Works that spoke:
Floated Thought, and F4.S, and Vortex 2: exquisite in execution, choice and use of material, and expression, these pieces have enormous presence through their stillness: a deafening stillness that engulfed the entire gallery. True to their culture. A nice concept too.
It always rains on wet: beautiful as a physical and visual experience, aesthetically and conceptually pleasing with a wonderful choice and use of materials.
Handle: pleasing concept and beautiful execution; a nice visual/aesthetic experience, with surprising presence displayed on the wall as it was.
Purple Heart, and Crown and Sweet Spot 3: beautifully executed and aesthetically pleasing; interesting materials; based on personal experiences.
And those that didn't so much or at all:
Cuffs: viewer lives/shares the working experiences and life of the artist, therin lies the enjoyment. Personally, I find the concept and execution lacking; (Why did it with the show Prize? - a reflection on the environment?)
Rolling our combined body weight in clay from our studio to the gallery: would probably have appreciated this more if it had been shown in a different way.
The present is just a point: became more interesting when reading the artist statement.
Hung: seems to exist better in the mind of the artist than in physical reality;
Myth interrupted: the thinking behind it reads nicely, but the final product is lacking formally; the plastic membrane in particular was a problem to me with regard to texture and finish.
Oscillator R: I was entertained by this momentarily; I do appreciate the concept of 'a visually simple and minimal structure containing a concealed complexity' (as per the artist's statement) but this wasn't enough to hold my interest for long.
You'd do it if you loved me, and I told you this was a good spot: again there's a gulf between the ideas on which these pieces are based and what you see in front of you.
The two pieces that stand out, in mind, as key to the institution that is sculpture are (both by the same artist):
It's not you, it's me, and My sculptures, my rules: although I personally don't find these pieces aesthetically pleasing, or 'tactile and sumptuous' - as the artist puts it in her statement - I feel they address something I personally regard as hugely important: as well as encouraging 'the spectator to ascertain a sense of the broader potential of the everyday and to perceive objects with a new admiration and comprehension that surpasses their function', they address the broader potential and purpose of sculpture through the choice of materials. They challenge the viewer's conception of what sculpture should be; what materials are 'acceptable' for it to be 'proper art' - the title of a piece by this artist I saw elsewhere last year was 'This is a serious sculpture'. This relates to my interest in the ideas and ideals of the Gutai movement, which I have mentioned previously and which I will return to in a subsquent post.
The purpose of this exercise in post-exhibition analysis is not to praise or criticize, nor judge worth, but to analyse in order to crystallize my own views and subsequently verbalize (and define?) my own (current) artistic approach.
What emerges as paramount here are (not in any particular order):
- choice and use of material
- concept
- aesthetics (universal geometry [which I will expand upon later])
- questioning
- execution
- simplicity
- viewer's experience.
