Whitney Museum Biennial 2012

The Whitney Museum’s Biennial opened my eyes to yet another view of the world of museums. I wasn’t ‘wowed.’ That does not mean I did not enjoy the experience. I very much enjoyed visiting the museum. I was mainly captured by the set-up and the informal atmosphere. The only part that really ruined this informal atmosphere was the people who stand guard over the work. However they are simply doing their job to make sure people do not take pictures or touch certain artwork. Yet they seemed misplaced in this type of atmosphere.

I loved how the spaces were set up. They made the floors appear somewhat informal, similar to a space inside a home with various rooms of different purposes. Artwork from various artists seemed to flow together, instead of being restricted to their own spaces. I could walk easily from one space to another and glance ahead on what was coming up. There were some works with their own spaces on other floors though. Despite that it was a successful show.

There were some spaces where it felt like people were on display. I could not tell if they were part of the piece or simply sitting there and chatting with people who came on by. I was unsure of who they were. Were they the artists? Simply people who worked in the museum? Or were they actors? I saw this theme continue in other locations, making me thing this was intentional. It was a display of communication. It was informal. This created a bridge between the visitors and the museum. I listened in on some of the conversations and the chatting is what gave me that feel. They talked about their lives, things happening in their lives, their interests, works they liked or did not like. A lot was conversation people would normally have outside of the museum. I would pass a room and there would be a person sitting there talking with a museum visitor. There would be a room full of people acting out scenes.  A person even spoke to visitors via Skype. He talked about an opera he was writing. However it was obvious he wasn’t too happy to be there in front of the camera. He didn’t seem that interested in talking with us. There was even a closed off area where two people spoke to a museum visitor from inside what appeared to be cage-like to me. At first I thought we were viewing a performance. Yet the person they were interacting with had a sticker like us signifying he was a normal visitor. The scene was cheerful. The man outside was invited into their space to continue their conversation. As he was entering I scanned the rest of the area and jumped when I saw something unusual in the back. A creepy doll was set up in the very back. As if it was spying on them. Then I felt we were doing the same thing as the doll: we technically were spying/eyeing the scene in the cage-like space too.

            The first work that really caught my attention was Werner Herzog’s Hearsay of the Soul. I loved how the work had its own space. I went in originally to rest my tired feet but ended up staying for a long period of time because I fell in love with the music. It was a multi-screen projection. Occasionally landscape artwork was put on the screen as well. I was captured by the expression of the cellist. He was so into his music that it translated onto his face. It was entrancing. I did not care much for the rest of the work. Although the artwork was nice, it went well with the music. I feel that cellist and the music overall was the best part of the experience. I wasn’t crazy about how the action traveled up and down the multiple screens. I had to keep changing my view from one screen to another and that bugged me.

            Another work that captured my attention was Nick Mauss’ Concern, Crush, Desire 2011. It was a popular one. People wandered back over to the area and went through the doors of this piece constantly. They posed and took pictures. They would go up close and discuss the work. I did the same as well. It gave me a feeling of belonging to another world. The space was cartoony. I felt as if I went through I would be taken into a cartoon world. The work is better observed from a distance than up close. From a distance it has more of that cartoony vibe and appeared completely painted. However when I went close to observe the details it lost that magical quality. Seeing reality through the doors (the regular museum and various other people) also destroyed that fantasy.

            A third work I enjoyed was Oscar Tuzaon’s For Hire 2012. It was fun walking around the space. It was like a mini version of the inside of a home or a skeleton of a home. However you could walk around in a way that would be unnatural in a house. The sad part was we could not go up the steps. I wanted to but there was nothing to go up to. It would have been nice if there was another floor to go up to.

            The three works are very different from each other. Hearsay of the Soul had its own space. It was cut off from the rest of the floor. You entered a dark space and sat on the ground to look at the multiple screens. The main feature was its music and display of artwork. Concern, Crush, Desire and For Hire shared a quality. They were interactive work. They were not cut off from the space around them, but instead added to the surrounding space. Concern, Crush, and Desire added to the living room feel of the floor it was situated in while For Hire was like a miniature home. The main feature of Concern, Crush, Desire was the cartoony design of the doors and space while the main feature of For Hire was the interaction process.

Amy Bennett

Church Giggles 2011

The Weight of Things 2011

Understudy 2010

Smoke Signals 2011

Taking Arms 2008

Taken from Bennett’s website: http://www.amybennett.com/home.html

Extras: Picture of her Otherworldly exhibit and one of the models she has created

“Assignment: Post an image (or images) of an artist’s work you like and write a post about specifically why you like it”

One of the artist’s I like is Amy Bennett. Mainly because her work is so different in comparison to work I had been exposed to. She is a Painter. I was exposed to her work Fall 2011 during my Art Semester class. We saw some of her really tiny pieces at the Otherworldly exhibit. She was also one of the artists our group visited. We were lucky to see both finished and unfinished work, her studio space, and some of the models she works from to create her paintings.

            What captured my interest originally were her small paintings at Otherworldly. They were so tiny yet so detailed! The others, including myself, marveled at the pieces. Some could fit in the palm of your hand. They were beautiful scenes too in settings such as the home, a church, a doctor’s office, and living rooms. She is mainly interested in domestic settings and the relationships between people. The images had a ‘plasticy’ look to them. They did not resemble actual scenes in reality. I later learned she created the little people and the settings herself and painted with those visuals! The models take her a very long time to make and she recycles a lot of them, re-using parts for new models. I liked her concept of creating her own models to work from in creating another work, such as a painting.

George Boorujy: Blood Memory

One of the exhibitions I visited recently was in the P*P*O*W Gallery. It was George Boorujy’s Blood Memory. The exhibit was open from March 15- April 14, 2012. I was fascinated with his work. The details were exquisite. I was especially drawn to two works containing birds. The first contained the image of a blue jay (Anting 2011).

The bird seemed settled (or had it fallen out of a nest?) on ground. Its wings were spread out and it stared out at the viewer.  Since the image was so large I felt a little intimidated by the bird. It was larger than an ordinary bird but beautiful in a way that was different than the actual bird in reality. The details were incredibly fine and its eyes showed no fear. My first impression was that the bird was hurt. Then I thought it was sad, simply relaxing or curious. In the press release it was written that:

“Boorujy challenges the viewer to confront both the animal and their preconceived notions about it. Through their gaze an interaction evolves with the wild that otherwise would have to be sought out or birthed from happenstance. However fleeting our exchanges with the wild are, an impression of their presence marks our memories.”

I have experienced what was written in my viewing of the Blue Jay. As I was gazing at the bird I felt like I had a connection. A bird is usually flighty and cautious. One would expect a bird to stay far away and fly off if one got too close. They would not gaze at you as if trying to read you. Or seem like they are deep in thought, even capable of thought! This Blue Jay however gives off a feeling that it is more than a bird. It is not the bird I know of in my reality. It does not fear me. Exchanges with the wild are rare. I’ve had a few in the past with a bears on a few occasion and a few wild rabbits where I felt a moment’s connection but they were fleeting and rare.  

The other bird image I was drawn too was an image of a blackbird with a large red chest (Frigate Bird 2011).

Originally when I saw the image I was not familiar with this type of bird, apparently called a Frigate bird, and thought the scene was horrifying. It appeared to be a raven being crushed by a large red thing that resembled a heart. Its eyes looked defeated to me, as if it had given up struggling and was too weak to fight this heart thing anymore. Later on when I saw the title of the piece and looked it up again I was greeted by images of a similar bird with a red chest! They can expand it to ridiculous sizes apparently as well. Although I have the knowledge that this is a Frigate bird I cannot forget my first impressions of it. But I adore the image nevertheless.

            Overall this was an exciting exhibit. It caught my eye and kept my interest. I love this artist’s style. I wished I could simply take the work for my own so I could gaze at them all the time, but alas one does not simply take things they like. That would be stealing…

Week 12: Wed. November 16, 2011 – Jonathan van Dyke

Van Dyke’s studio work was interesting. He seemed to have an interest in both performance art and dripping paint. He made the paint himself as well the boxes in which the paint dripped out from. The colors he gets from a grid. The fabrics or wood he gets from samples. They were set up so he had to turn them all on so the paint would drip. They dripped various colors onto the floor. He usually just left them there. He found the floor an interesting space and liked how it changed with the paint dripping on it.

            Over time his dripping paint sculptures get blocked up. When this happens they are taken down and stored. Before they reach they point they do a lot of changing over time. So viewers see it differently each time they go to view it. The sculptures are like performers too. The history of their performances is located within the layers of paint.

            He talked about a performance piece he did once. It was a ten hour performance for “Peforma.” He stood silent in front of a Pollack painting for ten hours a day. I was shocked that someone would consider doing something so… boring. I tried to picture myself doing something like that and could not. If I do not have a good book, maybe music, or my laptop with internet at hand I cannot handle doing something like that for hours. I do spend a lot of time painting and drawing but I do not think I could paint or draw for ten hours in a day. I could not focus on a painting that long. Van Dyke said he did not speak to anyone in the museum at the time he was doing this. There were interactions going on between the painting, himself, the wall writing and the other people around him.

The museum knew he was doing this project. They had put wall writing near van Dyke so people would know he was the artwork. Many were confused though and did not realize at first he was what the wall writing was about. The whole scenario sounded humorous to me. I could picture him and those interactions happening.

“You can hear anything people say about you,” van Dyke admitted. His hearing became much better during this performance. I was so astounded that this man had accomplished something so demanding and unusual so I had a lot of questions to ask him. When I asked about what kind of thoughts he had during all those hours he replied they were “garbage thoughts.” Things many of us think over such as bills that needs paying, problems going on and other various things. Some were too personal to talk about. He found it to be meditative. He felt like a different person at the end.

He also talked about another performance he was involved with. He had several people act out a performance for him in a museum setting. They were also silent. They were paid for it, since the work was demanding. It was a performance for certain amount of hours a day that spanned over days. His dripping paint artworks were on the walls. The performers interacted in that space. Over time they got paint on themselves and each other, on the walls and the floors. After a few days they are familiar with the situation, with each other; they are exhausted. Then they change things up again the next day.

Van Dyke finds language to be a contemporary art practice. For his work he decided to take away words. His work is silent. Communicating in silence is what he enjoys. However he also likes being with other people so he calls the idea of the artist working hours alone in a studio a myth. Although he said it was nice to get away from the world and stay alone in the studio, it was not a good idea to do it all the time. “Put yourself out in the world,” he urged.

Week 11: Friday, November 11, 2011 – Matthew Deleget

“Minus Space” was the name of the Gallery. When I entered I wondered about the naming. I wondered if it was related with the spacing of the works in anyway. The work was conceptual and abstract paintings. However I later learned the term meant something else. It was a recently coined term from around 2003. It became a social medium. It was to be a word that would gain meaning such as the word blogging, a word that meant nothing in the recent past. The artists involved with this type of art wanted a term that would describe them best. They were being confused with Minimalism, which was a term that entered my mind when I first walked in as well.

            Deleget described this type of work as reductive. The word was baggage-free and meant nothing. The goal was rather than make this type of work exclusive to one type of people, race, or region but inclusive. It would be open to all age groups, generations, all regions, and even contracting ideas. It was to become a global movement. I found it incredible. Nothing like this has been done before. Most art movements had similar ideas and the artwork was similar.

            Some basic principles of reductive work were that it was reductive abstraction, ideas were important; color and pattern were important, seriality and monochrome. Some could be politically engaged and some work could be spiritual. It all began in Brooklyn and in one month they were global thanks to the internet. They did online exhibitions. Soon people wanted to visit. Not many understood that there was no physical location for this reductive work. It was, like the gallery is named, minus space. It did not exist. However people kept asking the same question so they did decide to find a location.

            Work was shown in places such as MoMA PS1. They had a show there in 2008 that featured 54 artists from various counties. It was a successful one and even years later people come up to them and talk about what they remember and how they enjoyed it.

The type of artists that the gallery has shown has been of a wide range. They show emerging artists as well as established artists. Sometimes living and deceased artists’ work is shown. Work they call experimental is shown as well, and may not be art at all. They get a lot of new and old people. The general public, who never been in galleries before, have made their way into the gallery. They also had good luck with the press. They have been around eight years now and are still going strong.

            Social networks made this project possible. It was thanks to facebook, twitter, emailing that they were able to make reductive art global in such a short amount of time. This shows how our world is changing. The way we view art, learn about art, experience art is changing as well. We are more connected in this time thanks to social networks and the internet. Word gets around quicker. This amazing phenomenon has also been a part of Occupy Wall Street. Occupy Wall Street has been considered a protest like no other. It’s on a wide scale and those involved have been spreading messages, images, announcements, and news of happenings easily because of the internet.

Week 11: Wed. November 9, 2011 - Dorothea Rockburne

Dorothea Rockburne’s studio was bigger than I was expecting. I became accustomed to seeing a messy work space however most areas in the studio were neat and organized. Her work space matched her artwork. She had a lot of geometric shapes in her work. The way some parts of her studio were arranged mimicked that style. For example in one room where my group stood around a miniature of a museum exhibit she had had recently, I noticed that the way the lamps and tables were arranged in the room we stood in was geometric. They were lined almost perfectly in rows. The studio was also home to a beautiful black feline with bright green eyes. She paced around and gently demanded to be paid attention to. Throughout our meeting the cat rubbed against our legs and lay among our feet.

            Rockburne claimed that many had thought her work was made by a man. They also expected her to be different when meeting her in person. She was shorter than they imagined. This made it seem that her work was viewed as masculine, strong and maybe even bigger than life if they expected her to be tall, male and a strong presence. She did reveal her love for mathematics. She had a great professor back in college that helped develop her math skills. Rockburne is also drawn to the color blue. She attended a Catholic school in her youth and that blue shade was a dominant color that stood out to her. In her youth she did landscape and figure paintings that later became more abstract.

            Rockburned also talked about her daily routine. She spends a lot of time in the studio. She has a schedule she follows so she makes sure to eat at certain times of the day, and leave time in the morning and evenings for reading. She studied philosophy and that gave her a huge foundation. She still reads books on philosophy. At one point she talked about the different identities one person could have: “You are a different person depending on who you are with. We change according to a person and situation.” I found this revealed a lot of her character. She had said later that she enjoys working alone and in silence. It does make sense that a person does change according to the person or situation they are in. This must be a way she can remain her true self as she makes her art. It made me think of how I behave when creating my own work. I behave and do things differently depending on if I am myself or with my classmates and professor.

She has combined philosophy and art in a way that works for her. She recommended a book called Hegles Intro to Philosophy to us. She said it was a good ground for contemporary art. She also finds Egyptian art fascinating which perked my interest since I also have found Egyptian art to be attractive.