I wrote these notes while waiting for a friend before going into the exhibition.
Gilbert and George at Tate Modern
I've no idea about transcribing this, but I thought it might be interesting to write about how I feel before I go into the exhibition. I'm waiting for Clare, one of my fellow Middlesex students, who is very easy to be honest around because she has her own very special gently sociopathic disregard for convention. I had been going to see it with Lara, a very intense Italian, but she is ill, but I think I would have had difficulty contradicting her.
I am expecting not to like the work or rather to be unimpressed. how can they live up to the hype. I'm almost dreading going in. What if I do like it? If I don't, is it because I'm closed minded to the idea?
As it stands, I've seen their work at the White Cube and other galleries. I feel they have just produced the same piece over and over again, presenting not really the subject of their work or the issue but just taking another opportunity for self promotion, without innovation, stuck in a rut.
A very good friend (Isobel, for those who know her) pointed out something I've been very quiet about. They have a very similar aesthetic to me, putting themselves into their pictures, in their tweed suits or naked, both of which have echoes in my work . Maybe my dread is being compared to them. Their success with work that is so different to mine is intimidating, what if I don't measure up because I'm too literal or ordinary, or just not good enough.
- And that was when I ran out of paper and Clare arrived
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Friday, March 23, 2007
WhiteCube - A tale of two Galleries
The First piece of proper research I have done for this, happened on Saturday 17th March when I went to the White Cube Gallery. truth be told I finally got round to dragging my self to galleries after having 2 weeks of bed ridden illness and a week of partying for my birthday. I went to both the Hoxton and the Green Park White Cube Galleries to see the Anselm Keifer and the Christian Marclay. Unfortunately the Christian Marclay had ended, which I really regret because he is very much a new discovery for me. I fell in love with his recent piece at Tate Modern. it will hopefully give me a kick up the arse to make me go to see exhibitions when I hear about them.
Well back to what I actually saw. It was probably good that it wasn't the Christian Marclay as I actually thought about the gallery and the curating as well as the work on show. Chronologically I saw the Keifer at Green Park, it was a very grand show with another sculpture (which I missed) in the Courtyard of the Royal Academy, but what I did see had a lot of pizazz. Whoever curated the actual layout of the show whether it was the artist or the gallery's own curator was quite a showman and the piece Palm Sunday which was dominated by a 30 foot palm tree, on its side, was placed for impact, to give the whole show a talking piece. Unfortunately and the is always an unfortunately for me this really distracted and detracted from the wall of paintings/collages which were much more complex and ultimately more interesting than the tree.
Downstairs there were very large paintings, landscapes using clay, paint (and apparently shellac) to show very wide horizons, arable plains. The shear scale was very effective, 10 foot high and 20 foot wide, putting you in to the spaces they portrayed/created, but again after a while the clay, which had given the initial impact, became distracting and felt like a gimmick.
I only saw the sketches for the piece in the RA courtyard, but because of the understated nature of the display, in a glass table top case, they were very effective and you could get the feeling of the intention of the piece which actually makes me feel as though I saw the piece in reality.
I dashed from Green Park, to the Hoxton Square White Cube as it was the end of the day, a strangely awkward journey, to a very different show. I have never heard the name Eberhard Havekost which I'll admit is not saying much, but I did recognise one of his pieces.
Havekost is a painter with quite a diverse range, from fairly gory depictions of accidents to sharply technically drawn flags. The exhibition showed this, but in the worst way, it was cluttered and abysmally hung. Whereas the Keifer was hung for impact this seemed to be hung for information with aesthetics not getting a look in. There was far too much on the walls and it seemed to be hung in no particular order, and you had no chance to appreciate the work. One or two pieces got a good showing, because they were big enough to be on a wall on their own. It was like the artist had wanted to show absolutely everything he had done recently and the curator hadn't had the heart or the guts to say no, I really don't feel I can comment on the work it self, which is probably being fairer than I ought because I was left pretty cold but I can't tell if that was because of the paintings or the gallery .
They say an artist is the best person to hang his work but I disagree, as an artist myself, I am far too close to my work to be objective. I can advise on my work or on a piece and its context to another, but a good curator should make decisions about the space and the transitions between pieces within it.
With these two exhibitions, The White Cube seem to have shown where their priorities lie. A grand high impact show for their big name in the new flagship and a cluttered poorly curated show for the small name in the gallery where their roots are. It feels very much like they are wannabe star trying to fit in with their new glamorous 'friends' trying ditch their past out of embarrassment. It might be that the business has taken over from the Art and that they are prioritising the show with the prestige and money making potential, or it could be that they have over stretched and are not actually capable of putting two shows up to a high standard in which case their reputation will suffer.
Well back to what I actually saw. It was probably good that it wasn't the Christian Marclay as I actually thought about the gallery and the curating as well as the work on show. Chronologically I saw the Keifer at Green Park, it was a very grand show with another sculpture (which I missed) in the Courtyard of the Royal Academy, but what I did see had a lot of pizazz. Whoever curated the actual layout of the show whether it was the artist or the gallery's own curator was quite a showman and the piece Palm Sunday which was dominated by a 30 foot palm tree, on its side, was placed for impact, to give the whole show a talking piece. Unfortunately and the is always an unfortunately for me this really distracted and detracted from the wall of paintings/collages which were much more complex and ultimately more interesting than the tree.
Downstairs there were very large paintings, landscapes using clay, paint (and apparently shellac) to show very wide horizons, arable plains. The shear scale was very effective, 10 foot high and 20 foot wide, putting you in to the spaces they portrayed/created, but again after a while the clay, which had given the initial impact, became distracting and felt like a gimmick.
I only saw the sketches for the piece in the RA courtyard, but because of the understated nature of the display, in a glass table top case, they were very effective and you could get the feeling of the intention of the piece which actually makes me feel as though I saw the piece in reality.
I dashed from Green Park, to the Hoxton Square White Cube as it was the end of the day, a strangely awkward journey, to a very different show. I have never heard the name Eberhard Havekost which I'll admit is not saying much, but I did recognise one of his pieces.
Havekost is a painter with quite a diverse range, from fairly gory depictions of accidents to sharply technically drawn flags. The exhibition showed this, but in the worst way, it was cluttered and abysmally hung. Whereas the Keifer was hung for impact this seemed to be hung for information with aesthetics not getting a look in. There was far too much on the walls and it seemed to be hung in no particular order, and you had no chance to appreciate the work. One or two pieces got a good showing, because they were big enough to be on a wall on their own. It was like the artist had wanted to show absolutely everything he had done recently and the curator hadn't had the heart or the guts to say no, I really don't feel I can comment on the work it self, which is probably being fairer than I ought because I was left pretty cold but I can't tell if that was because of the paintings or the gallery .
They say an artist is the best person to hang his work but I disagree, as an artist myself, I am far too close to my work to be objective. I can advise on my work or on a piece and its context to another, but a good curator should make decisions about the space and the transitions between pieces within it.
With these two exhibitions, The White Cube seem to have shown where their priorities lie. A grand high impact show for their big name in the new flagship and a cluttered poorly curated show for the small name in the gallery where their roots are. It feels very much like they are wannabe star trying to fit in with their new glamorous 'friends' trying ditch their past out of embarrassment. It might be that the business has taken over from the Art and that they are prioritising the show with the prestige and money making potential, or it could be that they have over stretched and are not actually capable of putting two shows up to a high standard in which case their reputation will suffer.
Decisions, Decisions 6th March
Due to illness and well generally being Brendon, I haven’t really been able to research galleries and artists so I’m going to have to make a sort of executive decision or decisions.
The private gallery is the White Cube, initially of Hoxton but with a sort globalised brand I know there is one in Piccadilly and I believe Paris and New York, established by Jay Joplin partner of YBA Sarah Lucas, a sort of poacher sleeping with gamekeeper, relationship. Although this may all be tosh as this is what I think I know it’s not researched and may well be contradicted by things I write later
The Artist I’m choosing is Gilbert and George. For various reasons, firstly because I don’t actually like they’re work which will make this stimulating or at least thought provoking for me, although this might change while I research this piece. I have a terrible propensity for falling for or at least sympathising with the enemy I’m too much of a people person, I empathise very readily. Secondly although I think it’s pretentious they only work together as effectively one artist and it gives me the opportunity to switch between plural and singular verbs and pronouns with gay abandon, and enjoy the fact that that will really annoy some people. Thirdly and probably most important is that they are alive and still working and as this is about career as much as I is work that is relevant to me it also won’t do my research any harm that they have a big retrospective at the Tate
The Public Gallery I have chosen, I actually haven’t chosen yet, although have decided to choose the City of New York because I frequently hear about the Art scene there and how it is cutting edge and so superior. And certain friends are always telling me how wonderful the city is. Well I’ve never been there, but refuse to be overawed, which is one of my strengths and weaknesses. So I’ve chosen to keep what I value most which is an open mind and look into it for my self.
The Art periodical choice is another I haven’t made and this is for a reason which is different from the public gallery, which is due to a lack of knowledge, this is due to an almost voluntary lack of knowledge. I find or at least have found Art magazines stultifyingly boring. I am not a low art kind of guy but pseudo intellectualising and pretentious wannabes and snobbery when written down makes me actually want to enjoy big brother (unfortunately like my opinion of Paul Weller I prefer the early stuff) This will probably be the hardest to write mostly because I will have to force myself to read at least one possibly several. An open mind will be difficult but I’ll try, though it might be easier to just rant
This was actually writtten on the 6th March but any other blogger users will know that changing to the new system is more complex than they make out
The private gallery is the White Cube, initially of Hoxton but with a sort globalised brand I know there is one in Piccadilly and I believe Paris and New York, established by Jay Joplin partner of YBA Sarah Lucas, a sort of poacher sleeping with gamekeeper, relationship. Although this may all be tosh as this is what I think I know it’s not researched and may well be contradicted by things I write later
The Artist I’m choosing is Gilbert and George. For various reasons, firstly because I don’t actually like they’re work which will make this stimulating or at least thought provoking for me, although this might change while I research this piece. I have a terrible propensity for falling for or at least sympathising with the enemy I’m too much of a people person, I empathise very readily. Secondly although I think it’s pretentious they only work together as effectively one artist and it gives me the opportunity to switch between plural and singular verbs and pronouns with gay abandon, and enjoy the fact that that will really annoy some people. Thirdly and probably most important is that they are alive and still working and as this is about career as much as I is work that is relevant to me it also won’t do my research any harm that they have a big retrospective at the Tate
The Public Gallery I have chosen, I actually haven’t chosen yet, although have decided to choose the City of New York because I frequently hear about the Art scene there and how it is cutting edge and so superior. And certain friends are always telling me how wonderful the city is. Well I’ve never been there, but refuse to be overawed, which is one of my strengths and weaknesses. So I’ve chosen to keep what I value most which is an open mind and look into it for my self.
The Art periodical choice is another I haven’t made and this is for a reason which is different from the public gallery, which is due to a lack of knowledge, this is due to an almost voluntary lack of knowledge. I find or at least have found Art magazines stultifyingly boring. I am not a low art kind of guy but pseudo intellectualising and pretentious wannabes and snobbery when written down makes me actually want to enjoy big brother (unfortunately like my opinion of Paul Weller I prefer the early stuff) This will probably be the hardest to write mostly because I will have to force myself to read at least one possibly several. An open mind will be difficult but I’ll try, though it might be easier to just rant
This was actually writtten on the 6th March but any other blogger users will know that changing to the new system is more complex than they make out
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
