"The Chicago Review of Economics"

How many performance artists does it take to change a light bulb? The answer may be found in “The Chicago Review of Economics,” a group exhibition that would not meet with Milton Friedman’s approval.

Curator Moshe Zvi Marvit asked artists from around the country to address the relationship between art and economics. Some pieces refer to the commodification of art: Eli Horowitz, managing editor of McSweeney’s, has sliced his whimsical painting, Blimf, into eight conveniently sized pieces. “The idea is that people can buy what they want, and want what they buy,” Horowitz explains. “No longer must they subjugate themselves to the tyranny of the artist.”

Other works, such as Daniel Anhorn’s masterful drawing of a groovy red Volkswagen minibus, represent the “artification” of commodities. Yet many of the exhibit’s contributors believe that art can undermine capitalism instead of becoming embedded in it. David Petrou’s Love Letters represents an exchange based on his appreciation for David Foster Wallace (and error-free prose) instead of monetary value. Mattathias Schwartz’s Favor is a new type of currency that allows its users to define its worth. Toby Klinger’s Ambiguities raises questions about one’s personal economy. It resembles any Flickr snapshot of partying hipsters—until a closer look reveals that the “photo” is a piece of embroidery. Why bother spending untold hours to craft an image that your digital camera could capture in seconds? Like the Green Lantern itself—a sunny, inviting space, run out of someone’s loft—it must be a labor of love.—Lauren Weinberg