| |
ABSTRACT
STILL LIFE PORTRAIT, Art Monthly, Issue 156, May 1992.
Kettles
Yard Cambridge, March 14th-April 19th, 1992.
Kettles
Yard has mounted an exciting show of three new video installation
work in association with Moviola. The works are all connected by
a thematic relationship to traditional painting genres, which according
to the exhibition catalogue are 'subjects which have obsessed artists
for centuries'. One of the declared intentions of the show is to
provide an insight into the form of the video installation through
a linking of these traditional 'fine art' themes with notions of
the popular televisual culture of which video art forms an extreme
edge. This idea of exploiting the 'marginal' position of a relatively
new form to challenge traditional assumptions is of course not new,
and in his introduction to the catalogue Charles Esche acknowledges
that this strategy results in only a very brief disjuncture to the
status quo. Nevertheless, this recognition of video's potential
within the gallery context is encouraging especially if it heralds
the beginning of a more enlightened attitude on the part of gallery
curators and exhibition organisers to the work of artists using
video. In the exhibition catalogue's accompanying essay, Mararina
Benjamin suggests that the very act of using video creatively is
subversive. This, she claims, is the alternative use of a medium
'overwhelmingly identified with pu]p and mass culture'. This conscious
intention to subvert is clearly apparent in Katharine Meynell's
Eat Video. Made up of two principle elements - a rather faded fresco,
the projected video image of a formal supper, and a 5 screen version
of the same scene - the monitors were suspended in a line with the
image unfolding sequentially. These static configurations were in
counterpoint to a careful orchestration of images: a child crosses
through the frame, defiantly walking on the table, becoming almost
a symbol for Meynell's desire to shock her audience. The deliberate
juxtaposition of foods which are read as symbolic, such as milk
with blood, and the montage of sexual activities and bodily functions
is refreshingly up-front. Paradoxically, the rich texture Meynell
has woven underpins a kind of revulsion, a portrayal of the darker
side of human sensuality rather than a celebration of its pleasures.
Vampire Seat, a small-scale work almost hidden in a little alcove,
comprises a single LCD screen embedded into the cushion of a chair,
the image and sounds of a licking tongue slurping against the glass,
conjuring up numerous horrors: 'Castrating mouth, mouth that you
sit on to draw menstrual blood, eater of babies...'. Drawing on
themes which connect it to her larger piece, Meynell's Vampire Seat
benefits from its humour and simplicity. Surprisingly this piece
was the only work in the exhibition to function significantly as
sculpture, playing against the functional intentions of the chair
in an almost Dadaist fashion. Of the fine art disciplines mentioned
in the catalogue, sculpture would have been the most pertinent,
and yet it is strangely absent from any discussion. Descry by Judith
Goddard consisted of a line of seven large monitors arcing across
one end of a white room. Everything in this space was white, even
the floor, which was thickly carpeted, adding to the Hi- Tech, almost
affluent atmosphere. Facing the arc in the centre of the opposite
wall was a single monitor displaying the close-up sequence of an
eye operation. In stark contrast to Eat Video, Descry seems cool,
detached, the images distant. The main display flowing across seven
screens was reminiscent of Mararia Vedder's Sparkle & Fire,
a stately sweeping image sometimes the colours of the visible spectrum,
at others a swimming fish or the exploding brilliance of fireworks.
Synchronised to the lyrical sounds of The Japanese Cherry Tree Song,
the work was a technical tour de force, less an installation in
the sculptural sense and more a beautifully paced spectacle, its
themes of nature and artifice at times all but obscured by the surface
gloss.
In The House Of Love by Monika Oechsler displayed five tall aluminium
p]inths each topped with a video monitor. Taking the theme of portraiture,
Oechsler gave us five talking heads-five characters who play out
aspects of a relationship which seems doomed, their isolation symbolised
by their disjointed monologues. Suspended from the ceiling above
these plinths were large board game patterns, familiar symbols of
competition and gamesmanship. There was a sense that the work was
an attempt to bring together numerous personal references around
a central theme of identity. These symbols are not always easily
decipherable, sometimes too personal, occasionally too obvious,
for example a man wearing headphones to signify 'men do not listen'.
Her use of technique was disappointing too, relying on the tired
effect of strobing/ freeze-frame to disrupt the familiarity of the
video image. The overall effect of the work was one of distancing
and alienation and this supports a conclusion that the isolation
of each figure is inevitable. Taken as a whole, ' Abstract Still
Life Portrait' was a very coherent show. The three meticulously
staged works complemented each other and exploited the space beautifully.
There was an integrity to the overall conception which allowed the
artists the scope to explore their individual themes and gave the
visitor the rare opportunity to re-examine traditional subject matter.
|
|