When I first saw the big balloon dogs—first at the Tate Modern, then at LACMA, and finally an entire litter on the roof of the Met—I was a fan.
It was "aesthetic as given"; it aroused an immediate response removed the need or desire to question its depth or intent.
It infantilized the viewer. Captured the joy of seeing your first balloon animal. Even had a tense, explosive quality to it. The balloon was blown so full, with the stretch marks represented on the metal alloy (a significant technical feat I'm sure).
Even the other Koons-balloons I've encountered (the broken egg at LACMA, the heart at the WTC memorial) were fun in their own way. None as immediately satisfying as the dog, but enjoyable.
And then last week I saw his latest metal work at the Gagosian on 24th st. and frankly, it was tired.
There was an awful shiny Venus with literal fresh flowers in the vase, where if the asset value of owning a Koons we're removed from the equation, you couldn't pay me $1,000 to take it home from a garage sale; (maybe $950 if I got to keep the flowers).
And then there was a trio of animals. One a swan, the second supposedly a monkey (according to the security guard who was enlightening folks about not taking pictures) and the third a rabbit (the guard's favorite, because it was the "fastest").
This all felt like Koons was just keeping the factory line running.
I wondered if we really should demand more of Koons. That as long as his work continued to be dazzling and shiny, enough so that certain folks might call it "beautiful", he should pass muster.
I would have considered the question a lot longer had I not seen the stunning Anselm Kiefer exhibit at the sister Gagosian. They had printed a letter that Kiefer wrote to Richard Calvocoressi, Director of the Henry Moore foundation.
And in just a few sentences, Kiefer answered my skepticism of Koons.
“This past year I have painted a number of pictures of flowers. They were from Barjac where I had planted them. There were red ones, yellow ones, and blue ones. Flowers make people happy. They’re beautiful. But beauty in art needs meaning. One can’t have just beauty on its own. True art does not portray beauty alone. Beauty requires a counterpart.”