Barbican Art Centre.
Discussions with Prof. Andre, along the journey around Cardiff informed the questions that arose whilst looking at each exhibit.
Magnificent Obsessions: The Artist as Collector.
This exhibition was an intriguing example of how collections of objects and how the obsessions of the artists informs their art practice or vice versa. My major concern for this exhibition: what to decipher why each artist choose those particular objects to display? To reflect my research question, how to exhibit live art residue? What to exclude, what to show and how to show it? There were in this exhibit many different examples of exhibiting objects. However all of them were impeded by the institution in which they were located. Ref: ‘Inside the white cube’. There were some exceptions, which were mostly executed by installation pieces created by the objects/artifacts’. For example; in Howard Hodgkin’s exhibit, a completely different space inside the gallery was created, it was isolated. As you enter it was almost as if you were entering a domestic space, mostly due to the rather unexpected green colour of the walls . Dr Lakra, displayed a record collection with a record player. Perhaps however, as in the clay exhibition in Cardiff museum, it would have been more immersive if you were able to play the records. This of course could be problematic with a personal collection. Jim Shaw created another domestic narrative. Martin Wong/Danh Vo exhibit covered the walls from floor to ceiling with the curiosities’ ,also accumulated around the edge of the space wood flooring was inserted. This exhibit I feel would have been more immersive if the floor was completely covered. In the Andy Warhol back room, there was a wall covered in wallpaper which also allowed for a metaphoric exit of the gallery space. Pae White hung a collection of scarf’s and what looked to be tea towels, hung and spread across the space. Edmund de Waal in his case created a collection positioned in a way not dissimilar from his installations of ceramics. In the case of Hanne Darboven a piled up method was used, creating the experience when you could not quite focus on any one thing. Peter Blake and his collection of masks was positioned on the wall, this was not dissimilar from the shape they would be in, in order to fit in the corner of an attic. Arman had an intriguing collection of gas masks. In the case of other artists such as Damien Hirst, Hiroshi Sugimoto and Martin Parr their intriguing curiosities’ were all positioned in a museum spectacle, once again an informed decision that seems to reflect the artwork of the artist. Of course another thing, all of these objects have in common, apart from belonging to post-war contemporary artists, is that they are they were all men. Apart from the curator Lydia Yee, who is female. What an intriguing and stimulating show , however I will remain baffled as to why such a large show of the collections of artists, only belong to male artists ?
Roman Signer: Slow Movement.
Along a very misleading room with a wooden floor; made from a soft wood, beech. There was a faint line, marked it seemed with a slightly red paint residue. Then you look to the right at a video which directly informs you that a red kayak has been dragged. Then knowingly following the trail of the kayak, around the long curved space that seems never ending, and then behold there is the kayak. How disappointing, this gave too much information to the viewer. This way of exhibiting was really relevant to my current position, in that too much information does not allow the possibility of discovery and destroys the experience. I feel this will be particularly relevant in the final module, as we are showing in an art institution, so the viewing public are more likely to be more informed. If one was to observe a car crash, you would only need the tire marks on the road to induce that there had been one.