 |
|
Constructing
the image: Rob ONeils Projection (water).
|
Judging
the Jury
By
John Caputo
Mohawk
Hudson Regional
Schenectady
Museum, through Sept. 3
You can get a courteous and buoyant review of the 50 or so
works on display in this year’s Mohawk-Hudson Regional by
heading to the exhibition, picking up the free catalog, and
reading the juror essay authored by Pablo Helguera printed
inside. Here you will be assured by this polished but predictable
exercise in professionally approved “art speak” that
everything on exhibit is meritorious and worthy of your extended
consideration. Indeed, perusing this amply illustrated publication,
one could easily imagine Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland’s
Dodo once more intoning his famous line: “Everyone has won,
and all must have prizes.”
I counted no fewer than 18 awards doled out among the 36 exhibitors,
a ratio which I find more than a little troublesome. Mr. Helguera
has Guggenheim Museum credentials, a fact that will probably
cause most to defer to his judgment. But personally, this
reviewer would be disingenuous to give this particular version
of the regional high marks. Having not been privy to the pieces
or artists that were rejected, I choose to optimistically
conjecture that a number of talented regional artists chose
not to submit entries this year. Certainly the 2002 regional
provided a greater depth of quality participants, and respected
them in a way that this year’s venue could not possibly hope
to (it is installed in the former Carl Co. building next to
Proctor’s Theatre in Schenectady). Beyond that, anyone who
has paid attention to the local scene knows that serious and
accomplished artists do indeed live and work in the Capital
Region.
And fortunately, some of them are represented in the exhibition;
however, I take exception to the distribution of prizes, which
largely and inexplicably leaves them out. Consider: Four paintings
win awards, but not Terrance Tiernan’s Coltrane #1?
Banished like an ungainly relative at a wedding to the right
rear of the exhibition space (in what looks to be the semi-apologetic
“gestural” wing), it might be easy for viewers to miss. This
painterly painting’s title clearly hints at an aesthetic that
was triumphant at an earlier time, but it is still the best
painting in the show. The traits of ambition, presence, and
the possibility of failure, once deemed necessary elements
in the mere attempt to make art, are all in evidence
here. Peter Taylor, an important area painter I have long
admired, is ill-represented here. He had a piece at the airport
show that was a knockout, but this seems visually flat and
far more derivative than we’ve come to expect. As for those
award winners and other works on canvas, I saw far too much
of the type of tentative painting skills and half-formed ideas
that characterize a typical BFA thesis exhibit at any mediocre
college.
The realm of photography fares far better, but again, the
best in this medium went without an award and was also pushed
to the rear. I am speaking of Martin Benjamin’s Market,
Sapa, Vietnam, 2003. This piece has been exhibited and
published before in the area, but it is still a masterful
work that manages to be simultaneously immediate and hard-hitting,
yet touched with the type of cultural and philosophical intricacies
that cause one to think about it long past its actual viewing.
An honest piece of documentary photography, it is gorgeously
printed in warm tones that celebrate the best that the monochromatic
silver gelatin/fiber printed medium has to offer.
Post-modernist photographic constructs dominate the works
of both Rob O’Neil and Jessica Monsour. These are well-designed,
visually striking pieces, and it is obvious that the artists
have learned their lessons well. Artifice trumps reality.
Ambiguity trumps clarity. Multiple photographic elements in
a single image reveal that photographic truth is a lie. Parody
mocks authenticity. This is professional quality work that
has—and will continue to—find its audience. It’s just that,
decades after the major shift in photographic theory that
brought us to works such as these, one would hope to find
something less familiar.
I had a somewhat similar response to Michael Oatman’s A
Lifetime of Service and a Mile of Thread. This piece stands
proudly within the current wave of neo-dada/neo-conceptual
work that dominates such establishments as MASS MoCA (where,
in fact, I first saw this young artist’s work several years
ago). What’s not to like in this engaging piece? It’s got
appropriated objects, social significance, a bow to local
history, videos on a continuous loop, and—for those die-hard
romantics out there—even a hand-carved, wooden snake! One
could have predicted that this piece would get the juror’s
blessings, and, truth be told, I too would have given it an
award. But I would have accompanied it with this gentle admonition:
Might not your ample intelligence and gifts be challenged
more than with this predictably clever piece?
The balance of the sculptural offerings is less satisfying.
William Bergman’s Portrait in Flight is a nifty-looking
work, but I still don’t know if it is actually kinetic or
only meant to lead you on that it might be. Dorene Quinn’s
Collection of Related Objects, which greets you upon
your arrival, is a slick but ultimately unsatisfying menagerie
that borders on the visually obvious. Any three-dimensional
design instructor would applaud Aimee Tarasek’s Expansion
of Self, but that comment reveals more its weakness than
its strength. Chris De Marco’s installation 12 rooms left
is printed in the catalogue, but nowhere to be found in
the exhibition space. The eager-to-please but equally baffled
museum attendant couldn’t find it either.
Finally, the weakest link in this exhibition is the work that
falls under the rubric of mixed media. At its best, this realm
can be both exciting to the viewer and liberating for the
artist; however, no amount of experimentation with untraditional
material combinations can hide the lack of drawing skills,
odd color choices, and desperate attempt to actually find
an authoritative visual concept along the way that characterizes
far too many of the exhibitors represented here.
Being selected for one’s first regional is an exciting moment,
and can potentially serve a career for years to come. At the
very least, congratulations are in order for those for whom
this is true. Consummate pros, such as some I have mentioned,
have less to gain but much to contribute. To them, the regional
art community owes a debt of thanks, for they add strength
and substance to this important right of passage.
 |
| PERIPHERAL
VISION |
|
Cotton
Puffs, Q-tips®, Smoke and Mirrors: The Drawings
of Ed Ruscha
Whitney
Museum of American Art, through Sept. 26
Actually, this is two shows, as there is a terrific
small exhibition of Ruscha’s photographs and photo-books
in the Whitney’s first-floor alcove gallery in
addition to the exhaustively large full-floor
show of drawings upstairs. Can you tell already
which one I preferred?
What’s wonderful about Ruscha is that he is truly
a giant in both photography and painting, like
few others before him (Man Ray and Charles Sheeler
come to mind), and his art is presented with such
easy passion as to belie the significance of his
achievement. Everywhere in these exhibitions is
evidence of his far-reaching influence, especially
on pop art and landscape photography, both of
which helped form the basis of American art’s
continued dominance in the ’60s and ’70s after
abstract expressionism grabbed the spotlight from
Europe in the ’50s.
Ruscha’s drawings are mostly of words, odd words
like “pee pee” and “quit,” that float meaninglessly
on the page in lush, almost erotic tones of mainly
gray. There are the requisite names of places
in the zeitgeist (his hometown, L.A., and Hollywood
among them) and then there are nonsense phrases
that recall surrealist poetry. If Ruscha couldn’t
draw so well, he’d never get away with it. Fortunately,
he draws really, really well.
The best of the photographs comprise a group of
about 40 small, square prints from a trip to Europe
in 1961, in which the young Ruscha appears interested
in just about everything; his designer’s eye for
composition and ad-man’s eye for symbol combine
to create images as lovely and ripe with meaning
as any you could want. This collection alone is
worth the price of admission (as well as the trip
to New York).
—David
Brickman
|
|
|