Now on view at the Guggenheim is a retrospective of Louise Bourgeois’ work. The exhibition, co-organized by the Guggenheim and the Tate modern, London, takes a chronological look at the 96-year-old artist’s oeuvre beginning with her early paintings combining female and home imagery which later become integral to her later work at the upper spiral of the museum.

The exhibition takes a close look at the themes with which Bourgeois has worked over the years, from notions of home and fatherhood to the dichotomy between the individual and the collective. The materials changed over the years, from painting to sculptures made of found wood (Personages and Cells), to the more refined marble Cumuls and the softer, more organic resin, latex and plaster Soft Landscapes.

In looking at many of the work, such as the soaring, tall Personages and the carved marble sculptures with rough, unfinished bases, I could not help but think of Constantin Brancusi’s work in a formal sense. However, despite this grounding in artistic predecessors, Bourgeois’ work has a personal and emotional quality which make her emotional explorations unique and intriguing.

There is an interesting piece by Mike Spector in today’s Wall Street Journal entitled “A Portrait of Art As a Tax Deduction” which explains that with the tightened restrictions on tax deductions for fractional gifts of art to museums donors are simply not giving their artwork as they have in the past.

Donors often hesistate to sell their artwork because the proceeds are subject to 28% federal capital gains tax. Instead, many art collectors choose to donate their artwork to museums where it can be shared with a larger audience, and the donor gets a tax benefit of the market value of the artwork at the time of the donation. Some donors do not wish to part with their artwork all at once, however, so they utilize fractional interest donations.

It used to be that a museum donor could donate a fractional interest in a work of art (say, one third of a painting) and take a tax deduction for the dollar value of one third of that painting. The painting would be kept with the owner for part of the year and then would be displayed at the museum for a portion of the year as well. (Incidentally, such museum exhibition itself often increases the value of a work of art.) These donors could later donate further fractional interests to the museum (at increased market value) and take further tax deductions on the second donation, or even a third or fourth, etc. The value of the work of art (and thus the value of the fractional donation or tax deduction) was assessed at the time of each subsequent donation. This created a system whereby donors often donated works of art to museums in fractional interests over time (for various tax deductions over the years) rather than all at once.

The new system works quite differently due to a 2006 pension reform law. The value of the work of art is frozen at the time of the first deduction, so that donors can only deduct a fraction of what the value was at the time of their first fractional interest donation, regardless of what the value of the artwork becomes over time. However, if the value of the artwork declines, the donor’s later tax deductions are based upon the reduced value for the art. Finally, the total gift of the artwork must be completed within 10 years or before the donor’s death or the IRS will charge the donor or his/her estate a portion of the deduction plus interest and penalties.

A new plan is under discussion now, called the Schumer-Grassley plan, which could ease some restrictions yet add others. Stay tuned.

The Met’s current exhibition of the work of British painter J.M.W. Turner is a welcome addition to the summer museum show pool. The show requires patience and some time as there are 140 pictures, many of which are smaller watercolors which deserve individual examination. These watercolors tend to have been painted with incredible precision and a depth of color and form that is unexpected in the watercolor media. There are a number of what we think of as “Turners” — large oil paintings of moody, churning seas and burning, almost thunderous skies — his sublime landscapes. These grand landscapes, which the artist hoped would elevate landscapes to the level of importance of the genre of history paintings, are brighter and moreemotional than I had remembered and so were wonderful to see in person. It is a treat as well to see these pictures in New York as most of the works are borrowed from the Tate, London and other international institutions. The most interesting of all the works come in the final room of the exhibition where a group of unfinished paintings are displayed, each of which adds something to our understanding of how the artist painted and how he crafted his compositions, from the canvases primed in white to the textured surfaces and glowing yellow tones laid down before more defined forms. The exhibition runs through September 21, 2008 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

PBS’s series Art:21 on art in the twenty-first century has run for four seasons, beginning in 2001 and continuing in 2003, 2005 and 2007, and has covered 72 varied contemporary artists and their work. Divided into episodes according to conceptual themes such as Place, Spirituality, Identity and Consumption (the 2001 episodes) the shows each examine the work of four to five artists and feature the artists themselves discussing their artmaking processes and particular works in progress. It is a rare opportunity to spend 15 minutes with each artist, viewing that artist in his/her own environment and hearing each one speak of herself/himself, without the filter of a gallery or museum’s presentation of the work in an austere exhibition space. Often we associate images or specific works of art with an artist, but this series also allows us to learn more of the personality behind the work and to get a feel for who created it. Each episode also features humorous introductions created by a well-known artist and a celebrity, such as Steve Martin and William Wegman or Barbara Kruger and John McEnroe in Season 1. All four seasons are available on DVD format and are a great way to learn about artists both familiar and lesser known in an easy to watch and visually interesting program.

The Jewish Museum’s current exhibition, “Action/Abstraction: Pollock, de Kooning and American Art 1940-1976”, pits famed art critics of the era, Clement Greenberg and Harold Rosenberg, against one another and against the 20th Century as they reacted to and addressed the artwork of their contemporaries. The Abstract Expressionists Jackson Pollock and Willem de Kooning, we learn, best exemplified the two writers’ theories of what was best in art at the time. For Greenberg, the flatness achieved by the artists was key while Rosenberg appreciated the action involved in making the paintings above all else. Other New York School artists would win Greenberg and Rosenberg’s favor as well such as Arshile Gorky and Hans Hoffman while talented artists such as Norman Lewis, Grace Hartigan and Lee Krasner failed to win the critics’ attention perhaps due to the race or gender to which they belonged as the curators suggest. The critics, it seems became so involved in art making as to forge relationships with many artists, inspire some who would work in reaction to a review written by one of the writers or introduce artists to one another which would then produce lasting, creative synergies in the form of paintings and sculpture. The exhibition requires patience and time (and perhaps the audio tour) but goes a long way towards illustrating the role the two critics had in NYC art circles and the influence they wielded.

The exhibition runs through September 21, 2008. 1109 Fifth Avenue at East 92nd Street.