encountr

[encountr]

Myself with 'Another Place'- Anthony Gormley, Crosby Beach

[encountr]

Anthony Gormley: Another Place

Anthony Gormley: Another Place In this post I will discuss my experience of Anthony Gormley’s installation titled ‘Another Place’ which is on Crosby beach, Sefton. It features 100 cast iron figures of Gormley’s own body placed along 2 miles of the beach, with some being nearly 1 kilometre out in the sea. It first arrived at Crosby beach in 2005 after being previously displayed in Norway and Belgium. It is now owned and managed by Sefton Council. When thinking about my encounter with the piece, the thing that struck me most was how important and essential the environment was to the installation. Usually in gallery environments the surroundings are either plain white or traditionally decorated so I find them quite irrelevant to the art work because they are simply backgrounds that the art is placed on. However, I think that the beach environment is what makes ‘Another Place’ so special because it is as much a part of the art work as the figures themselves. There is a mutual interaction between the statues and the beach- I gained an impression that the figures were aware of their surroundings as they are all placed facing outwards looking towards the sea. The beach has physically encroached upon the figures which is evident in their appearance and texture, they are rusty and some have barnacles on them. I have found that I prefer to encounter art in environments that are not in a gallery.I find the experience a lot more enjoyable because I felt free to spend as much time as I wanted to at the beach and was able to touch the figures and explore the surroundings, some are sunken in the sand, some are in water. Having an interaction with art is something which I think is seen a lot more in contemporary art than it has been in the past when art was merely something to be admired from afar. In addition, a lot of galleries want to present art as timeless and stop the environment from harming it, by using conservation methods such as controlling the humidity of the room. Of course, this is necessary for some works but I find it does make my encounter feel quite sterile in a way because you have to experience the art work through physical barriers, leaving a feeling of being detached from the work you are seeing. However, ‘Another Place’ provides an opposite situation to this- the work is not timeless, you can physically feel how the effect of the costal environment has ravaged the iron structures over time. The statues are very tactile, anyone can interact with them because there are no barriers; I saw one which someone had placed a scarf on to. I think this shows how relatable the piece is- the figures age and deteriorate just as we do, and I appreciate the work more because it won't be there forever, despite it being a permanent installation it will eventually become worn down and claimed by nature.

[encountr]

'Ecclesial' - Kerry McSweeney (2017), Tunnels exhibition

[encountr]

'Blind Perception' - Imogen Walker (2017), Walker Art Gallery

[encountr]

Artist Interview: Imogen Walker & Kerry McSweeney

This post is a written interview with Imogen Walker and Kerry McSweeney, BA Fine Art Students at LJMU. I recently attended both of their exhibitions, held as part of their university course: Imogen created a piece titled ‘Blind Perception’ which was displayed at the Walker Art Gallery for the ‘Nuality’ Exhibition. Kerry exhibited her piece, ‘Ecclesial’, at the ‘Tunnels’ exhibition held in the tunnels underneath St. George's Hall. • Would you please introduce yourself with a brief artist statement: description of your artistic style, what interests you in regard to the work you make etc? I: I’m Imogen. I’m a fine art student and I make a variety of different pieces. They used to be very painterly, I used a lot of paint and used to be more of the realism style. I then moved into abstract, materials and textures: what they mean and don't mean. Hiding things in materials, hiding things in galleries. The work I've been doing at the moment is more about the ideas behind the work. I find that working collaboratively is nice because it gets the ideas flowing. I also like to jot things down in a notebook to see where ideas can go and use mind maps. I’ve done installation works. I'm just doing a variety of different things at the moment to find out what my artist practice is. K: Hi, I'm Kerry and am also a fine artist at LJMU. My style is similar to an extent. I like painting, sculpture and installation art, which is probably my favourite but I'm in to conceptual things at the moment as opposed to physical work. I: I like a bit of everything K: We have quite similar interests and styles. • Explain what these exhibitions you have just exhibited in are, eg. What the reason for it/ brief was? K: Honestly there was no brief and that's why it was so hard. I: I think the brief was concerning the different venues more than anything. We had to create work to fit the venue, with the Walker anyway we had to create pieces which were in response to the work in the gallery and the building itself. • Yes, we will talk about this later on as well, but I think your work did fit in to the environment. For example, Kerry’s religious theme in the tunnels because it felt like a religious environment, with the architecture of tall arches and the space echoed. I: Yes, it used to be a courthouse/ prison- people died there. Lots of people probably prayed to god for their life, when people are reaching the end of their life they get very religious don't they? K: That is true but it was a very open brief. It was like you can come up with a response if you want but otherwise.. it was very scary because you could just do whatever and explore whatever theme you wanted to . It was quite hard. • Give a description of the work you created for the exhibition, eg. Concept behind them, what you physically made. K: We started together then went off in our own ways. I: The first talk I went to at the Walker, the lady talked about the art that's stored which no one sees for years and if this make it more or less valuable because no one sees it for so long and people forget that it exists. And I was interested in that. And I like to speak to Kerry about things and we both thought it was an interesting idea. And then we just liked the idea of value in general and what it means, the different meanings behind it, different values and stuff. K: I think it was nice because it’s so broad you can do so much within it but it’s a starting point. And then we spoke about it and went off in our own way. Well at the start we did similar things such as: are things valuable? Why are objects valuable? Then I just went off into mine. I: Yes and what does value mean? Who decides what is more and less valuable? • So Kerry you made this religious shrine set up with your work. Can you talk about this a bit-what objects you made and put together, and describe what it physically looked like. K: It was an installation piece. It had lots of Lambrini bottles painted with gold leaf and little objects that were personal to me on the bottles. It had 2 plinths, a projector, little rocks that said works like ‘religious’, ‘freedom’ and ‘consume’. There was a tree with lights. The video was of me and my friend, Chris, worshipping a Lambrini bottle on a mountain. It was inspired by a video I saw at the Tate exchange of a man doing yoga positions on a sacred mountain/temple location. • Imogen would you like to describe yours. I: There was golden objects, 3D geometric shapes hidden around the room. • You both used gold objects a lot, what was the significance of this? I: I think it was sort of linking the works together and looking at the idea of value. K: Yeah- what makes something valuable, how easy it is and why people perceive certain things as more valuable than others. I: If they were left as they were, just wooden… K: They would be dismissed and unnoticed, and it's to take it and make it special. I: And as well it’s because they were gold people noticed them a lot more when they were hidden in the room, a lot of them were resting underneath objects, on wooden plinths so they would have blended in the background. So even though I was hiding them, if someone did see them it would catch their eye and bring it to attention. And I chose those shapes because I was interested in the meaning behind them and we had a lesson about how different personalities are recognised as different objects. The initial idea was for them to represent specific people but I didn’t get that far with it. If I did it differently I probably would have got different people to choose an object but I didn't have time. K: Imogen was meant to do a performance piece but she wasn't allowed. It was health and safety but I thought it was a bit extreme. She was going to get members of the public to put blindfolds on. I: Yes I had 3 different pieces in the installation, along with the objects being hidden, about if you can't see art, is it still valuable? There were blindfolds on a golden clothes rail and I was going to do a performance piece and put them on people and take them round and describe the works. I think my idea would have worked better with someone who had never been to the Walker gallery before, and then I would describe the work to them and they wouldn't be able to visualise it in their head.. but I wasn’t allowed to do that because it was a health and safety issue. The main idea behind the hidden canvas was that no one knew what was underneath it so they had to guess, so it could have been a really amazing piece of art or not. So it was meant to challenge the view of does it really matter what's underneath it or not? Another student discussed with me the topic of private exhibitions and how rich people buy paintings just for themselves to view. The same idea that if only one person can see it and it’s exclusive, if people don't know it exists or can’t see it or only a select handful can view it, is it still valuable? Or just to say you have it. K: Its quite interesting because it fits in with the religious thing because we were the only ones who knew what was underneath and we created this religion so it turned into an exclusive thing. I: Ideally it would have been a religious painting that was used in Kerry’s work, but our work only ended up being connected by the gold objects. But I feel it was still a collaboration because we share ideas and help each other a lot. K: I also think it’s a collaboration because we were discussing how gallery spaces can be like religious spaces. And you did about the value of art work and mine was about the value of religion but then how people approach artwork the same as they approach religion like a sacred thing, is the same. I: Yes, like religious icons coveted by religious followers and with people really interested in art they see it as amazing. And it relates to the world in general such as with celebrities, that they are almost religious figures that people revere. K: That's sort of what mine was about in the end because it turned into what our religion is and how we don't think we're religious we actually are, because we cant escape the lifestyle that's been put on us in terms of material things. The religion now is to not be religious. It’s that we think we're not being controlled by it but we are. And with religion, to feel good about yourself you do all these nice things to get into heaven- but with us its like ‘stuff’ is our religion. That's why it was about consuming. It's like the way you feel valid about yourself is based on who has the most stuff, money, friends. • For my blog I am focusing on the theme of ‘encounter’, obviously your art works fit in with this very well, were you considering this when making them, and what sort of encounter do you think people had with them? I: I know when I was sitting there invigilating people didn't really know what it was. I think the exhibition was successful but I was taken aback by how many people weren't actually there for the exhibition, they were there to see the work behind it. So it’s like a different encounter because they were looking at the painting behind my work not my work, so was it being ignored? But one of the staff members thought the painting with the sheet was going to be unveiled. So its weird that people expect that something else will happen and this preconceived idea that art is meant to be seen. K: It ties in as well because the works behind have the big names so they are more valuable but why? Because what’s the difference between yours, just because theirs has the name. • So were you thinking about how people would encounter/interact with it when you were making it- because you wanted an interactive element but obviously that didn't happen. I: Yeah a lot of people were asking what was underneath the sheet so it’s a different encounter. K: I think people were excited by it. When I was invigilating it that's what I thought. I also think they assumed the most positive thing. Because they can’t see it so they think something really exciting and interesting is under there. I: It wasn't really about what was underneath, I didn’t care about that. It could have been anything underneath- even a blank canvas. But why would that be less valuable? It has still been made by someone. • How about you Kerry? K: I think I was surprised by it. I wanted to put it at the end of a tunnel because it's like in a church where you walk down to the altar. So it was like a religious encounter. And obviously in prestigious galleries you do feel like that, but in the tunnels it’s less so. And I wanted to put the formalness back in, but in a different way. • Your artwork is inspired by, and depicts religion. It could be debated that religion is not a theme held as highly in contemporary art any more, with people preferring to focus on more modern day issues such as environmental issues or capitalisation. Also people fearing the risk of excluding groups or offending people. What is your opinion on this? I: I feel like there is a place for it today. K: I feel like there should be but I don’t think there is as much. I: It depends what type of person you are because if you're very deeply religious then of course, because your artwork is an expression of you and a part of you. • But neither of you two are religious are you? I: No, but that's the sort of thing that we were thinking about. That we aren't. K: Mine kind of comments on the change that you just mentioned. That we consider ourselves not religious but we are in today's society. I: But then again we've got so much value for the things we are interested in, it’s so easy to see it as a religion. The stuff that you love its part of who you are- so making our own religion. K: I think it’s because we think we have loads of freedom, but we don't really because we are all pushed into the same lifestyle. Also I like religious expression but I wouldn’t necessarily like religious propaganda. I: I think religion is a really nice idea. I just like the spiritual aspect of it, connecting with something you believe is higher than yourself. K: I think it can be nice but I think everyone needs to have the independence to believe what they want. Obviously extremism isn't good. But it’s still good for religious art work to have a place. I: I think it would be really cool to do more modern ideas. Like do an installation piece or something that's really abstract but still connected. Because all the religious art you think about is old paintings. Modern representations of religion in general/spirituality would be really cool. • Also alongside the theme of encounter: do you think it is right to present and display art works in such a way that people react in the same way to them as if they were a religious object? Or does this affect people's encounters in a negative way? K: I prefer interactive art but I think its personal preference. I: I think you only get one aspect of the work if you're just looking at it. K: Yes you don't really experience it. I: I was looking at art for blind people and they get to touch the art. I think that's really interesting using different senses to experience the art work. K: It takes away from it I guess if its covered with glass with security guards. I think it’s negative but it depends on the work. I: And what type of person you are. Because some people might really like to touch it. I really like getting up really close with art work and looking at all the details. And taking pictures as well, why is that a bad thing? Because I feel that every art work is recreated on the internet, like on Google Images, so there will be thousands out there already. • Obviously the Walker already has the prestigious art gallery environment so people would have been quieter, less likely to touch the art work, lots of big names around etc. Do you think your art work would have been more effective if it had been in the tunnels alone. Did it add or detract from it? K: I think it added. I: I would have liked to have been able to make people more interactive wth the work by putting blindfolds on them and involve them more in it. But I think because it was in the Walker environment everyone was being really quiet and just reading the descriptions of the paintings and stuff. Some people did ask me about the work, but I don’t think as many as people in the tunnels would. There wasn't any description by my work but because there was so much other work that was well known around it, whereas in the tunnels people purely came to see your work. K: But I think the themes of your work were really relevant to where it was, whereas it wouldn't have been in the tunnels. I think with all the prestigious paintings around it made sense and it’s easier for people to grasp what you're trying to get at. I: Also all the paintings in the Walker have gold frames so it fitted in really nicely. So I don’t think it added or detracted, the work is going to say something different in each place that it is. It's just like a new piece of work each time. K: Would you have rather gone in the tunnels? I: No honestly I was happy. I would have liked to have been in the tunnels but I like the Walker as well. I think it would have said something completely different if it was in the tunnels. A different encounter. K: I don’t think mine would have worked in the Walker. I: I think mine probably worked best where it was. K: They were quite suited to the environments, I liked mine. Thank you to Kerry and Imogen for making the time to speak to me about their work.

[encountr]

'Deconstructed Cabbage' - Jai Redman (2016) water extracted from cabbage, watercolour pigment on paper.

[encountr]

Jai Redman: Paradise Lost

This post will discuss my experience of the exhibition ‘Jai Redman: Paradise Lost’ which I visited at Manchester Art Gallery. Information about the exhibition on the gallery’s website states: “Jai Redman’s work deals with his personal experiences as an environmental direct activist and social justice campaigner in the UK over the last 25 years. As such it forms a unique, honest, emotional and often satirical commentary on our dislocation from politics and the planet. His contemporary perspective and modern materials combine with a passion for traditional painting techniques and the works of the old masters, to create provocative images of great beauty.” ( http://manchesterartgallery.org/exhibitions-and-events/exhibition/jai-redman-paradise-lost/ ) My immediate impression, without reading into the context of Redman’s practice, was that his work failed to seem particularly ’contemporary’ in my idea of what contemporary art is usually like- a watercolour series depicting studies of the leaves of a deconstructed cabbage failed to strike me as innovative despite his technical skill. In addition, I was trying to search for the common link between the subjects of the pieces in the exhibition; plant studies, a plastic water bottle and a portrait of Debbie Harry seemed a random combination. However, when I read the accompanying descriptions of the pieces, my interest was suddenly sparked at the discovery that Redman uses elements of the objects themselves, such as plant water for the plant paintings, or even his own sweat, actually in the paint that the works are created with. The exhibition made me consider one of the issues that John Berger touches on in his ‘Ways of Seeing’ series which is to question whether all the additional information we are given about a piece of art benefits us, or is it better to approach it with no prior context. In this case I would suggest that yes, the additional information was needed as what makes Redman’s watercolours special would remain otherwise unnoticed. This was in the simple form of the information signs next to each piece but it revealed the materials Redman uses. The information quoted from the gallery’s website (which was also present in the exhibition for visitors to read) additionally highlights Redman’s interest in the environment and climate change which made me consider the importance of his use of plants and even Antarctic ice. The environment also appears to be a popular topic of contemporary art, which I will keep in mind when visiting other exhibitions and I think it would link well into the focalisation point of ‘Encounter’. Sticking with characteristics of contemporary art, I enjoyed the new use of traditional watercolour paint by Redman by putting a part of himself/other objects physically within the medium of painting. I liked this because I see a lot of installation and video works being very popular in contemporary art which actually makes the simplicity and traditional nature of this style of watercolour painting stand out against the majority of other works being created now. This series of watercolour paintings also sparked my thoughts on the idea that a painting of an object is merely a reproduction in itself. However, Redman uses physical essences of the object itself in his work; for example using extracts of cabbage water in his paintings of cabbage leaves. So I questioned if this made the painting less of a reproduction, and more of a reinvention or repurposing of the subject. Finally I would like to consider my encounter of the works in relation to the gallery environment. The exhibition was situated in newly built/modernised part of the building, which is quite a contrast against the traditionally built and decorated older section which houses mostly older historical works. I think that the modern environment the work was placed in suited it well because If it was in the old part of the building then I probably would have just presumed it was old watercolours, but its placement with other contemporary works make you realise there's probably more to the pieces than there seems. The exhibition is free and is running until 24th September 2017.

[encountr]

Encounter: Ways of Seeing

John Berger’s 1972 television series ‘Ways of Seeing’ is considered seminal in regards to the way we approach and consider art. His recent passing has drawn fresh attention to the ideas he presents within the programme; which arguably remain as relevant today as they were 45 years ago. I, like most people, was aware of Berger; and even own the book adaption of the series, but I had never delved into his theories in any depth until being shown a clip of the first episode in our introductory lecture. I decided that I would like to approach my gallery visits with John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ in mind, as a starting base for my thought-process on the focalisation point of the encounter. So I spent some time watching the full first episode whilst making notes on some points I would like to discuss in this blog post. One point that Berger made which particularly resonated with me is that thanks to technology, media and reproduction we no longer have to physically travel to view art- instead art comes to us, even if we don't want it to and if this potentially distorts our view of it. I could apply this to my personal experience in that I am in the unique environment of attending an art school, so therefore encounter art on a daily basis as it is all around the building in which I study. In addition, attending galleries and exhibitions is a vital part of my course, alongside giving presentations in gallery spaces and learning how to critically analyse art. I wonder if this has altered the way I view art because I generally try to consider academic concepts in mind; and will now additionally be thinking about this blog when I am viewing it. It has made me question whether I am almost overexposed to art, and how this would affect my encounter with it, compared to someone who has to make a conscious decision to actively seek to view art as it is not part of their everyday life like it is with mine. Does it make me value it less? Or does my academic background mean I am able to appreciate it more? In contradiction to this idea of art becoming a passive, daily aspect of my life, Berger draws upon the often religious nature of our encounters with art. This highlights the importance of the environmental circumstances that the image is presented in, for they can be so powerful as to impact our physical behaviour; for example feeling the need to be silent in a gallery. Berger reiterates that: "Everything around it [the image] confirms and consolidates it’s meaning.” I think that the topic of Berger’s argument has a profound link with the idea of ‘sight and site’- that our relationship with a piece of art is not only affected by the form in which we view it, but also external factors such as the environment in which the viewer and art is immersed in- be it the same or separate. This is something I already consider when viewing contemporary art; for example, what is the effect of the placement of Mark Leckey’s inflatable Felix the Cat upon the Victorian balcony of the Walker Art Gallery? How would my encounter with the piece be different if it was in one of the stark white spaces of Tate Liverpool? Ultimately, what I will take from watching Episode 1 of Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’ is an increased self-awareness of my own encounters with contemporary art. When considering if Berger’s theories still apply to the art of 2017, I would say most certainly they do and that if anything, they have only been been multiplied in our internet age in which we have more free and easy access to images than ever before. I believe that the mass reproduction of images has its pro’s and con’s, however feel that the focalisation tool of the ‘encounter’ can best be explored through the physical journey of visiting an art work in person; which I will explore in future posts.