“Uncertain States” is a loose
collaborative group of over 100 writers, artists and academics, based in the
London area, which publishes and distributes a quarterly broadsheet newspaper
showing “lens-based art”, holds monthly talks and organises and curates an
annual exhibition of its contributors’ work. Its shared purpose is defined as
“to support the creative process, both of others and ourselves, to offer a
platform of exposure for work to a wider audience and to be part of the ongoing
dialogue of what photography is today……..in short, to be a flagship for
contemporary British photography.” The collective includes a number of staff
from my partner’s college, the Cass School of Art (part of London Metropolitan
University). We visited the annual exhibition and I also picked up the latest
quarterly magazine (number 24).
The exhibition features the output of 50 artists, whose work could loosely be described as photographic art.
Pinhole cameras, scratched surfaces, early printmaking processes,
self-portraiture of various kinds and rarely used techniques feature heavily in
an exhibition of what might reasonably be described as “cutting edge”
photographic art, of the type that is beloved by the British Journal of
Photography. Having said that, many of these artists may be exploring new
directions that will reach dead ends and “cutting edge” does not necessarily
imply high quality. Nevertheless, I was interested in exploring the concepts
behind some of the work and how those concepts were being or had been realized.
To describe the work as being of
variable quality would be to suggest that I have a deep understanding of
contemporary photographic art, which of course is not the case. Suffice it to
say that a lot of the work (in particular the experimentation with new and old
camera techniques and cameras) left me cold. Other work I actively disliked and
I failed to grasp many of the concepts behind the works (if, indeed, the works
were based on a concept at all). A lot of the prints were described in flowery
language, either in the artists’ statements or the accompanying catalogue
guide. I have selected a couple of anonymous examples (from many) below:
“Home represents the
autobiographical self, the picture that everybody builds of him or herself. It
is the image that we establish and develop over time: a continuous reshaping of
the past which has either been lived in actuality, or lived in the imagination
through other stories or images…..”
“My intent is to bewilder the
viewer, engendering a sense of disbelief and hence unsettle our accepted sense
of reality. With my work I aim to alter the view of the ordinary by emphasising
its creative essence, adding a new visual experience by shifting our awareness,
so that we look what (sic) goes
unnoticed.”
Are we meant to take these statements
seriously, or is this just a ruse to confuse and bewilder the viewer / reader
and force them into believing that the artist has a much more profound view of
life than they do? This type of hyperbole is all too common in the world of
contemporary art: in my view it is an attempt by the artist (or journalist or
reviewer) to hide the lack of a concept or a clear objective for their work
behind a screen of verbal drivel.
Notwithstanding this criticism,
which applies to many other scenarios in the world of contemporary photographic
art, I did find some art that was visually attractive, some that was
thought-provoking and some that was of relevance to my own work.
Victoria Kovalenko
Kovalenko’s work consisted of a
single composite picture, produced by joining together about 100 smaller prints
in order to depict the Palio horse race in Siena (Image 1). She mentions David
Hockney as being a creator of this style of photography, which she refers to as
“joiner” photography, although I have seen several examples by other well-known
artists, in particular David Mach. The end-product has a “cubist” feel to it.
More importantly, it is a style that allows us to watch stages of an event (in
this case including the 90-second race itself) in a single “frame”. The
end-product is a visually stunning, aesthetically pleasing picture and yet,
perhaps uniquely in this exhibition, there is no originality at all in its
production. I welcomed its inclusion here, but wondered about its relevance to
the other work.
Image 1 (Victoria Kovalenko)
Francesca Centioni
Whilst Kovalenko’s work was
visually very attractive, Centioni’s photo-collage (Image 2) was far less
appealing. Nevertheless, her style of leaving space between some of the
photographic prints and composites was thought-provoking and might be of value
to my own work. One of the ideas that I’ve had for a while is to deliberately
blank out sections of either a single or composite image, leaving an image that
requires the viewer to think about how and / or why the remaining elements are
connected or juxtaposed. On a less serious note I was impressed by how she had
managed to incorporate one of the worst wildlife photographs that I’ve ever
seen (of a seagull) into her work!
Image 2 (Francesca Centioni)
Robin Grierson
I found Robin Grierson’s work
both visually attractive and thought-provoking. His prints relate to a gentleman,
John Laidlaw, who lived alone in a house adjacent to a colliery in Durham. He
was a bit of a character, a “loner” who nevertheless seems to have acted as a
sort of father figure to the local youth, including the artist. John was
knocked off his bike by a car and killed at around the same time as the
colliery closed, in 1988. The story is poignant and I can certainly identify
with John’s character (like me, he apparently studied chemistry at University,
but he had a mental breakdown and didn’t finish his course – I did). However,
his story is nothing without the images, which are “double exposures” featuring
(I presume) archival footage of John, together with landscapes from (again
presumably) the Durham area (see Image 3). The end-products have atmosphere and
provoke a sense of loss, exactly what I want the images from the project that I
am about to embark on to have. I will definitely be finding out more about this
work.
Image 3 (Robin Grierson)
“Uncertain States” features work
by photographic artists, many of whom probably have full time jobs and may have
little time to devote to their art. It is hardly surprising therefore that some
of the featured work lacks the quality that would be found, say, in an
exhibition at the “Photographers’ Gallery”. I have voiced criticism in the
review that some of the work, and some of the accompanying text, is pretentious
although the exhibition is far from unique in this regard.
Nevertheless, there is some work
to enjoy here and there are a few thought-provoking projects. One of my main
reasons for visiting photography exhibitions is to generate ideas for my own
work and, from that point of view, the visit was successful. I will certainly
look more closely at the work of Robin Grierson, whose project was by some way
the most interesting one for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment