Nau mai, haere mai, welcome to EyeContact. You are invited to respond to reviews and contribute to discussion by registering to participate.

HA

Artistic Trickery

AA
View Discussion
James Oram: Neural Market, 2014. Chain, laminate, custom vitrine, HD video (Tracking, 2014 and After Tracking, 2014), customised hat and chair frame. Courtesy of the artist; Wallpaper, 2012. HD video, 9min13sec. Courtesy of the artist and Chalk Horse James Oram, Neural Market, 2014. Detail. Chain, laminate, custom vitrine, HD video (Tracking, 2014 and After Tracking, 2014), customised hat and chair frame. Courtesy of the artist James Oram, Neural Market, 2014. Detail. Chain, laminate, custom vitrine, HD video (Tracking, 2014 and After Tracking, 2014), customised hat and chair frame. Courtesy of the artist Graham Fletcher, Untitled (The Petrified Object), 2014. Oil on canvas. Courtesy of the artist and Gow Langsford Gallery, Auckland Max Bellamy, Post Script I-III, 2014 Hygrothermograph, human hair, paper, stainless steel, aluminium, nichrome, laminated glass, acrylic, PVC, electrical components, peltier, heatsink, fans, microcontroller, notebook computer, GSM modem, custom software. Max Bellamy, Post Script I-III, 2014 Hygrothermograph, human hair, paper, stainless steel, aluminium, nichrome, laminated glass, acrylic, PVC, electrical components, peltier, heatsink, fans, microcontroller, notebook computer, GSM modem, custom software. Max Bellamy, Post Script I-III, 2014 Hygrothermograph, human hair, paper, stainless steel, aluminium, nichrome, laminated glass, acrylic, PVC, electrical components, peltier, heatsink, fans, microcontroller, notebook computer, GSM modem, custom software. Justin Spiers, Barn, Momona 2014. Pigment prints. Courtesy of the artist Katrina Thomson, Monumental Ignorance, 2007. Timber and acrylic paint. Courtesy of the artist Mary McFarlane, Lament I 2008, and Blue Black 1, 2008. Mirror plate and mixed media. Courtesy of the artist and The Diversion Gallery Mary McFarlane, Moon (Series) 2014. Detail. Mirror plate and mixed media. Courtesy of the artist and The Diversion Gallery Mary McFarlane, Moon (Series) 2014. Mirror plate and mixed media. Courtesy of the artist and The Diversion Gallery Madeleine Child, The Art of Leaving, 2014, clay (in the centre of the room). Courtesy of the artist Kathryn Madill, The Blue Train (series), 2014. Mezzotint (print edition 10). Courtesy of the artist

A visually effective exhibition should offer both restraint and innate attention to detail, but 'Sleight of Hand's' sheer volume of works renders it incredibly overloaded, its curation clunky, overwhelming and undefined. Despite this, the trajectory of the show is playful and has very obvious appeal, especially in terms of its placement within a public institution.

Dunedin

 

Max Bellamy, Madeleine Child, Graham Fletcher, Mary McFarlane, Kathryn Madill, James Oram, Justin Spiers, Katrina Thomson.
Sleight of Hand
Curated by Lauren Gutsell

 

16 August - 16 November 2014

Upon entering Sleight of Hand one is greeted by two ominous full moons and their own distorted reflection staring back at them. These two mirror works by Mary McFarlane adorn the entrance to the first room displaying the works of James Oram and Graham Fletcher. Sleight of Hand has been framed around the notion of both illusion or theatricality and locality by curator Lauren Gutsell; the artists all “currently living and producing in Dunedin”. Sleight of Hand presents the idea of illusion ‘clever manual dexterity and deception when performing magic tricks’. Part of the text is taken from Dariel Fitzkee’s 1944 book The Trick Brain. Each of these works reflects the manual process to which they were made and harbours theatricality, trickery or illusion

Oram’s works are immediately enticing, perhaps a reflection of their subject matter. They revel in the mystery of marketing psychology, namingly neuromarketing, where the ‘subject’ is shown a series of images in order to incite and document a reaction. Neural market (2014) is an extension of his exhibition Old Brain Prospect (2014) at Dog Park in Christchurch. It consists of thin steel chair adorned with a hat embellished with gold chains. This hat mimics the brain tracking technology used in marketing strategies. The heavily embellishment also refers to the faux luxury iterated throughout Oram’s videos, featuring images of idealised domesticity.

On the left is a custom-made vitrine with two videos with a latex hand displayed between them. The room however feels cluttered, for there’s an eye created with gold chains that feels like too much. It seems tight spacing in relation to the other works. Perhaps if these works had been spread apart without the presence of Graham Fletcher’s painting they would’ve had stronger visual impact.

In Oram’s two video works Tracking and After Tracking (2014) domestic scenes quickly flash one after the other, to be then scrunched up by a hand which floats over the screen. Their farcical, stock like imagery of domesticity and ‘interior design’ offered a rejection of heteronormative narratives, and highlighted the simulacra inherent in our relationship to images in a post digital age.

This allusion to the editing process weighed heavily as though one were fighting the urge to crush and remove certain works such as, for example, the work by Fletcher, whose painting appears alongside Oram’s as if parallel to his video. The painting is that of a gaudy domestic scene and despite its (ostensibly) anti-bourgeois post-colonial critique its placement is too obvious. The space could have benefitted from the editing process alluded to in Oram’s works.

The second room displays the work of Max Bellamy and Justin Spiers. This room fails from the same curatorial inconsistencies as the first. Bellamy’s work consists of three custom made, identical glass vitrines on stainless steel frames. Inside each vitrine is a hygrothermograph, which simultaneously measures and records the temperature and humidity within a spectrum. These machines write out these measurements as poems. However each time we’ve visited this exhibition they haven’t appeared to be working. These works are both majestic and exquisite in their simplicity, beautifully articulating their ‘sleight of hand’, displaying mysterious mechanical devices and revealing the hidden technologies behind gallery walls. They tie in nicely to Bellamy’s video work currently on display in the rear window.

On the walls in between Bellamy’s works is a series of photographs by Justin Spiers. His photographs can be pictorially mesmerizing, especially the large scale works on the left-hand side of the room, but the size and placement of the works on the right-hand side were underwhelming, especially the placement, as it made them seem transitional. They really needed to be on a larger scale and given room to breathe.

Spiers also presents a video work from a previous show called Castleland seen at Blue Oyster in 2011. This video would benefit by being on a larger scale, as it uses what appears to be surveillance footage of a rabbit. This rabbit stands ominously in the foreground with the hollow sound echoing through a very small screen. Its appearance seemingly refers to both David Lynch’s Rabbits (2002) and Lewis Carroll’s fantastical Alice’s Adventures In Wonderland (1865). If this video work was given the space it needs in order to be digested, its nuanced poignancy would be better appreciated. It seems very pertinent, especially in light of information surrounding surveillance released during the ‘Moment of Truth’ presented by the Internet Mana party earlier this week.

Katrina Thomson’s theatrical curtain is the most literal manifestation of the title. Looking like fabric, it is fully carved out of wood. As it was produced in 2007 for a show at Blue Oyster it is one of the oldest works in the show. For this exhibition one would have expected Thomson to have created a newer work.

Mary McFarlane’s works are beautiful and nuanced, each work seeming quite mesmerising, especially with Lament I and Blue Blank I (2008) which in the entrance to the gallery allude to the magical connotations of the moon. These repurposed mirrors have been painted, aged and distressed. Their black slick appearance gives them a certain accessibility by embellishing the reflection of the viewer in their surface, and referencing the show’s trajectory. Her works aptly embody the infamous Dunedin aesthetic, but in a way that is a tasteful reference to their locality.

A lack of restraint is exemplified in the final room featuring the works of Madeleine Child. Seeing her work before one enters the space is a nice gesture; a plinth displaying a series of processual ceramics. But upon entering the viewer confronts four more, the density of the rest of the show rendering them almost obsolete. In this room a projected video is almost unviewable in the daylight from the windows.

Sleight of Hand was designed towards creating a stronger relationship between the Dunedin Public Art Gallery and its thriving art community. There has always been a disparity between the two, but Gutsell should be commended for her efforts to show a wider variety of local talent, in the rear window and now inside the gallery itself. In saying this we must reiterate the inability of these works to cohesively communicate the ideas the show seeks to explore. A visually effective exhibition should offer both restraint and innate attention to detail, but Sleight of Hand‘s sheer volume of works renders it incredibly overloaded, its curation clunky, overwhelming and undefined. Despite this, the trajectory of the show is playful and has very obvious appeal, especially in terms of its placement within a public institution. This show is an exciting step towards fostering critical engagement with the work of local artists.

Hana Aoake and Zach Williams

Print | Facebook | Twitter | Email

 

This Discussion has 4 comments.

Comment

katrina thomson, 12:51 p.m. 1 October, 2014

Hi Hana and Zach,
I was asked by the curator to specifically show my work Monumental Ignorance for this exhibition, not make a new work. I was happy to show it even though it is an old work, because it was a good opportunity to see it again, and it worked in relation to the Sleight of Hand theme. Also my surname is Thomson without a P.

Reply to this thread

Cohen Siddens, 6:52 p.m. 9 October, 2014

This review’s sheer volume of mistakes renders it incredibly overloaded, its content clunky, overwhelming and undefined.

Witness: sentence fragments, missing punctuation, ignorance of spell-check, and repetition rather than exposition (e.g., the word ‘illusion’ appears three times in the first paragraph). Simple copy-editing slips such as ‘the heavily embellishment’, or the neologistic ‘namingly' (I think our writers mean ‘namely’) are so glaring that they actually cause physical pain in my eyeballs.

A review is only a reviewers opinion and boy, is this piece opinionated! Well, my opinion of their opinion is that the principally negative tone feels like the beginning critic’s easy steps to success through cynicism and dismissiveness. The writers’ voice is so stilted — like a self-conscious, 2nd-year-at-art-school drama-queen who says 'daaaahling' quite a lot — that it’s hard to find any potential insights in the hackneyed wannabe art-wank style. Speaking of stale, the very first sentence begins with the overused faux-ponderous “Upon entering…” (a phrase with which our writers are so enamoured that they use it again later in the article). Or how about this double-barrelled nothing: ‘nuanced poignancy’?

Amidst the technical and stylistic clumsiness are bumbling assumptions both aesthetic and practical. Here’s two for-instances: ‘For this exhibition one would have expected Thomson to have created a newer work.’ Much as I would love to see more new work by Thomson, the piece in this exhibition is powerful and beautiful, and has not been seen in Dunedin for several years. I was delighted to revisit such a potent, witty, well-crafted work. Another: ‘[Justin Spiers’ work] really needed to be on a larger scale.’ Really? Perhaps Kathryn Madill — whose mezzotints are not even mentioned —might have made her miniatures larger, too? While we’re on the subject of Spiers, I need also nitpick a factual error: the creature in his video is Mickey Mouse, not a rabbit. This is clearly described in the wall text.

It’s good for new writers to get a chance to give it a go but please, some quality control. This write-up was amateurish every which way, and even seemingly spiteful. I like the show; I find the spacing airy, with strong connections between the works, the curation contemporary and considered. But I wouldn’t have bothered to respond if this were just a bad review of a show that I liked.

I’ve bothered because this is just a bad review.  

 In reply

John Hurrell, 8:43 p.m. 9 October, 2014

Remember that this venue is a forum where all sorts of opinion are welcome. The writing doesn't have to be slick or polite, as the site is a catalyst for debate. As Oscar Wilde once said, "Better to be talked about than not talked about." Everybody in the art world has opinions on what they see happening around them, but most keep them to themselves out of fear of offending their peers, or the alleged 'gatekeepers'.

EyeContact encourages writers and artists to make the private public. It is better for everybody if we shake the tree a little - noting that artists cannot control interpretation. We're adults - and as part of a wide visual arts community should be comfortable about speaking our minds. The alternative is silence. Any discussion is healthy.

Zach Williams, 4:56 p.m. 14 October, 2014

Thanks for taking the time to reply daaaahrrrlling.
Firstly I'm offended that you seem to conflate femininity with immaturity. We clearly enjoyed the show as well otherwise we wouldn't have written about it. I'm also sorry that you perceived our critical approach as all out pessimism. If you have read any of the other reviews we have written, you will note that we have often taken a very favourable approach to the shows we write about.
But we can see how you see this as being somewhat spiteful, though this was not our intention at all. We were trying to reflect the problems we saw in the show (when talking to friends we found they encountered similar problems with the exhibition).
Your problem with our grammar is interesting, and pins you down as an old fashion stickler for banalities. Language is ever changing and has a complex array of meanings to different people. I don't doubt you that there are grammatical errors, esp if you are nitpicking for them lol.
As you pointed out previously this review is just our opinion. It's apparent that your problem with it is just your disagreeing with our opinion. May I suggest you write your own review (with or without pseudonym)? x

Reply to this thread

Recent Posts by Hana Aoake

HA
Deanna Dowling, In search of gold, the stone was there all along (2015). Photo: Blue Oyster Gallery

Outside the Gallery

BLUE OYSTER GALLERY

Dunedin

 

Tomas Richards, Robyn Jordaan, Deanna Dowling and Cobi Taylor 
A Tragic Delusion


5 August - 29 August, 2015.

HA
Kate van der Drift, Everything Returns to the Sea, 2014, Giclée photograph on matte paper, 871 mm x 1220 mm

Van der Drift Photos

SANDERSON CONTEMPORARY ART

Auckland

 

Kate van der Drift
Changing shores of shadow

 

2 June - 21 June 2015

HA
Installation of 'Something felt, something shared' at Enjoy.

Remembered Space and Psychic Residues

ENJOY PUBLIC ART GALLERY

Wellington

 

Gabrielle Amodeo, Ruby Joy Eade, Clare Hartley McLean, Kayla Ward
Something felt, something shared


7 May - 30 May, 2015

HA
Gabriella Mangano and Silvana Mangano, Visible Structures,  2014, installation views, Dunedin Public Art Gallery. Courtesy of the artists and Anna Schwartz Gallery

Gabriella and Silvana Mangano in Dunedin

DUNEDIN PUBLIC ART GALLERY

Dunedin

 

Gabriella Mangano and Silvana Mangano
Visible Structures


29 November 2014 - 15 March 2015