Well the MA Exhibition came down this weekend. ‘Blossom’ is now packed away in hibernation for the time being. I must admit I was a little disappointed with the show as a whole. I really felt that the space had, for the most part, not been used particularly well. Visitors were greeted with a huge vacuous space as they walked in and as they approached the rear of the gallery the space was cluttered up by Jen Lewis’ installation. This installation would have been better suited to a larger, brighter space, such as the entrance where it would have benefitted from the large amounts of natural light. It was also a very cluttered piece and smaller works such as the video and the drawings could perhaps have been exhibited elsewhere in the gallery.
There was a drive from a number of the old dears on the course to try and emulate the feel of an exhibition as it would be seen in a contemporary art space rather than an institution. This fell flat on it’s face as the exhibitor’s were far to disparate in their practice’s and some demanded a certain level of information being available to their viewers. I have spoken to a number of people who made comments about the lack of information that was available. One visitor, a very respected artist both internationally and at home, even stating that she didn’t really like the work that was laid out like a studio full of clutter. I had to point out to her tha this was a room filled with support material from all the artists’. The fact that she thought this room was to be considered a work of art backed up up a concern that I already had about the standard of work on show. I didn’t really feel that the strength of the work on show was as it should have been for an MA exhibition. Obviously I’m discounting my own work from this as I’m biased and it was awesome! Joking aside I feel that the artist’s involved really didn’t explore their ideas in a real depth.
Well the MA Exhibition came down this weekend. ‘Blossom’ is now packed away in hibernation for the time being. I must admit I was a little disappointed with the show as a whole. I really felt that the space had, for the most part, not been used particularly well. Visitors were greeted with a huge vacuous space as they walked in and as they approached the rear of the gallery the space was cluttered up by Jen Lewis’ installation. This installation would have been better suited to a larger, brighter space, such as the entrance where it would have benefitted from the large amounts of natural light. It was also a very cluttered piece and smaller works such as the video and the drawings could perhaps have been exhibited elsewhere in the gallery.
There was a drive from a number of the old dears on the course to try and emulate the feel of an exhibition as it would be seen in a contemporary art space rather than an institution. This fell flat on it’s face as the exhibitor’s were far to disparate in their practice’s and some demanded a certain level of information being available to their viewers. I have spoken to a number of people who made comments about the lack of information that was available. One visitor, a very respected artist both internationally and at home, even stating that she didn’t really like the work that was laid out like a studio full of clutter. I had to point out to her tha this was a room filled with support material from all the artists’. The fact that she thought this room was to be considered a work of art backed up up a concern that I already had about the standard of work on show. I didn’t really feel that the strength of the work on show was as it should have been for an MA exhibition. Obviously I’m discounting my own work from this as I’m biased and it was awesome! Joking aside I feel that the artist’s involved really didn’t explore their ideas in a real depth.
Morag Colquhoun’s shed (pictured above) for example had been converted into a solar powered dark room; now I don’t know all the theory behind it in any real kind of detail but I do now that Morag is very intersted in ‘green’ issues’ and ideas surrounding sustainability. However, although the dark room is solar powered, the art of photography in itself is not ‘green’ at all. This is compounded by the series of photographs displayed on the walls around the shed showing some of the prints created and some of the series of test prints that were created as the processing of the images was fine tuned. This waste of paper in conjunction with the various chemicals required to use a dark room seems to negate the comment on sustainability being made by the artist. harsh as might no doubt sound I personally felt that the shed made a good school science project but did not stand very well as a work of art. The theory supporting it as a work of art did not stand up well and left me feeling that it was little more than a practical experiment in the use of solr energy.
There were a coule of video work on display at the final exhibition including a work by Rabab Ghazoul and Mandy Pritchard’s piece pictured at the top of this post. Mandy’s work made for interesting viewing although due to the nature of the way that the exhibition had been organised there was very little information to explain the background to the work: what there was seemed flimsy. In the exhibition literature the artist explained that each interviewee ‘is shown full-length in an outdoor setting to eliminate differences and generalise their environment’. Unfortunately all these outdoor settings are different and vary quite dramatically and so this generalisation of the environment is not achieved at all as can be seen in the picture at the top; te man to the left is stood next to a brick wall whilst the man next to him has a view across rolling green fields behind him. The artist also states that those people being interviewed are from a closely defined area in South Wales. However, I am very much aware that at least one of those people featured in the video is not from Suth Wales at all. I quite enjoyed dropping in on the work to hear some soundbytes but due to the way that the people’s answers were cut and pasted, and the lack of information about the questions they were actually asked, they were nothing more than nice soundbytes too me.
It sounds like I’m grumbling quite a bit but there were also a number of positive aspects to the show as well and I’ll highlight some of those in another post shortly. Unfortunately I’m feeling somewhat defalted after the whole experience but I’m sure that will pass as I hve more time to reflect on it.
I feel that ‘Blossom: The Space Between Us’ exhibited as a part of the MA Fine Art exhibition at Cardiff school of Art & Design was a success.
What suprised me was the lack of interest spectators showed in the title of the work and trying to understand the work with regard to the title. Of course I gave some consideration to the title as it should provide some kind of key for the viewer to access the work. I think that ‘Blossom’ should speak for itself with regard to what I said above about the process and the growth of the work. ‘The Space Bewteen Us’, however, was selected to give a deeper insight to some of my thinking. Those who know me well know that I have a general aversion to society, to the way in which it’s headed and that I yearn for a more primitive way of life. I saw ‘Blossom’ as being a comment on society and the way in which the spaces between us are expanding through the development of technology; through mobile phones, social networking etc.; how the links between us are so fragile. In this respect it was important that the whole work was handmade and that had a real, physical presence. The fact that the physical form of the work could be read as looking somewhat ‘viral’ was also important in this reflection upon society and the idea that society itself can be seen as a virus upon the planet.
