2020年9月23日 星期三

The T List: Five things we recommend this week

A Croatian monastery turned hotel, a new show at the Sculpture Center — and more.

Welcome to the T List, a newsletter from the editors of T Magazine. Each week, we’re sharing things we’re eating, wearing, listening to or coveting now. Sign up here to find us in your inbox every Wednesday. You can always reach us at tlist@nytimes.com.

Book This

A Restored 15th-Century Croatian Monastery

Left: architects and engineers retained the massive fortress that protects the monastery, even keeping some of the original plaster from the 16th century. Right: each of the property’s five suites features a range of artworks that the Thyssen-Bornemisza family has amassed over four generations, an impressive collection that spans between the 13th and 21st centuries and was once said to be the largest collection after the Queen of England’s.Courtesy of Lopud 1483

By Michaela Trimble

T Contributor

ADVERTISEMENT

Several years ago, while the architect Frank Gehry was boating by a derelict 15th-century monastery on the island of Lopud in the Elaphiti Islands of Croatia, he convinced the fourth-generation art collector and philanthropist Francesca Thyssen-Bornemisza (of the Thyssen-Bornemisza National Museum, opposite the Prado in Madrid) to restore the former Franciscan treasure to its original grandeur. Collaborating with the Italian designer Paola Lenti and the Zagreb-based architect Rujana Markovic, Thyssen-Bornemisza embarked on a 20-year renovation of the 5,000-square-foot complex, originally constructed in 1483 as a cloistered sanctuary for contemplation and healing and abandoned in 1822. Now, with five luxurious hotel suites converted from 12 former monk chambers, Lopud 1483 is something of an oasis. It’s also home to one of the world’s greatest private collections of Renaissance and contemporary art, including works that once adorned Thyssen-Bornemisza’s family property in Lugano, Italy, as well as commissioned pieces by the artist Olafur Eliasson and the architect David Adjaye. Behind the property’s walls, guests can dine alfresco on local oysters and Dalmatian ham or stroll through the property’s extensive gardens, lined with rows of lemon and olive trees and over 80 species of plants inspired by the Franciscan monks’ traditional knowledge of medicinal herbs. lopud1483.com.

Read This

#QueerCorrespondence as a Form of Art

Beatriz Cortez and Kang Seung Lee’s “Queer Correspondence #2” (July 2020), commissioned and produced by Cell Project Space in London. Jaeseok Kim/Gallery Hyundai from Seoul, Korea

By Nicole Blackwood

T Contributor

When the pandemic began, the London-based associate curator Eliel Jones, who works at Cell Project Space, started writing love letters to his boyfriend in Los Angeles. Jones came to see his correspondence as longing made tangible. Letter writing has a rich queer history, he observed, and often bridged the gulf between isolated individuals while reminding them of their distance. Enter Cell’s new mail art project, “Queer Correspondence.” Artists originally slated to showcase in the gallery this year were asked to correspond through letters and visual art, which would then be copied and mailed to a (now-full) list of over 800 global subscribers every month through December. In June, Alex Margo Arden and Caspar Heinemann shared a facsimile of a letter and a bottled scent. In July, Beatriz Cortez and Kang Seung Lee engaged with activist traditions of flyposting, and in August, Ezra Green and Martin Hansen bound emails and poems in a small purple booklet. Though Jones posts fragments of the work digitally and is considering eventually displaying it in the gallery, the project exists primarily for subscribers, who can share with and browse the hashtag #QueerCorrespondence on social media. As witnesses to queer intimacy, onlookers are twice removed from the source — right now, there’s no such thing as pure connection. cellprojects.org/exhibitions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Visit This

Jesse Wine’s Sleep Works at the Sculpture Center

An installation view of Jesse Wine’s “11:10 am / 15.10.1983 / 75 Heath Lane / Chester / United Kingdom / CH3 5SY” (2020) at the Sculpture Center in New York.Courtesy of the artist, Simone Subal Gallery, New York and the Modern Institute, Glasgow. Photo: Dario Lasagni

By Thessaly La Force

Opening this week at the Sculpture Center is “Imperfect List,” a new exhibition of work by the New York City-based, English-born artist Jesse Wine. Wine was interested in exploring the idea of sleep, especially as it functions in a capitalist society — “the more capitalism consumes the world, the less we get to sleep,” he told me — and his free-form ceramic figures consist of slumbering heads and limbs that appear to have been jolted awake. Wine also crafted a fleet of ceramic transport trucks, inspired by those he could hear idling outside his studio in Red Hook as he worked. It reminded him of the sleep function on a computer, he said, “where the machine is neither on nor off but in an intermediate state.” “Imperfect List” was supposed to open in May but was then postponed; Wine said that, in the intervening months, he returned to see the Sculpture Center’s garden overgrown as if it, too, had been busy while it slept. Inspired to include evidence of the garden’s growth alongside his exhibition, Wine added a tuft of a weed to one of his finished pieces. “I wouldn’t have noticed that normally. I wouldn’t have been slowing down,” he said of his pre-pandemic existence. There is much to admire in Wine’s ability to harness complex thoughts and quiet observations into gestures and figures that seem born from a more subconscious space. “Imperfect List” is on view at the Sculpture Center through Jan. 25, 2021, sculpture-center.org.

Covet This

A Unisex Uniform From Georgia ic25

Left: Yves B. Golden wears the Nova Knit tank, $145. Right: the model in the Mesa Chore jacket, $245, and Ray apron, $155. Ira Chernova

By Gage Daughdrill

ADVERTISMENT

Season after season, the fashion industry takes larger strides toward a more gender-fluid understanding of clothes, breaking down old modes of thinking, including whether or not a garment belongs strictly to a man or a woman. The Los Angeles-based designer Maria Dora is unconcerned with such distinctions, leaving the clothes of Georgia ic25 completely undefined by gender. Inspired by studies of the artist couple Charles and Ray Eames, as well as the pioneering painter Georgia O’Keeffe, Georgia ic25 offers four modular pieces — a chore jacket, a five-pocket pant, an apron and a tank top — that are meant to be building blocks for a working artist’s uniform. So while Georgia ic25 offers functionality, it also evokes a moment in art history when the artist was both stylish and unconventional. Dora believes that the pieces are a kind of blank canvas for individuality — from there, Dora says, “It’s whatever the person wearing it wants it to be.” From $175, georgia-ic25.com.

Eat This

A Gluten-Free Bread Maker Goes National

Left: Breadblok’s gluten-free sourdough. Right: the Santa Monica, Calif., shop, with interiors by Commune Design.Courtesy of Breadblok; Laure Joliet

By Kurt Soller

Gluten-free diets may be trendy, but the Charlier family — who run a farm in Provence, France — has been eating that way for three generations, because of a history of celiac disease and wheat allergies. Now they’re helping others do the same: Last April, Chloé Charlier, 28, opened Breadblok in Santa Monica, Calif., which sells organic baguettes, brioches, shortbread cookies, crackers, croissants and other pastries — all made without wheat, soy, gums or refined sugar. And beginning this month, her most popular offerings will be available for nationwide delivery through Breadblok’s website. As someone who loves sourdough bread to the point of occasionally baking it myself, I have found that Charlier’s version — created with brown rice, buckwheat, tapioca, sorghum and coconut sugar, among other ingredients — is the only gluten-free loaf I’ve tried that mimics the tang, earthiness and airy crumb of the original. breadblok.com.

From T’s Instagram

48 Hours: A Fashion Show on Roosevelt Island

Though she is known for her vibrant prints, this season, Ulla Johnson also embraced solid colors, such as the soft terra-cotta shade of this dress, worn by the model Chloe Blanchard. “It was all very grounded in this urban feeling,” the designer said.Nina Westervelt

Last Wednesday, the designer Ulla Johnson arrived at Four Freedoms Park at the southernmost tip of Roosevelt Island. Here, the skyscrapers of Manhattan to the west and the lower-slung buildings of Long Island City to the east would provide the backdrop for her spring 2021 show — it was a fitting setting for a collection she had dreamed up as a tribute to her home city and its people. “I’m pretty much the most ride-or-die New Yorker you’ll ever come across,” she explained. And indeed, hers was one of the most ambitious presentations during New York Fashion Week. This season, instead of shying away from the runway format, she embraced it, not only staging a show (albeit one without an audience) but also a video shoot. (The resulting short film depicting the collection, directed by Yelena Yemchuk, a longtime collaborator, debuted online last week.) Still, the designer acknowledged that “trying to remain focused on designing clothes when there’s so much chaos in the world, sometimes, it’s complicated.” Read the full story by Katherine Cusumano with photos by Nina Westervelt (@vnina) at tmagazine.com — and follow us on Instagram.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for The T List from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

On Tech: Hooray (mostly) for the government!

U.S. lawmakers are digging into questions about how to steer technology to make our lives better.

Hooray (mostly) for the government!

Leif Gann-Matzen

I feel a glimmer of hope about America’s government officials and elected representatives. A tiny one.

Underneath a truckload of partisan hooey, they are digging into complex and important questions about how to steer technology to make our lives better.

In investigations into technology antitrust and the reconsideration of a 24-year-old bedrock internet law, government officials are taking on big ideas: Is the online economy fair? And how should U.S. laws balance protecting people from online horrors with giving them room for expression online?

First, the Department of Justice may sue Google within days, claiming the company breaks laws intended to ensure healthy business competition. There’s no telling how this lawsuit might turn out, and my colleagues have reported that some people familiar with the government’s investigation have worried that it was rushed to score political points ahead of the presidential election.

It’s going to be a shouty mess. But there are meaty questions here: Did Google, and America’s other tech giants, get so powerful by tilting the game to their advantage? Broadly, does the dominance of superstar companies result in Americans having worse online communications products, more expensive pharmaceutical drugs and crummier cellphone service than we would if there more, smaller competitors?

ADVERTISEMENT

These are good questions! I don’t have answers, but I’m glad the questions are being asked on a big stage.

Likewise, there is lots of truly awful garbage in the government scrutiny of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but I’m still glad that it’s being reviewed.

The 1996 law gave websites legal breathing room to filter and delete threats of violence and other unwanted material that people posted in spots like comment sections. This was a foundation that enabled Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and others to let people share themselves with the world without fear that the companies would be sued out of existence for what users posted on their sites.

Both Republicans and Democrats are now asking whether the law has outlived its use and is too lax on online companies that don’t effectively weed out child sexual abuse imagery or extremists organizing violence. And they’re also asking whether tightening the rules might unfairly squash what people say online. This is a worthy debate.

ADVERTISEMENT

The issue is complicated by political interests. Some conservatives have misrepresented what the law says and want these companies to intervene less in what people say online to avoid what they view as partisan censorship. Some Democrats want to hold websites more responsible for false information, but haven’t talked about the possible unintended consequences of doing so.

Skeptical people — hello, I am you — might be shouting at me through their screens. Our government officials and elected representatives are not banging the table about Amazon mistreating small merchants or conservative bias in Gmail folders because they’re thinking deeply about our world and how it works. This is about their side winning.

Fair, OK. I also worry that antitrust and Section 230 have become so bogged in the partisan muck that there is no there there.

But U.S. government officials recently made a partisan charade over the TikTok app, AND didn’t even try to tackle big questions like how the United States should deal with future global technology that is less American.

ADVERTISEMENT

I prefer this one time to look on the bright-ish side. At least in two areas of technology policy, U.S. officials are mixing the partisan muck with taking on complex issues.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

So, Amazon: Is this useful?

One good thing about the questioning of Big Tech power is that it gives us a chance to consider whether the status quo is good for us.

I was thinking about this because The Wall Street Journal dug into the promotions that Amazon pushes when we hunt for products on its site. Type “dog beds” into the search box on Amazon. The first half-dozen products that I saw, marked as “sponsored,” had paid Amazon to appear prominently.

The Journal’s article showed that Amazon has different rules for paid promotions for its own products versus those of its top competitors.

But I have a more basic question: Are these Amazon promotions useful to those of us shopping on the site?

If the most visible products on Amazon are those that pay Amazon, is the company nudging us to buy the best product at a great price — or the one that paid Amazon the most for promotion?

As a Recode technology reporter pointed out to me on Twitter, merchants who sell cat toys or Oreos on Amazon tend to say that these ads help them get noticed — although they often resent them — in Amazon’s sea of products. That’s true. That doesn’t necessarily mean that we shoppers are better off, though.

Yes, these kinds of paid product promotions are not novel. Stores charge cereal and ice cream companies for prime placement on store shelves. When you type “Niagara Falls hotel” into Google, companies pay Google to pitch you their vacation packages and lodgings. Amazon has said that paid promotions help people find what they’re looking for.

But it’s worth asking whether Amazon combining the largest online store in America with a Google-style paid ad machine is a step too far.

Before we go …

  • Surprising! Also, not good! Usually it’s baby boomers and other older Americans who get blamed for believing bogus stuff on the internet. But new research found that it’s Americans under 25 who are most likely to believe false information about the coronavirus, my colleague Adam Satariano wrote.
  • TikTok-style geopolitics are only new to Americans: The confusion about TikTok — is it a Chinese spying threat? Can the U.S. government really ban it? — might be unsettling for Americans, but is old hat to most of the world, my colleague John Herrman wrote. People in other countries have long had little say in what happens when their favorite online spaces are threatened by diplomatic or political fights between companies and corporations.
  • I mean, at least your kid’s school is not THIS: Some schools in Hawaii, California and Ohio dropped an online learning program after parents found some of the material racist, sexist and of low quality. One example: A cartoon bear welcomed first grade students to “the concentration camp,” The Wall Street Journal reported. Some parents also worried that the company founder was connected to a polyamorous religious sect.

Hugs to this

Drumming to the beat, with hopping virtual penguins. Make sure to turn on the sound for the video. (My colleague Charlie Warzel is obsessed with this. Thank/blame him.)

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018