Last week I was introduced to an artist new to me at an opening at the Akron Art Museum: Jean-Pierre Gauthier. I guess I should have been more familiar with him as he shows at the very tony and well-known gallery, Jack Shainman. Still, this was his very first North American museum show, so perhaps I can be forgiven for not knowing his work already. I encourage you to go to his website and look at the installation shots and videos. Mr. Gauthier creates complex, 3-dimensional, cross disciplinary works that defy written description. It's best to just look.
Jean-Pierre Gauthier website. (Watch the installation process on the Akron Art Museum website.)
Walking through the exhibit, I was struck by how often I was thinking of other artists. Mr. Gauthier is certainly an original and unique artist, yet the range of my associations was intriguing to me. I share them for others' thoughts or discussions.
My first association was to artists who, like Mr. Gauthier are from Montreal or have worked in there including Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, Alexandre Castonguay, and Karilee Fuglem.
My association with Lozano-Hemmer's work is that both are creating environments that have an interface between humans and technology. I like the way both artists use the viewer to influence/create the work. Rafael Lozano-Hemmer's website
The other two artists I mentioned both show at Pierre-François Ouellette art contemporain. I saw both during my visit to Mois de Photo in Montreal this time last year. Alexandre Castonguay's "Drawing by numbers" bears distinct parallels to "Uncertainty Markers" of Mr. Gauthier. I quote here from the Ouelette website:
In Drawing by Numbers , a wall-mounted plotter lightly engraves participant's images. The drawings are based on the image analysis of visitor's movements, retaining their outlines. They are registered when people make gestures that are close enough to the coded gestures that are often characteristic of interactive art installations and of the usage of portable electronic devices.
So, in the same way the "Uncertainty Markers" uses sound to control a device that leave the traces of that sound on a wall, "Drawing by Numbers" uses photo technology to do the same thing. I would love to see both in the same show.
Karilee Fuglem is a more ephemeral link to me. Both artists use found and everday objects in their constructions, but they subvert the object's original intended use for artistic means. I also find some parallels in the the fact that both artists explore a world that is almost beyond perception. Again I quote from the gallery website:
Karilee Fuglem is interested in revealing that which is invisible at first sight. Using translucent, delicate and supple materials, she can make the air we breathe and the space we are living in tangible. The magic of Karilee Fuglem's installations, drawings and photographs comes from an aesthetic approaching nothingness, where negligible elements, such as bubblegum, dust, plastic bags and nylon thread, are charged with unforeseen potential.
With Ms Fuglem, I would include the sculptural works of Thorsten Brinkmann in my list of associations. I've spoken a few times about Mr. Brinkmann's photography, but I've spent less time noting his clever and engaging scultural work made out of found objects. I relate these especially to Mr. Gauthier's "Remue-Ménage", "The Janitor's Break", and "Le Cagibi". Brinkmann's sculpture at Kunstagenten.
Including Mr. Castonguay, I thought about other artists who have made wall drawings. There is a Sol LeWitt on the AAM wall downstairs, but I was strongly reminded of the amazing DIA show of LeWitt wall drawings 2 years ago. In Mr. Gauthier's "Uncertainty Markers" piece, a machine makes the marks on the wall rather than a team of humans operating under strict instructions. But this work shares with LeWitt's a careful limiting of scope in order to make marks and patterns on a wall for temporary and conceptual effect. They are both circumscribed in every possible sense of the word.
Is it too wimsical to invoke the sculpture of Alexander Calder? The sense of serious play and playful seriousness combines with the artists sharing a use of asymmetrical geometry hanging in three dimensional space. Maybe it's a reach but I like the idea.
Last, and not least, I was reminded of the installations of Monika Sosnowska and Iole de Freitas. These works simultaneously invade and take over the spaces they inhabit while also describing the idea of what a line describes in space. I'm thinking especially of Mr. Gauthier's works "Chant de Travail"and "Échotriste".
Iole de Freitas' website
Monica Sosnowska
I hope my ruminations on artistic associations provides some food for thought and discussion on this artist. I find the work to be excellent and thought provoking on its own. I hope these few links will only add to appreciation of the work. I have ignored the musical inspirations that Mr. Gauthier, himself, cites. Chief among these are John Cage. I feel that the viewer would find his way to this in any case, and, if not, Mr. Gauthier is there to suggest it. Comments welcomed.....
Monday, September 29, 2008
Akron Art Museum redux
I had the pleasure of revisiting the Akron Art Museum last week. I had written about this small jewel in one of my first blogs. Seeing it again, I was struck again by what a remarkable and unexpected institution this is. I am hard pressed to think of a museum in a town of this size that has such a first-class, A-list, forward-looking roster of artists in its permanent collection. And this is not a case of first rate artists represented by second rate works. As I mentioned in my previous post, we see great work by Chuck Close, Yayoi Kusama, Claus Oldenburg, and Sol Lewitt. To that list, I can add Andy Warhol, Gene Davis, Morris Louis, Nam June Paik, Robert Rauschenberg, Louise Nevelson, and a really exciting collection of photography. On view was a show of photo collages by John Heartfield that was curated entirely from the holding of the museum. WOW! If you're anywhere near Akron, Ohio, check out this museum. It's a treat. A link to the museum's website is to the right on my start menu.
Next: a blog about the current Akron Art Museum show of Jean-Pierre Gauthier.
Next: a blog about the current Akron Art Museum show of Jean-Pierre Gauthier.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The 2nd Silverstein Photo Annual
The 2nd installment of the Silverstein Photography Annual (SPA) recently opened. I continue to believe that this is a good and worthwhile addition to the NYC art and photography scene. I wrote a positive blog about it last year, and my views have not substantially shifted. We all know how tough it is for an artist to get a gallery show in the straight-jacket-tight NYC gallery scene. Artists struggle even to get their portfolios reviewed much less shown in a gallery. Add to that equation the fact that most galleries cannot gamble on economically unproven artists, and that most gallery owners are too busy paying the rent to see a broad spectrum of new work. (I don't blame them for this fact, but it is a fact.) Art consumers like me know that what we see in the galleries is a tiny slit in the panorama view of the art world. Because of these art-world realities, it seems obvious that SPA puts art in front of the NYC audience that would most likely not be seen here otherwise. I think this is deserving of praise.
Now, I know there are other outlets that show new work. There are the various museum shows like the MoMA New Photography series and the Whitney Biennial. One can visit the open studios of the many fine art schools in the area or see their graduation shows. I cherish these options as much as anyone, and I'm glad they exist, but none of them operate under the auspices of a gallery. I think this makes SPA a welcome addition. Whether Mr. Silverstein is flexing his curatorial muscle or showing his latent desire for museum cred is beside the point. The point is we get to see work that we wouldn't otherwise see. YAY!
I also like the format in which 10 curators (usually highly esteemed and renowned curators) are each asked to nominate one photographer. This means each choice is a highly edited and selective one, and it also deflates some criticism that the gallery and its directors are using SPA solely as a marketing tool. Is the work for sale? Yes. Does the gallery use the format to market itself? Of course it does. But I believe the spirit behind the marketing is honest, and that there is a love for the medium manifested in the show. Nothing is perfect; I choose to celebrate what is good in the idea.
Since perfection is an imperfect ideal, I suppose it's only to be expected that rapturous enthusiasm for every single chosen artist would be unlikely, even impossible. Again, I think this is a good thing. Most people who don't happen to be photography professionals never participate in the portfolio review process. They don't get the opportunity to see one artist against another with the sole criterion being choosing who is good. SPA lets us do that, although in a highly pre-selected way. It's fun and instructive to see who shines, who really speaks to us.
For me in this show that would be Raphael Dallaporta and Rick McKee Hocks.
Unlike most of the photographers in SPA, Mr. Dallaporta's work has been seen in NYC at least twice. His landmines work was in William Ewing's Re-Generation show at Aperture a few years ago (the same work now in SPA), and his Autopsy series was shown a few months ago in the NY Photo Festival in Dumbo. I liked the Landmines work from the very start. I love how something so menacing and deadly can be transformed into an object of glamour and seductiveness by a photographic perspective. There is a sweet moment of realization when walking up to this work. One's eye is attracted by the color and the shininess of the objects so we walk closer, just as real people do with the real thing. Then, we realize that these 1:1 proportion photographs show a deadly object that is pointed right at you. BOOOM! Terrifying. For many years, Mr. Dallaporta didn't want these photos to be sold to private collectors for fear that they would be used as objects of design and shabby chic. NY collectors are lucky that now he has changed his mind.
Rick McKee Hock creates fascinating work using Polaroid transfer onto Arches paper. I love the multiple layers of self-reflective commentary on photography and photographic process as the images are re-photographed images themselves. The combination Mr. McKee finds between well-known images and vernacular ones creates a tension in the best works that is mesmerizing. Each work is unique.
A show well worth checking out.
Now, I know there are other outlets that show new work. There are the various museum shows like the MoMA New Photography series and the Whitney Biennial. One can visit the open studios of the many fine art schools in the area or see their graduation shows. I cherish these options as much as anyone, and I'm glad they exist, but none of them operate under the auspices of a gallery. I think this makes SPA a welcome addition. Whether Mr. Silverstein is flexing his curatorial muscle or showing his latent desire for museum cred is beside the point. The point is we get to see work that we wouldn't otherwise see. YAY!
I also like the format in which 10 curators (usually highly esteemed and renowned curators) are each asked to nominate one photographer. This means each choice is a highly edited and selective one, and it also deflates some criticism that the gallery and its directors are using SPA solely as a marketing tool. Is the work for sale? Yes. Does the gallery use the format to market itself? Of course it does. But I believe the spirit behind the marketing is honest, and that there is a love for the medium manifested in the show. Nothing is perfect; I choose to celebrate what is good in the idea.
Since perfection is an imperfect ideal, I suppose it's only to be expected that rapturous enthusiasm for every single chosen artist would be unlikely, even impossible. Again, I think this is a good thing. Most people who don't happen to be photography professionals never participate in the portfolio review process. They don't get the opportunity to see one artist against another with the sole criterion being choosing who is good. SPA lets us do that, although in a highly pre-selected way. It's fun and instructive to see who shines, who really speaks to us.
For me in this show that would be Raphael Dallaporta and Rick McKee Hocks.
Unlike most of the photographers in SPA, Mr. Dallaporta's work has been seen in NYC at least twice. His landmines work was in William Ewing's Re-Generation show at Aperture a few years ago (the same work now in SPA), and his Autopsy series was shown a few months ago in the NY Photo Festival in Dumbo. I liked the Landmines work from the very start. I love how something so menacing and deadly can be transformed into an object of glamour and seductiveness by a photographic perspective. There is a sweet moment of realization when walking up to this work. One's eye is attracted by the color and the shininess of the objects so we walk closer, just as real people do with the real thing. Then, we realize that these 1:1 proportion photographs show a deadly object that is pointed right at you. BOOOM! Terrifying. For many years, Mr. Dallaporta didn't want these photos to be sold to private collectors for fear that they would be used as objects of design and shabby chic. NY collectors are lucky that now he has changed his mind.
Rick McKee Hock creates fascinating work using Polaroid transfer onto Arches paper. I love the multiple layers of self-reflective commentary on photography and photographic process as the images are re-photographed images themselves. The combination Mr. McKee finds between well-known images and vernacular ones creates a tension in the best works that is mesmerizing. Each work is unique.
A show well worth checking out.
The Season Begins
Well, summer is officially over. It's not the sight of geese flying south or the leaves turning color but the sight of Chelsea galleries jammed to overflowing at the start of the new season. I, for one, did not find much pleasure in the experience. Was I alone? It seemed so desperate and overcrowded. The art was in third place most of the time and I just couldn't find the right rhythm to be looking at the work. I don't know if it's the financial and economic challenges on my mind or a slow transition from the easy/lazy summer days. It just didn't feel right. But there were pleasures to be found. A few thoughts on a few shows......
The new Vik Muniz show at Sikkema/Jenkins is remarkable. It showcases all of his trademark cleverness and fine craft but turns it on its head. Instead of creating a creating a photo from a made object, he has made a sculptural object from a photo. The photo is of the back of a famous painting after which Mr. Muniz and his team obsessively re-create the markings, stamps, tape, and labels that mark the provenance of all works of art. To see these recreations leaning with their putative masterpieces on the other side feels like a museum turned inside out. It also remarks wittily on our desire for authenticity and connoisseurship over any aesthetic concerns. What's on the back has become more important than what's on the front. Cool.
Von Lintel has an interesting show called "More Than Words". I was disappointed that the actual show didn't quite live up to the potential of the description of the show, but I was happy that they tried. It was good to see that the smartly curated group/theme show was not dead as we move into the Fall. Standouts for me were the typed works of Lee Etheridge IV and the drawings of Mark Lombardi. Both are artists I know well from their showings at Pierogi, Brooklyn. While Mr. Etheridge's work recalls typed work of Carl Andre, I feel that it's a new, graphical direction that stands on its own.
Wonderful Minor White retrospective at Howard Greenberg. I have loved this artist's work since I first discovered photography. Though I don't believe that his devotion to eastern philosophical principles adds much to the work, I do believe that the work stands on its own without that philosophical overlay beautifully. The abstractions are wonderfully created in camera. Some of them are so arcane that it's hard to believe that they had no post production in the darkroom. I find it hard to understand that the abstractions and constructions of Aaron Siskind, Frederick Sommer, and other from the Chicago I.D. school have found such favor with collectors while Minor White's work remains largely unknown. Mr. Greenberg chose to supplement this show with a small selection of the great artists who have been influenced by Minor White. It was a lovely frame to show the legacy and influence of a great artist and teacher. Must see.
I'm happy to see that Yancey Richardson has added Hiroh Kikai to her roster. She has a small showing of the city portraits on view. Though I don't believe this is his strongest work nor the best way to see this series, I'm happy to know that Yancey chose him. I eagerly look forward to a more comprehensive show in the coming years.
My dear friend Cornelia Hediger had her debut NYC show at the up-and-coming Klompching Gallery in Brooklyn. I am thrilled for her. It's dramatic and personal work that is well worth the trip to the other side of the river.
The always smart and engaged Becky Smith of Bellwether Gallery has a show of Zoe Beloff. The show is of maquette theaters using archival videos, mirrors, and stagecraft to unsettling effect. Take a look before you read the press release. It's interesting to have an impression of this work BEFORE you know the whole story.
Last, and not at all least, was a photograph by Christopher Rauschenberg at the newly named Michael Mazzeo Gallery (formerly Peer Gallery). Sometimes an artist taps into emotion that is so pure, so raw, so honest, that it takes your breath away. Mr. Rauschenberg has done that here.
Link to the photograph and the wall text from the show.
Just reading that makes me tear up. Seeing his brilliant, simple, honest photo, I thought about a poem I know by Joshua Beckman from his cycle "Lament for the Death of a Bullfighter"
At the news of your death
not a good poem was written
not in your country or mine
not by any of the famous poets from anywhere,
no, we all just sat down and had a good cry,
........
We could all have a good cry at the sight of Chris's photo. Wow.
The new Vik Muniz show at Sikkema/Jenkins is remarkable. It showcases all of his trademark cleverness and fine craft but turns it on its head. Instead of creating a creating a photo from a made object, he has made a sculptural object from a photo. The photo is of the back of a famous painting after which Mr. Muniz and his team obsessively re-create the markings, stamps, tape, and labels that mark the provenance of all works of art. To see these recreations leaning with their putative masterpieces on the other side feels like a museum turned inside out. It also remarks wittily on our desire for authenticity and connoisseurship over any aesthetic concerns. What's on the back has become more important than what's on the front. Cool.
Von Lintel has an interesting show called "More Than Words". I was disappointed that the actual show didn't quite live up to the potential of the description of the show, but I was happy that they tried. It was good to see that the smartly curated group/theme show was not dead as we move into the Fall. Standouts for me were the typed works of Lee Etheridge IV and the drawings of Mark Lombardi. Both are artists I know well from their showings at Pierogi, Brooklyn. While Mr. Etheridge's work recalls typed work of Carl Andre, I feel that it's a new, graphical direction that stands on its own.
Wonderful Minor White retrospective at Howard Greenberg. I have loved this artist's work since I first discovered photography. Though I don't believe that his devotion to eastern philosophical principles adds much to the work, I do believe that the work stands on its own without that philosophical overlay beautifully. The abstractions are wonderfully created in camera. Some of them are so arcane that it's hard to believe that they had no post production in the darkroom. I find it hard to understand that the abstractions and constructions of Aaron Siskind, Frederick Sommer, and other from the Chicago I.D. school have found such favor with collectors while Minor White's work remains largely unknown. Mr. Greenberg chose to supplement this show with a small selection of the great artists who have been influenced by Minor White. It was a lovely frame to show the legacy and influence of a great artist and teacher. Must see.
I'm happy to see that Yancey Richardson has added Hiroh Kikai to her roster. She has a small showing of the city portraits on view. Though I don't believe this is his strongest work nor the best way to see this series, I'm happy to know that Yancey chose him. I eagerly look forward to a more comprehensive show in the coming years.
My dear friend Cornelia Hediger had her debut NYC show at the up-and-coming Klompching Gallery in Brooklyn. I am thrilled for her. It's dramatic and personal work that is well worth the trip to the other side of the river.
The always smart and engaged Becky Smith of Bellwether Gallery has a show of Zoe Beloff. The show is of maquette theaters using archival videos, mirrors, and stagecraft to unsettling effect. Take a look before you read the press release. It's interesting to have an impression of this work BEFORE you know the whole story.
Last, and not at all least, was a photograph by Christopher Rauschenberg at the newly named Michael Mazzeo Gallery (formerly Peer Gallery). Sometimes an artist taps into emotion that is so pure, so raw, so honest, that it takes your breath away. Mr. Rauschenberg has done that here.
Link to the photograph and the wall text from the show.
Just reading that makes me tear up. Seeing his brilliant, simple, honest photo, I thought about a poem I know by Joshua Beckman from his cycle "Lament for the Death of a Bullfighter"
At the news of your death
not a good poem was written
not in your country or mine
not by any of the famous poets from anywhere,
no, we all just sat down and had a good cry,
........
We could all have a good cry at the sight of Chris's photo. Wow.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Responses to Creative Destruction
I got a great comment to a previous Creative Destruction post. To save you all from looking back into the blog site to find what I'm responding to, here is what One Way Street says on the topic of Creative Destruction:
Here are some random associations with "creative destruction": Historically I think of the "duotone solarizations" of Edmund Teske, which involved re-working his existing negatives, playing with the chemistry (exposing developers to light before they had been fixed, or after they had been partially fixed) - rendering each image unique. Depending on the papers & chemistry used as well, different tonalities were achieved, as well as solarization effects (negatives rendered as positive, & vice versa). Teske comes out of a very distinct pictorial tradition, dating back to the 1920s, in Chicago & subsequently Los Angeles. The print & its surface were assumed to be mediated - the transparency we assume with modern "straight" prints is a later idea. Teske's patron was Aline Barnsdall, who is known now primarily for her estate "Hollyhock House" designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, which is now a cultural center run by the city of L.A. Teske was also a follower of the Vedanta Temple. Unlike more traditional pictorial materials (gum bichromate overlays, platinum printing, etc.), Teske utilized the effects of "deterioration" of the silver, experimenting with chemistry & light, which I think would fit in this framework. Teske had been a teacher of James Fee, who works currently, who has experimented a lot with the same techniques. Other work that comes to mind: the photos of Sigmar Polke, which use chemicals in a much more selective & delirious manner - such that the image sometimes is barely apparent or unrecognizable. Also, some of the prints of Boris Mikhailov, which employ scavenged or "compromised" materials. I'm thinking of his book "Unfinished Dissertation" which uses an academic dissertation as the matrix of Mikhailov's book. Or his use of cyanotype paper. My understanding of Mikhailov's work is that before the fall of the USSR, it was "officially" unofficial, & was deliberately "poor" & "poorly made" to stand outside the world of sanctioned imagery. Also (to go in another aesthetic direction): the 80s work of the Starn Twins with its folds, wrinkles, spills & cellophane tape, come to mind.
I think this response hones the ongoing discussion about what constitutes destruction. Is it destruction to experiment in the darkroom with chemicals and toners? Is it destruction when any sharp object breaks the surface of the emulsion? I think the Starn twins are in the same category to me as Carlos Garaicoa. The use of pins (in the case of Garaicoa) or tape (the Starns) is sculptural and and of a certain utility. There seems to be no intent on the part of the artist to destroy or mar the object. From a viewer's point of reference, I don't see these works as damaged by the process in the same way as Walead Beshty's process damages his work. I understand that Beshty may not INTEND destruction either, but we certainly see it that way.
In the case of Teske, I wonder if this is related to my questions about any of the artists who use the darkroom as a place of experimentation. Is toning an act of destruction? Is the work of Allison Rossiter with her use of damaged and expired paper destruction? What about all the photogram and darkroom experimentation out of Bauhaus and the I.D in Chicago? For my money, these do not fall into the realm of Creative Destruction.
That being said, Mr. Polke seems to be in a different world. His practice does seem to have some intent by the artist or perception by the viewer of ruin and occlusion. I would compare this practice to the color abstractions and folded paper work of Wolfgang Tilmanns. Here darkroom work seems to be directed towards the "ruin" of the image or taking the paper to the limits of it's viability. Destruction of the object seems a distinct possibility in the process of creating it.
In any case, there is no clear answer, nor any one right one. I enjoy chewing on the idea, though, and I think it would make an intriguing show. More to come........
Here are some random associations with "creative destruction": Historically I think of the "duotone solarizations" of Edmund Teske, which involved re-working his existing negatives, playing with the chemistry (exposing developers to light before they had been fixed, or after they had been partially fixed) - rendering each image unique. Depending on the papers & chemistry used as well, different tonalities were achieved, as well as solarization effects (negatives rendered as positive, & vice versa). Teske comes out of a very distinct pictorial tradition, dating back to the 1920s, in Chicago & subsequently Los Angeles. The print & its surface were assumed to be mediated - the transparency we assume with modern "straight" prints is a later idea. Teske's patron was Aline Barnsdall, who is known now primarily for her estate "Hollyhock House" designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, which is now a cultural center run by the city of L.A. Teske was also a follower of the Vedanta Temple. Unlike more traditional pictorial materials (gum bichromate overlays, platinum printing, etc.), Teske utilized the effects of "deterioration" of the silver, experimenting with chemistry & light, which I think would fit in this framework. Teske had been a teacher of James Fee, who works currently, who has experimented a lot with the same techniques. Other work that comes to mind: the photos of Sigmar Polke, which use chemicals in a much more selective & delirious manner - such that the image sometimes is barely apparent or unrecognizable. Also, some of the prints of Boris Mikhailov, which employ scavenged or "compromised" materials. I'm thinking of his book "Unfinished Dissertation" which uses an academic dissertation as the matrix of Mikhailov's book. Or his use of cyanotype paper. My understanding of Mikhailov's work is that before the fall of the USSR, it was "officially" unofficial, & was deliberately "poor" & "poorly made" to stand outside the world of sanctioned imagery. Also (to go in another aesthetic direction): the 80s work of the Starn Twins with its folds, wrinkles, spills & cellophane tape, come to mind.
I think this response hones the ongoing discussion about what constitutes destruction. Is it destruction to experiment in the darkroom with chemicals and toners? Is it destruction when any sharp object breaks the surface of the emulsion? I think the Starn twins are in the same category to me as Carlos Garaicoa. The use of pins (in the case of Garaicoa) or tape (the Starns) is sculptural and and of a certain utility. There seems to be no intent on the part of the artist to destroy or mar the object. From a viewer's point of reference, I don't see these works as damaged by the process in the same way as Walead Beshty's process damages his work. I understand that Beshty may not INTEND destruction either, but we certainly see it that way.
In the case of Teske, I wonder if this is related to my questions about any of the artists who use the darkroom as a place of experimentation. Is toning an act of destruction? Is the work of Allison Rossiter with her use of damaged and expired paper destruction? What about all the photogram and darkroom experimentation out of Bauhaus and the I.D in Chicago? For my money, these do not fall into the realm of Creative Destruction.
That being said, Mr. Polke seems to be in a different world. His practice does seem to have some intent by the artist or perception by the viewer of ruin and occlusion. I would compare this practice to the color abstractions and folded paper work of Wolfgang Tilmanns. Here darkroom work seems to be directed towards the "ruin" of the image or taking the paper to the limits of it's viability. Destruction of the object seems a distinct possibility in the process of creating it.
In any case, there is no clear answer, nor any one right one. I enjoy chewing on the idea, though, and I think it would make an intriguing show. More to come........
Pleasures and perils in Arles (Perils)
So, you think you want to be a curator, huh? It looks easy, right? Just find a bunch of good art, hang it in an attractive space, and, Voilá!, great show. Not so fast, my friend. It's clearly not so easy, as Christian Lacroix must have discovered as the commissaire for 2008 at the Rencontres de la Photographie in Arles. We must admit that the bar was not set high. I know whenever I hear that a fashion "personality" is venturing into "high" art, I bring all kinds of stereotypes, prejudices, bigotries, and low expectations to the table. Unfortunately, all of my expectations were met with such generosity that I might have to create some new prejudices and stereotypes. I have to say, I was eager to be proved wrong. I love to see expansion in the world of art that would include anything from vernacular to commercial work. Art can be a big tent. But the fashion world showed once again that it is usually only about itself and its own ego.
I understand the rationale behind why Mr. Lacroix would be invited to participate in the festival. He is a native of Arles. As a celebrated and successful son of the city, it's only fitting that he be fêted and included in one of the city's most prestigious events. Still, if he's going to be included, it should be on the terms of a festival devoted to photography, not as a photo festival turning into a fashion show. This is exactly what happened.
I fast forward to the evening program on the final night of the opening week. Usually this is an evening devoted to awards for books and artists, video presentations about noted photographers, or a presentation by a noted photographer. The witty and erudite presentation by Joan Fontcuberta a few years ago remains a highlight in my photographic life. This was a wonderful opportunity for Mr. Lacroix to show his relationship to and passion for photography in any number of ways. Instead he had a fashion show. 20 years of Lacroix couture paraded around a makeshift runway while a fast cut, music-video-style montage of musicals droned on a big screen behind the models. It was dull, it looked haphazard, it seemed ill conceived, but worst of all: IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH PHOTOGRAPHY. Why on earth were we looking at this. Did Mr. Lacroix feel that the photography world needed more awareness of couture fashion? Did he think the one perfect thing he could offer a festival celebrating photography in his hometown was a parade of dresses? It was so sad.
And then, as an afterthought, there was a mumbled introduction to a video recounting the making of Josef Koudelka's photos of the Soviet invasion of Prague. WTF??!! Did anyone planning this event think that maybe, just maybe, fou-fou dresses might not segue so well with a documentary of totalitarian takeovers? Current French international football star Djibril Cissé was also born in Arles. Perhaps next year we can look forward to a soccer match onstage as the culmination of the opening week.
But this was only the final act. The run up to this opera buffa was looking at the other shows chosen and curated by Mr. Lacroix.
At the core of this was his takeover of the Musée Rattu. We are told that this museum is where the young Lacroix first encountered great art, and where his artistic sensibility was first formed. He therefore tried to construct a show built from the holdings of the museum, representations of other artists, and his own couture creations. When this kind of multi-period, group show works, it can be thrilling. Anyone who saw the Artempo show at the Palazzo Fortuny last year can attest to the power this kind of show can have. If you didn't have a chance to go, you can still see it online at http://www.artempo.eu/ . The Fortuny show looked effortless and the works of various periods spoke to each other in easy conversation that sparked new ideas about each work.
At Reattu, the conversation was as forced as a badly planned blind date. And like a bad date, one could see no reason why these "people" were in the same room together. I would happily argue for fashion/couture as art. But like any art, context is everything. In the Reattu show, it seemed that there was a variety of art in the room plus a dress or two. The conversation stalled and died after the first handshake.
Since this is primarily a photo blog, and Arles is a photo festival, I'll only say that the photos in the Reattu show could not have been more dismal. Perhaps this is the fault of Reattu and their archives, but bad iterations of mundane photos could not have been a help to Mr. Lacroix's argument. As with the fashion show, I look to the festival organizers to put some control over the content being shown. If Mr. Lacroix had an unworkable but good idea, there should have been some oversight and editing to bring the level of the show up to the level of the festival.
ok......I'm getting tired of whining about all this fashion stuff. I prefer to be positive. I'll leave off any discussion of the derivative and stereotype-reinforcing shows of Paolo Roversi and Peter Lindbergh. If this work has power and art in an editorial context, it was lost on me in big prints in gallery milieu. And the extended hosannas that were extended to Richard Avedon for his alleged rejection of fashion in his New Yorker magazine "fable" called "In Memory of the Late Mr. and Mrs. Comfort" were beyond my ken. How a shoot that had models, designer clothes, an extensive set with a set designer, production deisigners, and credits for the clothes could be called a rejection of fashion is just outside of my understanding. It was called "harsh" and "daring" by more than one writer. Such pronouncements send my skepticism meter into the stratosphere. What's next, an Ansel Adams show calling him the greatest color photographer? How about a show that calls Weegee the most important studio portraitist of his time. If it looks like a fashion shoot, reads like a fashion shoot, smells like a fashion shoot, guess what it is? Yep, you're right! And no amount of curatorial wall text or theorizing is going to make it into something else, as much as we may like it to be true. Daring? Please.
I'm a big fan of the Arles festival. It has been important to me in my development as a member of the photo community. I root for its success every year. I feel bad about being so negative about the program this year. Francois Hebel is a smart and capable man. I have confidence that, whatever stumbles there may have been in my opinion this year, future years will return Arles to its position of authority and creative interest.
Ok....I'm really done. In penance for all this rant, I promise a minimum three positive posts to follow. Of course, any constructive debate is welcome and asked for.
I understand the rationale behind why Mr. Lacroix would be invited to participate in the festival. He is a native of Arles. As a celebrated and successful son of the city, it's only fitting that he be fêted and included in one of the city's most prestigious events. Still, if he's going to be included, it should be on the terms of a festival devoted to photography, not as a photo festival turning into a fashion show. This is exactly what happened.
I fast forward to the evening program on the final night of the opening week. Usually this is an evening devoted to awards for books and artists, video presentations about noted photographers, or a presentation by a noted photographer. The witty and erudite presentation by Joan Fontcuberta a few years ago remains a highlight in my photographic life. This was a wonderful opportunity for Mr. Lacroix to show his relationship to and passion for photography in any number of ways. Instead he had a fashion show. 20 years of Lacroix couture paraded around a makeshift runway while a fast cut, music-video-style montage of musicals droned on a big screen behind the models. It was dull, it looked haphazard, it seemed ill conceived, but worst of all: IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH PHOTOGRAPHY. Why on earth were we looking at this. Did Mr. Lacroix feel that the photography world needed more awareness of couture fashion? Did he think the one perfect thing he could offer a festival celebrating photography in his hometown was a parade of dresses? It was so sad.
And then, as an afterthought, there was a mumbled introduction to a video recounting the making of Josef Koudelka's photos of the Soviet invasion of Prague. WTF??!! Did anyone planning this event think that maybe, just maybe, fou-fou dresses might not segue so well with a documentary of totalitarian takeovers? Current French international football star Djibril Cissé was also born in Arles. Perhaps next year we can look forward to a soccer match onstage as the culmination of the opening week.
But this was only the final act. The run up to this opera buffa was looking at the other shows chosen and curated by Mr. Lacroix.
At the core of this was his takeover of the Musée Rattu. We are told that this museum is where the young Lacroix first encountered great art, and where his artistic sensibility was first formed. He therefore tried to construct a show built from the holdings of the museum, representations of other artists, and his own couture creations. When this kind of multi-period, group show works, it can be thrilling. Anyone who saw the Artempo show at the Palazzo Fortuny last year can attest to the power this kind of show can have. If you didn't have a chance to go, you can still see it online at http://www.artempo.eu/ . The Fortuny show looked effortless and the works of various periods spoke to each other in easy conversation that sparked new ideas about each work.
At Reattu, the conversation was as forced as a badly planned blind date. And like a bad date, one could see no reason why these "people" were in the same room together. I would happily argue for fashion/couture as art. But like any art, context is everything. In the Reattu show, it seemed that there was a variety of art in the room plus a dress or two. The conversation stalled and died after the first handshake.
Since this is primarily a photo blog, and Arles is a photo festival, I'll only say that the photos in the Reattu show could not have been more dismal. Perhaps this is the fault of Reattu and their archives, but bad iterations of mundane photos could not have been a help to Mr. Lacroix's argument. As with the fashion show, I look to the festival organizers to put some control over the content being shown. If Mr. Lacroix had an unworkable but good idea, there should have been some oversight and editing to bring the level of the show up to the level of the festival.
ok......I'm getting tired of whining about all this fashion stuff. I prefer to be positive. I'll leave off any discussion of the derivative and stereotype-reinforcing shows of Paolo Roversi and Peter Lindbergh. If this work has power and art in an editorial context, it was lost on me in big prints in gallery milieu. And the extended hosannas that were extended to Richard Avedon for his alleged rejection of fashion in his New Yorker magazine "fable" called "In Memory of the Late Mr. and Mrs. Comfort" were beyond my ken. How a shoot that had models, designer clothes, an extensive set with a set designer, production deisigners, and credits for the clothes could be called a rejection of fashion is just outside of my understanding. It was called "harsh" and "daring" by more than one writer. Such pronouncements send my skepticism meter into the stratosphere. What's next, an Ansel Adams show calling him the greatest color photographer? How about a show that calls Weegee the most important studio portraitist of his time. If it looks like a fashion shoot, reads like a fashion shoot, smells like a fashion shoot, guess what it is? Yep, you're right! And no amount of curatorial wall text or theorizing is going to make it into something else, as much as we may like it to be true. Daring? Please.
I'm a big fan of the Arles festival. It has been important to me in my development as a member of the photo community. I root for its success every year. I feel bad about being so negative about the program this year. Francois Hebel is a smart and capable man. I have confidence that, whatever stumbles there may have been in my opinion this year, future years will return Arles to its position of authority and creative interest.
Ok....I'm really done. In penance for all this rant, I promise a minimum three positive posts to follow. Of course, any constructive debate is welcome and asked for.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Computer glitch
On my recent trip to France, my not-so-dependable laptop was not-so-dependable. It decided to stop accessing the Internet 3 days into the trip. So while I was able to continue to write, I was not able to post. Forgive what will seem like a glut of new posts in the next few days. They were actually written at a leisurely pace over the last few weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)