or not) and becomes good
> and/or important. On the other hand, we're _not_ looking for objective and
> balanced 'journalism'. The name says it all, really: we'd rather have a
> (positive) polemic to any overview or critique. Everything we publish will
> be enthusiastic: if you want to slag anything off (except as part of an
> argument in favour of something else), we're not interested.
>
> As for the contributors, we'll take anybody who can write. You
> might be a lecturer, a student, an artist, or just a fan. We do expect you
> to know what you are writing about, but an in-depth understanding of
> post-structuralist semiotics is not required. If you think you know someone
> who might like to contribute, tell them or tell us and we'll get in touch
> with them.
>
> The _Partisan Review_ will be run on a very small budget. We hope
> to fund it mainly by persuading the galleries of featured artists to take
> out a full-page ad each; the cover price will be around =A31.50. The
> circulation probably won't be very big to begin with, but it will be
> select. It will most definitely not be a glossy, expensive art mag: there
> are too many of those already. There won't be any avant-garde typography,
> or even any colour, beyond the one colour on the cover - so make sure your
> piece isn't too dependent on illustrations.
>
> With any luck, we'll be able to pay contributors a little money,
> and they will retain copyright on their work. But no chickens are to be
> counted at this point. What we're looking for now is articles: it doesn't
> really matter how long they are, so long as they're persuasive. We are not
> prejudiced in favour of any particular school: figurative painting is as
> welcome as neo-conceptualism (though probably harder to write about). The
> artist, if not resident in Britain, should at least have a gallery here.
>
> Any correspondence should, in the first instance, be sent to:
>
> The Partisan Review,
> 132 College Road,
> London SE19 1XD.
> =46ax: (0181) 766-6985.
> email: partisan@uel.ac.uk
>
> (Note the email address: not 913513sa@udcf.gla.ac.uk)
>
>
>