Visual art exhibitions and events with a platform for critical writing
PHOENIX & BRIDGE GALLERIES, Exeter
7 March - 12 April 2008
Reviewed by: Nannette Brown
Looking through the glass door of the main gallery of the Phoenix, Exeter I was interested to see that the gallery was in the process of mounting a new exhibition. I was wrong. The exhibition was up and awaiting an audience. I walked in and looked around. There were large photographs on the far end wall. On moving closer I saw they were of sheep, facial portraits of sheep, titled “ Good Mother”. Each sheep had received an award for being a good mother. The awards were mounted below each portrait. I read “ My piece voices the expectations surrounding women to be good girls, to be beautiful, or loving mothers.”
I was then distracted by shirts made from unbleached linen hung on coat hangers suspended from the ceiling. Images and writing was printed onto scraps of material and feathers which were machine sewn on to the shirts. These shirts showed no sign of ever warming a body. I read that the shirts were metaphors for those who were no longer there.
The photographs on the walls were in aluminium frames, well printed, with plenty of white space around them. Women’s work and domesticity was implied somewhere. How nice and neat everything was. Books, whose contents had been selected and printed, lay on the back of a fleece. Could this be a reference to the women, or their way of life; are they being fleeced? Dare I put my mucky little fingers on the books? You know the feeling, like when you walk into a house and you feel you should take your shoes off. I couldn’t help thinking that the women whose lives were the subject of the show, women who plucked turkeys, would have to take off more than just their muddy shoes before entering this space.
I left the first room and moved into another part of the gallery. There I found another book, larger this time. Sitting on the stool provided, I began very carefully to turn the pages, which were sandwiched between tissue paper like a wedding album. It was in the form of a diary. Each page had reproduced pencil drawings and text, the layout of which had been carefully designed, illustrating the journey the artist had taken. Was this book art I asked myself, or was this the diary of a 21st century lady. I closed the book and moved into the final space.
This contained a metal kitchen unit, the sort that was found in many kitchens from the thirties to the sixties. Inside there was more writing photocopied and pasted onto the doors together with pots of jam and preserves. I must admit I was losing interest and becoming annoyed. I moved towards two beautiful wooden Edwardian specimen chests. Chests, great, I thought. I wanted to be fascinated. In expectation that each object I found would be a reminder of those things collected from a journey, I opened the first drawer very gently waiting to enter a world where secrets are revealed, love lingers along with a forgotten mothball. I tried another drawer, which contained a piece of floral material.
I realised this was supposed to be part of a story, a story of experience. Yet why did I not respond to it, why was I so disappointed? Later, I realised, that any sense of genuine involvement had been lost in a neat and tidy process, a process that had laundered and bleached authenticity. There had been no transmutation of the collected material. It had not been reworked or mutated sufficient to reveal, unfold, inform let alone to intrigue or astonish. What I had missed was a sense of soul. Of passion, of women who worked hard who were tired most of the time who put the demands of their livelihoods before the neat and tidy for its own sake.
Yet, there is a message in this show: the sense of continuity through generations engaged in the same activities and how it is preserved and established through memory. But I wonder how many people other than those who have an arts degree, who can reference the various approaches, will get the message. I found the visual impact of the exhibition minimal. What it lacked visually it certainly made up for in words. The web sites covering this project are far more interesting.
Venue detail:
PHOENIX & BRIDGE GALLERIES
Exeter Phoenix,
Bradninch Place,
Gandy Street,
Exeter,
EX4 3LS
The main problem I had with this show was that it lacked a sense of structure that arose from a rationale that underpinned and guided selection and presentation. That is not to say that work should not have a sense of fragmentation as an expression of a philosophical premise or as a way of communicating ideas. Unfortunately this show reminded me of the many student projects and degree shows I have had to assess. Ok, the project sounds very worthy, a great topic that straddles the criteria required for anything from a sociological research project, a starting point for the development of an aesthetic process, to a good subject for regional arts funding, However, like so many student projects it was reasonably rich in terms of the collection of raw material, and in the basic ordering of it, but lacked essential resolution as either an artwork in itself (such as an installation) or a collection of artworks. It appears that in the end the problems of working within a gallery space were beyond the directors of this project. And of course this is what all artists must work within. For example the numerous photographs could have been presented in a way to retain and expand their function as snapshots of memory. Blowing up a few images and framing raises the question. Why those? There are many women artists, for example Annette Messager who have successfully manipulated image and object together and in the process have made something that transcends its component parts. Maybe that's what Nannette refers to as soul. The same could be said about the writing. Unlike Linda Gordon. I did not find this show sophisticated, rather a set of unconnected and borrowed attempts to present collected material as some form of art. Neither was it unmanipulated. Everything was a reproduction, and processed in some form or another, even the objects in the drawers appeared to be after thoughts. Unfortunately these processes seem to squeeze out the sense of direct experience, so
posted on 2008-03-28 by Michael Bartlett
sorry - my last response is well under 400 words, but.... Anyone wanting to read the full version - please see http://throughstones.wordpress.com
posted on 2008-03-27 by Linda Gordon
I don't understand how soul communicates itself. I think you have to be open to it. It certainly is not tied to the manipulation of visual material. Indeed, I thought one of the strengths of the exhibition was the fact that much of the material was left unmanipulated ' a multitude of scraps, fragments and mementos, left to speak for themselves and resonate with each other. And coupled with the complex sound tracks in those specimen chests, and the background noise, light and movement of the gallery itself ' the whole effect was sophisticated and quite un-nerving. This is where the transmutation lay, I think ' within our own brains. About 'neat and tidy', and its being a destroyer of soul. Maybe the distancing effect was something to do with the gallery space itself. I did not feel at all uncomfortable handling the work ' even the large book with the tissue paper sheets. In fact I thought, as exhibitions go, it was all very touchable. I did not notice anyone else looking awkward about this either. People seemed relaxed and chatty - many, like myself wearing comfortable jeans and anorak. (Though, like myself, I am sure they all washed their hands and changed before coming out). Yes, certainly some of the work on show was less successful than others ' this is to be expected in a group exhibition. Yes, I did sometimes find metaphors and art historical references too obvious and contrived. I didn't interpret any of this as a lack of integrity or involvement ' just people struggling to communicate, like the rest of us. Strangely, when I met up with my husband again (someone with no art degree) I found he was much taken with the works I had found the most problematic. Conclusion? I haven't a clue. Each to his own, that's what I say. PS. I would just like to say: This is a public gallery in a semi-rural county of England, and we are British, not generally given to baring our souls or passions in public. And no-one with any self-respect, is go
posted on 2008-03-27 by Linda Gordon
I will post my response to Nannette's very interesting review at my first opportunity - meanwhile, I would like to refer readers to my blog post 'Women in Farming' on http://throughstones.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/women-in-farming. which I wrote a couple of weeks ago, a few days after seeing the show. Our interpretations and points of view are completely different, yet I think that if a test of successful art lies in its ability to provoke, and to disrupt one's habitual ways of thinking - allowing space for new thoughts and new understandings - then 'Women in Farming' has undoubtedly done that for both Nannette and myself. My 'throughstones' post was not intended to be an all-encompassing review - just my own personal 'take' on what I consider to be a beautiful, unpretentious and important exhibition. Important because of the issues it potentially raises (i.e. our moral responsibility towards animals; our relationship with the land; how do we survive under present-day conditions; how do we feed a hungry world, and what it is to be a woman whose life is inextricably bound up with these fundamentals of life). Important also, because bringing this type of exhibition into a gallery setting brings 'art' and 'life' just that little bit closer together. It brings a new, and interested audience into the gallery, introduces a new world to the seasoned gallery-going public, widens everybody's experience of life and shows the social function an artist can have in expressing common values, voicing concerns and setting up new scenarios. I aproached the show from a perspective of my interest in notions of time and memory. And most important of all, I thought, as far as art-making is concerned, were the recording techniques involved, and the way they were put together. The way some of the apparently unconnected fragments of sound and visual material interacted is not unlike the way our own memories operate. This has to be pretty exciting and interesting stuff!
posted on 2008-03-26 by Linda Gordon
To post a comment you need to login
Back to top
Unfortunately the end of my comment was not posted, so here goes... so what one touches is neither authentic in terms of the actual or authentic in terms of aesthetic experience. Yes, transmutation should take place in our brains, but also in those of the artist, whose job it is to challenge and to communicate. Otherwise what's the point? I am bemused about Linda's references to Britishness, the nature of the audience and the comfort of their clothing.
posted on 2008-03-28 by Michael Bartlett