The Ken Price exhibition called “Happy’s Curios” (Happy is the artist’s wife) was a critical riddle to which the wrong answer is given, bravely, in the first sentence of Maurice Tuchman’s catalogue introduction: “ ‘Happy’s Curios’ is a work of art about pottery.” The (or a) right answer, it seems to me, is that “Happy’s Curios” is a collection of pottery that provocatively moots the question of art. But what does this mean?

“Happy’s Curios” comprises hundreds of cups, plates, jugs, bowls and other mostly functional ceramic objects, with supporting drawings, posters and a tapestry, the pottery

Richard Jackson’s recent show comprised, besides the standard selection of project-proposal drawings featuring the standard scrawly elegance, one mammoth, room-filling work, a clever process/environmental gesture that managed to touch base simultaneously with painting, sculpture and architecture. There was a diamond-shaped (parallelogram) configuration of canvases stretched over plywood, about 32 by 19 feet, and a rectangular configuration, about 19 by 19 feet. The diamond rested face-up, ramplike, with one end at the bottom of a wall and the other at the top of the opposite wall (16 feet high)