There's one sentence in the article I'm interested in here, though. In the section discussing Marclay's irritation with galleries not giving the work appropriate respect, the writer relates an anecdote about a Los Angeles museum wanting to project the work on their outdoor wall. The anecdote is followed by a qualification in parentheses:
"(LACMA denies suggesting outdoor projection)."
I'm probably weird, but this struck me as hilarious. These bracketed A denies verbing B appear in New Yorker articles all the time, but they're usually more like "the notorious arms trader denies dealing with the Taliban" or "Exxon Mobil denies deliberately tarring birds" or "Politician denies the Mafia influence". So the gallery denying outdoor projection was pleasantly tame.
This must, I suppose, be the work of the fact checkers. Reading the Marclay piece, it seems pretty clear that the LACMA denies sentence was a later addition. The degree of fact-checking this implies is intriguing. Did the gallery really suggest projecting the clock outdoors? Talk about a fine-toothed comb.
Fact-checking, it turns out, is pretty much an American phenomenon. The New Inquiry has a really interesting article about this, dissecting its place in American culture. There's also a bit more about the Daisey affair, if that interests you. The London Review of Books has a bit of a lighter, shorter take on fact-checking too. The outsider take on American fact-checking there is pretty interesting.
Anyway, I'm hoping for more slightly ludicrous fact-check clarifications like the gallery denial.
0 comments:
Post a Comment