Showing posts with label The Saatchi Gallery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Saatchi Gallery. Show all posts

Friday, 29 July 2011

The Shape of Things To Come: New Sculpture (The Saatchi Gallery 27th May - 16th October 2011)

Introduction

I need to write about more Art galleries. I need to write about more Art galleries. As sporadic as it is (a post on Christian Marclay's 'The Clock', the Newspeak Exhibition). But, once again, an exhibition at The Saatchi Gallery in London has completely inspired me to write. I reiterate my point that the foundations of film and cinema is in Art - and through understanding the history of Art and keeping in the loop with contemporary Art you will enjoy film-watching moreso.

This exhibition focussed on sculpture and, in discussion with friend Jenkins, he stated how what is so successful about exhibitions at The Saatchi Gallery is the layout. The gallery is not afraid to put a single art piece into a room despite having quite small spaces to fit art pieces in. Even the layout is a little random - forcing you to walk up and down stairs, up and around in lifts if you are keen to visit each gallery before popping to the basement to see a room full of oil. It is still an incredible gallery with pieces that inspire and resonate.

Crashed Cars and Obscene Acts

My favourite artists work funnily enough coincide with my recent interest inn David Cronenberg. I spent a large portion of time wandering around and through the work by Dirk Skreber. His two pieces (strangely titled "Untitled (Crash)" - why not just "Crash") used a single metal pillar and physically wrapped (what appeared to be) fully functioning cars around the pillar. The cars stood tall, in the air almost, and appeared to show a specific moment in what would usually be a fast, chaotic state. On the one hand, I think about Michael Bay - and how parents should take their children to see this exhibition whereby they would literally stand in awe at these huge metal creatures rather than sit and be [metaphorically] punched in the face multiple times, wearing 3D glasses in a darkened room. An incredible experience to see his art work.


David Altmejd is another favourite who used figurative form and corrupted it. I recall two pieces - one whereby a single figure stood tall and winding around it and through it were multiple stairwells and mirrored surfaces, reflecting the different contortions and creations. It was as if M.C. Escher had been turned 3D and then stretched across the figure. Altmejd's larger scale piece, The Healers, was fascinating. It consisted of many, many figures all in sexual unison in a variety of forms - but the faces were often distorted and the figures were all joined up. They were often asexual and, in almost all cases, had further sculptured hands twisting and breaking free from the figures. It was obsecne, explicit and facsinating - you wanted to peer in to see more detail as if to ask how the whole sculpture was possible. On one leg, the knee was a combination of two hands connected, another showed a face completely removed as the penis of another figure protruded through. His work reminds me of Cronenberg's filmmaking whereby the physical form moulds and mixes with other shapes. Berlinde De Bruyckere equally showed a Cronenberg-esque style whereby horses almost looked like they had been melted down into an almost blob-like form. Both artists forced you to look close and carefully at what exactly you were looking at.

Finally, an artist who I truly enjoyed was the cubist inspired Thomas Houseago. His art pieces showed figures that combined oppostie approaches - figurative but abstract, complete but appears incomplete, etc. As a teacher, I speak to pupils about Picasso regularly - he is an artist who can fit so many forms and ideas. You can get any idea or object and, with Picasso's influence, distort and change it into a range of different ways. These pieces, as soon as you walked in, showed these multiple-angled but flat-surfaced 'creations'.  Great to see.

The Viewer chooses the Meaning

Now, a couple of artists failed to inspire me. Peter Buggenhout's potential-pieces-of-rubbish apparently challenge the viewer into considering what should and shouldn't be Art. The pieces, we are told, have been created - thye are not random or purposeless - but the artist has "carefully made" each one. Problem is, it is not clear what the purpose is. He questions the "strong influence of projection on the way art is perceived". Well, sorry Pete, I perceive very little and that gives me a question - do you truly believe your art is any good? Because I don't.

Oscar Tuazon's Bed equally seemed to be problematic too - originally his own bed and then converted into an art piece, this seems to have a lack of focus. I appreciate that it must have been interesting when within a flat/house and the extreme process of building this strange bed-shape, but in an Art gallery it seems out of place and out of context. Sometimes, art pieces should stay in bed.

A Great Show

I absolutely loved the exhibition - and there are many more artists who I enjoyed: Anselm Reyle, John Baldessari and Folkert de Jong  all presented work that I could've spent much longer looking at. I think, as film fans, we owe it to the Art form to appreciate these exhibitions because - as we know from directors like Steve McQueen, Sam Taylor-Wood and Tracy Emin - incresingly, artists are turning into filmmakers and these shows give us an indication as to what their films may be like. I'd like to see more filmmakers from teh Art world - rather than coming from the producing/business side of the industry (no offence to Matthew Vaughan).
Large Association of Movie Blogs

Wednesday, 9 June 2010

Newspeak: British Art Now (Part 1, The Saatchi Gallery 30th May - 17th Oct)

Introduction

I have complete intentions to be more prolific with my writing here but currently I am in a truly rubbish position as the internet has yet to be connected at home - thus I complete posts after work which is a shame. But alas, one thing I want to start doing is going through exhibitions I have visited in London. I personally see that Art is the foundations for almost everything - may it be Film, Music or Drama. It is that sense of expression which creates tha wonderful art today. I could go on with how Scorsese completed incredibly well drawn and accurate sotryboards - or discuss how James Cameron is an accomplished artist (it was his drawing of 'Rose' Jack was drawing in 'Titanic'), but whether there is evidence outside of their cinematic back-catalogue or not, the films themselves show enough to prove their artistic merit. (Nb. All the Art I mention is in the pictures displayed but, be aware that some are not next to the point they are discussed...)

The Walk Around

Having walked around the gallery it truly is impressive - a wide variety of styles and approaches to Art. Accurate observations alongside obscure, abstract sculptures. The inluence of culture of many pieces of work is inevitable - whether it be an sculptures of almost-Greek origin or an update of previous styles, inevitably, everyone will find something interesting about this exhibition.

Lowlights
I followed The Saatchi School - a reality TV programme that followed a group of artists leading to one being chosen to appear in this exhibition and the tour it is a part of - which begun in St Petersburg. The Winner was Eugenie Scrase with her piece 'Trunkated Trunk'. I remember watching the show and, though not a big fan of the Duchamp object-is-art approach, I could appreciate the unique entity of the hevy weight of a log and what appears to be careful balance on a fence. More impressive was the gate holding, virtually, the entire tree before it was trunkated - but alas, it is what it is and, upon viewing it, it truly isn't as inspiring as I believed it could have been. I think, by seeing the 'trunk' in comparison to the range of other artists part of the exhibition showed how, in comparison it was not really that impressive. Make of it what you will.

Another 'weaker' piece was Scott King's 'Pink Cher'. Andy Warhol was fifty years ago - the Cher and Che connection is weak, at best, and - in my opinion - has been commented on enough. We understand the disease that is the celebrity culture - we have seen Marcus Harvey's Moors Murderer painted by childrens hands. It says very little that is new.

Finally, we have John Wynne - an artist who uses 300 speakers to create an environment that, though uneasy, I had previously felt before. The Brazilian artist Cildo Meireles' Tate Modern Exhibition included a piece titled Babel - a huge tower that was made up of small radios all individually tuned and, with their glistening LED lights and discomforting sound even reminded me a little of Blade Runner. John Wynne didn't seem to have many of the speakers on it seemed - walking around the space seemed to show that the majority of sound was from around the self-playing piano. If all the speakers were clearly working, I may have been more understanding - but alas, the range of speakers that didn't work merely highlighted a lack of atmosphere. Ultimately, Meireles' tops him anyday.
Highlights

Personal favourites were in the form of 'littlewhitehead', Hurvin Anderson and Iain Hetherington. Both Hurvin Anderson and Iain Hetherington are both, primarily, painters. Andersons almost abstract landscapes are fascinating. 'Untitled (Black Street)' is clouded in darkness gives the feeling of coming back from a school trip, whereby the school is closed and darkness surrounds the buildings. Its eerie and dark, whilst at the same time comfortable and engaging - the single road leading you into the darkness. A beautiful work of art. Iain Hetherington, on the other hand, seems to merge objects into canvases of mixed colours. The NYC caps I have seen are often worn by the cliche 'youths' who torment communities - so, to see the same cap tunred into a work of art through an abstract setting changes your opinion.

Finally, 'littlewhitehead' (Should I call you 'head'?), in the style of Joseph Beuys, uses mannquins and places them in a position that forces you to personally get involved. The one piece I saw at this exhibition was 'It Happened in the Corner', whereby the figures are all huddled in a corner - their clothes appearing tatty and rough - and you are forced to look into the corner with them. The entire look of it and unsettling nature makes you question your reaction to this type of situation - our facination with potential-horror and the mob-dynamic and sheep mentality as every follows each other. Every person in that room walked to the corner and joined the group - peering at the ground...

Finally, the link to the actual website to explore more - and their truly is alot to explore.
Large Association of Movie Blogs