Tuesday, November 01, 2005

The Secret Life of Art: Piotr Nathan's How Far Do You Dare To Go

There is that portion of a life which is presented to the world and seen, and that other portion, the secret life, which is cloaked, known only to whose life it is and perhaps a select group.  What constitutes this secret life can run from the mundane to the extreme, but everybody has one. 

If you haven't been to the Belkin Art Gallery at UBC to see Piotr Nathan's How Far Do You Dare To Go, go while there's still time before the show closes on December 4th.  Not only is the Belkin one of Vancouver's best designed spaces in which to see art, but it now offers the first Canadian exhibition of an artist well known in Europe and the United States.  Covering the past ten years, the work is rich, and varied, and fascinating, with imagery that runs from natural history to homosexual sadomasochism.  The Secret Life and The Crystal Metaphor are the links of this diversity.

The Garment of a Fleeting Notion is a small vitrine inside of which a large glop of brilliant red oil paint rests atop a copy of the illustration of an iceberg which Nathan used for his series of five paintings Notes on the Future Becoming the Past.  The paint is like a little iceberg of its own, amplifying the notion that what is seen on the surface of ocean or painting is only a fraction of what lies below.  Ninety percent of an iceberg is below the water's surface, submerged below sight and consciousness.  This is the hidden mystery of the iceberg, the iceberg's secret life.  The iceberg is a perfect metaphor for art.  The portion of art which is seen is analogous to what's above, its metaphor, the vastness of its meaning  is what is unseen below.  It's this below, in the secret communication that each person shares with a piece of art beyond the intention, desire, and control of the artist that constitutes the secret life of art.        

An iceberg is a crystallized form.  One which turns water from a common element into something imposing and magnificent.  This is one of the main themes of the Crystal Metaphor - the transmutation of base matter - like water, or paint.  Rituals of Disappearance is an allegorical representation of the four elements transformed from the ordinary to the sublime:  earth to dust storm, air to Northern Lights, water to waterspout, fire to volcanic eruption.  Taken from wood engravings from a nineteenth century work on natural history, Nathan has enlarged and traced them directly onto square aluminum panels.  As presented, the picture has been crystalized into regular units and shattered into a grid.  The indication is that the quality of the experience - of the pictures' former meaning and the experiences represented - has been transformed.  

In the lush and colorful painting Margarethe's Treasure Chest two caves lie side by side.  They meet in a common interior filled with crystals and geodes of all type and color.  On the right is the Blue Grotto of Capri, on the left the Scottish Fingal's Cave formed of columns of basalt.  A pair of small figures appear in each.  They're looking at the caves, but outwards towards sky and light, missing the real treasure which lies unseen in the chamber behind them in which we imaginatively stand.  With the high domed ceiling and dual sockets there's an unmistakable impression of being on the inside of a skull, standing amongst the riches of the mind, looking out.  The figures are turned away from this - another example of the secret life - seeing only surfaces.

First published in The Vancouver Courier

The Biographical Landscape: The Photography of Stephen Shore, 1968 - 1993

Even if you don't already know the photography of Stephen Shore, entering Presentation House gives the uncanny feeling of familiarity. It looks like Shore looks like everyone else.  The fact is, he got there first, and The Biographical Landscape:  The Photography of Stephen Shore, 1968 - 1993 shows many of the still dominant trends in contemporary photography that Shore helped to define, including the reflection of some of Vancouver's best known photographers.  Why "biographical"?  

The answer begins in American Surfaces.  In the early 1970s Shore headed West from New York to Amarillo, Texas.  Using a 35 mm camera, color film, and a snapshot aesthetic he produced a photographic diary of the adventure.  The pictures are autobiographic.  Like a photo album they tell a story, the story of his first trip across country.  They also develop a subject matter and pattern of working that he would refine and enlarge upon in Uncommon Places, Shore's essential series on the American vernacular landscape and the focus of the exhibition.

From 1973 to 1982 Shore crisscrossed the United States and Canada taking color photographs of everyday scenes.  For reasons not explained, he switched from the ease and portability of a 35 mm camera to large format cameras - the kind with accordion bodies - that require a tripod. Because of their size and the nature of their operation, use of large format cameras contributes to clarity of image at the same time they preclude the possibility of spontaneous picture taking.  What Shore lost in the snapshot aesthetic, he gained in crisp detail and forthrightness of composition.  Like American Surfaces, Uncommon Places is a record of what Shore encountered - the places he saw, the people he met, the motel beds he slept in, the meals he ate.  But it's more than that.  They're how Americans see themselves as Americans.  More still - they're how they fondly remember themselves because for many it's a vision of America that's never been known firsthand, known in no other way, but photographs or stories.  Looking at the photographs we realize they're iconic images.  This is the moment when the landscape becomes "biographical" in a way more significant than photography's ordinary subjectivity because the feeling isn't "this is my experience of the landscape", but "this is my landscape".  The feeling of ownership is concrete.  What starts as autobiography becomes biography at the moment I recognize the images as mine.  It's no longer Shore's story he's telling, it's my story, and your story, and the story of everyone for whom the photographs become "mine".  When a thing is owned so personally by so many it becomes iconic.      

How does Shore make me claim his landscape for my own?  First, through a combination of subject, classicism of composition, and quality of light the pictures induce an experience of solitude which makes the moment of their taking seem quiet and unshared.  Next, looking at any photograph you imaginatively replace the photographer.  When there's no person in the photograph as in many of Shore's, you become the only one present when the photograph was taken.  With that realization you own that moment held by the photograph and whatever is represented in it in a very particular, and I'd say particularly American way.  Americans own differently than other people.  It has to do with a form of proprietariness based on a distinct feeling of ownership of private property.  Absent of anyone else the landscape and everything in it becomes ours in a way that makes it proper to say that it was Stephen Shore's landscape, just as it becomes ours in our moment of viewing.  We are inclined to say along with Ralph Waldo Emerson that, There is no history, only biography.

First published in The Vancouver Courier

Sunday, May 08, 2005

After the Disasteroid

After the Disasteroid

Here was a qualified Nothing, a Nothing of such
deep despair, I could not be absolved of my
aesthetic responsibility - a nonhope Nothing, a
non Nothing - and yet, also before my eyes was
the evidence of a dedication to artistic expression
so unyieldingly vast in its implications that my
mind - at least at first - bluntly refused to accept
the evidence.

Charles Willeford, The Burnt Orange Heresy

Some look around and see the triumph of the ages.
The same prospect can as easily offer a view of
the debacle of time. It all depends on who you're
rooting for.

Anonymous sightseer at the Grand Canyon

The physical landscape is a language of mounds, depressions and meanders that can be read as a series of dramas, comedies and tragedies not unlike the artistic landscape. Geologist and art critic become fellow excavators searching their respective topographies for clues to their formation. Deformation of these landscapes is common, the result of powerful, often hidden forces.

While on a recent trip to the Grand Canyon, standing at the rim looking into a popular section called the Abyss, my mind drifted to Robert Smithson and his essay An Esthetics of Disappointment, "Futility, one of the more durable things of this world is nearer to the artistic experience than excitement. Yet, the life-forcer is always around trying to incite a fake madness. The mind is important, but only when it is empty. The greater the emptiness the grander the art." I yelled this into the Canyon, but the echo came back as the words of Lancelot Law Whyte in The Next Development of Man, "To think is to confess a lack of adjustment which we must stop to consider. Only when the human organism fails to achieve an adequate response to its situation is there material for the processes of thought, and the greater the failure the more searching they become." From between Smithson and Whyte it occurred to me that perhaps the entropy which preoccupied Smithson and of which he was so enamoured had finally engulfed the art world. It wasn't the rundown of energy, but of belief in art as capable of doing or meaning. The extinction of the belief in art, if not art, had become complete and with it came the end of authenticity. The unfortunate thing for authenticity and for all late coming artists is that in the 1970's as the last of the magnificent dinosaurs roamed the art world a disasteroid of terrible proportions struck causing an earthquake that opened a chasm between the artist, and authenticity and belief. As authenticity and belief receded, self-consciousness oozed forwards to take its place. Truly, self-consciousness, failure and impotence have always been present in the history of art, but before the disasteroid there was still the possibility of also making an authentic gesture. In De Kooning's work it is possible to see when self-consciousness first leaked in. The moment comes early in his abstract career. Very suddenly the bold and confident brushstroke became a stroke with pause.

After the disasteroid inner world was replaced irrevocably by "inner world" and the utopian, transcendent, and utilitarian aspirations of art were exiled to a lost world. As a result it is just too simple for the artist to wake up in the morning and decide that, "today I'll be an abstract expressionist," and the next morning, "today I'll be a minimalist." Without conviction, artists developed commitment without duration. Though a jejune example, something that might be found in a block of text by Sean Landers, it is as easy and as hollow for the artist to change styles as it is to change socks. Most artists continue to make art ignoring this loss or unaware that the rug has been pulled out from under them, or in a doomed attempt to turn back the clock. Some artists, however, make it the unavoidable motive or motif of their work. The background of these artists is the Modern Dilemma of the artist wanting to continue, but not being able to continue and continuing anyway. Self-consciousness is the grand concept. Failure and impotence are subsumed under it - I think therefore I cannot. The only authentic gesture left to them is the authenticity of their self-consciousness and to make that the catalyst of their work. In an odd way the self-conscious mark is the only mark that can be made authentically. All others can be faked. It's possible to make an expressionist painting with no feeling. It's possible to make a minimalist sculpture while being a romantic maximalist. It's possible to make propaganda without caring. But it is impossible to make any self-conscious gesture without being aware of both the gesture and the self. The prototypic artist of self-consciousness, failure and impotence is the fictional painter Jacques Debierue of Charles Willeford's Burnt Orange Heresy. Unlike Debierue who sat daily in futility waiting for an idea that never came these artists don't just sit around waiting. Theirs is an active rather than a paralyzing impotence, a sense rather than a fact. Though this is not an easy position to be in they are using it to make interesting art.

While lost in these reveries a storm blew in. Huddled against the rain with the pygmy pinon and juniper trees that grow on the rim I watched the Canyon change color as the soil soaked up water and turned to mud. Soon miniature mud flows, and slumps, and avalanches began. Their frequency increased until the entire side of the Canyon looked as if it were sliding into the river below. With this abundance of moisture and motion I naturally began to think of painting. In particular the painting of Julian Schnabel.

It's all like a movie: the outfits, the
surfboards, the picture perfect wife, the rustic
house, the giant open-air studio, the barefoot
children. What does it mean to try to be an
artist, even a great artist (I'm as close to
Picasso as you're going to get in this fucking
life," Schnabel has said), in a time when
people think in cinematic rather than painterly
terms when, in fact, almost everyone is far
more interested in movies than in painting?

James Kaplan, from "Lives of the Artists", New York Magazine 12.August.1996.

In James Kaplan's essay on Schnabel he asks the right question - the crucial question as far as Schnabel is concerned - but never answers it. What does it mean to try to be an artist? Whether people are thinking in cinematic, painterly or any other terms is irrelevant. The question is simply, What does it mean to Julian Schnabel to try and be an artist? His entire career is an answer to this question; failure. This isn't to say that Schnabel is a bad painter or an uninteresting artist. Undeniably a strong painter, he can move it around with the best of them, but that has nothing to do with what makes him significant or interesting. Schnabel is absolutely right when he says that he's as close to Picasso as you're going to get in this life. It's impossible for him to get close because it's impossible for anybody to get closer. It is, in fact, impossible to get very close at all. The gap that separates all contemporary artist's from Picasso, or from any of the other strong precursors (Guston and Pollock in Schnabel's case), is the swamp of self-consciousness into which authenticity has vanished. Bubbling up from its depths are the twin miasmic plumes of failure and impotence. Getting across is a donnered expedition that Schnabel never tires of. He seems entirely devoted to the impossible task of recapturing the Modernist myths that cripple generation after generation of succeeding artists, and the belief in art that accompanied and supported those myths. The massive and aggressive use of paint and materials that Schnabel employs no longer signifies the expression of the artist's authentic inner world as it did for his strong precursors, but rather only an overwhelming desire and dedication to paint. It is precisely the earnestness of the attempt and the monumentality of Schnabel's failure to recapture anything that constitutes his grandness.

As with most forms of description, the classification of self-consciousness, failure and impotence contains a fundamental dualism; in this case the classic Cartesian split of mind and body. There is then Failure of the Body and Failure of the Mind, or in other words Gestural and Conceptual Failure. Schnabel's work is an example of Failure of the Body; Jonathan Lasker's, Failure of the Mind.

What does a painter paint when there's nothing left to paint? What to do with desire and ambition? For Lasker, it looks like paint the paint and paint the painting of paint. Ground. Figure. Line. There's supposed to be a ground, there is ground. There's supposed to be a figure, there is figure. Then there's the line. A line that goes nowhere and describes nothing, but a dedication to painting frustrated by self-consciousness, failure and impotence. With no emotion, no passion, no action the line is slow, and deliberate, and dumb. The kind of noodling line one makes while passing time waiting for an idea. Even so, Lasker's work distinguishes itself as Conceptual Failure as distinct from the Gestural Failure of Schnabel in its clear lack of painterliness. The self-consciousness of the gesture is so complete that the gesture disappears, revealing the mind behind it.

"Language" and "doodle" are the most frequently used terms to describe Lasker's work. Formal language is pitted against formal language until a series of civil wars is produced that leaves the viewer a witness to a visual babble. More entertaining would be to think in terms of All Star Wrestling. The result, if a language, is one which has been emptied of content. It's an absurd language. If I have to think of a Lasker as language I prefer to look at the blank spaces between the letters from which another Lasker is waiting to emerge.

And Watt's need of semantic succor
was at times so great that he would
set to trying names on things, and on
himself, almost as a woman hats.

Samuel Beckett, Watt.

The first time I read this I was reminded of the work of René Magritte. I'm thinking of those paintings like Swift Hope, The Living Mirror, and The Tree of Knowledge, which show abstract shapes apparently labeled, at least associated with, words or phrases such as: cloud, horse, leaden road, figure bursting out laughing, or bird calls, as well as paintings like Dream Key that depict recognizable objects together with words which are associated, but not descriptive of the objects. With the paintings of Lasker the passage echoes to mind once again.

Magritte's abstract shapes are just that, abstract shapes. Their relationship to the accompanying text seems gratuitous at best, a simple trying on of hats that illustrates the tenuousness of meaning, the impotence or words to describe, and the failure of language to communicate. With Lasker on the other hand though there may be an idea behind the image as he asserts, the language that would help prop up that idea has abandoned the image. The image is stranded. Left alone to fend for itself. And it's not talking. Why should it? After all, Lasker's a painter, he's not a postman.

More so than the paintings themselves, it's their titling that shows the affinity that exists between Magritte and Lasker. But whereas Magritte's use of titles is surreal, Lasker seems to really want to say something. There is in Lasker an overwhelming commitment to content and meaning. He says it, it is said about him, and it is clearly read in his titling of paintings.

As with all artists of self-consciousness, Lasker's paintings are portraits. Portraits of the artist as ambiguous figure. As absurd gesture. As subversive mark. As antithetical language. Lasker is that deliberate meandering line that more frequently than not is the last mark added to a painting. The gesture sits on top of and suppresses all the preceding languages of paint. He is the last word. The finishing stroke. The final kick in the pants.

Follow Lasker's line that goes nowhere far enough and you end up on a patch of highway by Michael Ashkin, another artist of Conceptual Failure. Ashkin's sculpture shows the empty, desolate, entropic landscapes that so absorbed Robert Smithson: construction and industrial sites, pipelines, parking lots, abandoned vehicles, and high voltage lines - the heroicism of landscape and progress eroded by a deluge of failure. In many of the works there is a marked resemblance to the Monuments of Passic. Like Smithson, one expects Ashkin to be a proponent of J.G.Ballard's dystopic aesthetic: the "beauty of the car crash, excitements of the deserted holiday beach, elegance of automobile graveyards, mystery of multi-storey car parks, and poetry of abandoned hotels."

Most frequently featuring highways which are commonly thought of as conduits of travel or direction, these highways are failed. Rather than a way to someplace they are roads to no place. One can imagine Tony Smith on his famous midnight ride that helped pave the way for the development of art as place and the experience of art as journey. Instead of helping to remember where you have been they make you forget where you are going, leaving you on a lost highway. These are the side roads and disused state and county roads, the access roads and service roads good for dumping and joy riding and the romantic notion of driving across country on the scenic route of an America that doesn't exist anymore.

Overall, the work of Michael Ashkin seems to ask where there is to go. By the looks of his sculpture the answer is nowhere. With no beginning and no end the artist is stuck in the middle, cut off in both directions and stranded on a fragment of highway. Ashkin's sculpture No. 60 is a good example. An isolated section of highway and an isolated section of land are separated and surrounded by murky, milky, "water" that has a toxic look. I hedge to call the land an island because it and the highway are the same size and in the past the scale in Ashkin's work has been consistent. They lie in a straight line with one another. An equivalence is being make, similar perhaps to Ballard's Concrete Island. Like Robert Maitland the story's protagonist, in the present climate, surrounded by self-consciousness and buffeted by failure and impotence, the artist is marooned beside a lost highway on an island that time forgot.

Debierue was a slave to hope. He had
never accepted the fact that he couldn't
paint a picture. But each day he faced
the slavery of the attempt to paint, and#
the subsequent daily failure. After each
day of failure he was destroyed, only to
be reborn on the next day - each new day
bringing with it a new chance, a new
opportunity. How could he be so strong
willed to face this daily death, this vain
slavery to hope? He had dedicated
his life to Nothing.

Charles Willeford, The Burnt Orange Heresy

More so than any of the others, Sean Landers is most obviously an artist of self-consciousness, failure and impotence. Discernible in almost all of his work, they are absolutely unavoidable in his text pieces. Like Lasker and Ashkin, Landers is an artist of Conceptual Failure. But whereas Schnabel, Lasker and Ashkin might confront their situation, Landers wallows in it. Even "inner voice" has been so skewed that it almost returns to its pre quotation mark state. By transcribing it, Landers reveals the tectonics which have formed and deformed him. Coming later than the others he has the most to lose because he has the least to work with. Even so, he continues. His hope and desire and dedication may be as great as those that came before, but he has even less place to go; authenticity and belief have receded further still. But he goes on.

The text works like Self-Something are like small, brightly colored jaw breakers. Sucking from layer to layer, the color changes as the text teeter totters from authenticity (blue) to self-consciousness (green) to delusions of grandeur (red) to impotence (white) and on and on until it dissolves and nothing is left, but to pick up another and start again. In the text and landscape works there are mountains of failure, seas of self-consciousness. Stand in front of a Landers long enough and the whole thing dissolves leaving the epic emptiness that Landers so persistently addresses.

In the November-December 1997 issue of Flash Art Wolf-Gunter Thiel developed the category of Synthetic Abstraction and the centrality of artificiality or simulation to it. Artificiality and simulation are germane to self-consciousness, failure and impotence too, but I would differ with Thiel and say that the history of art is not the history of simulation, but of failure. Every simulation is a tacit acknowledgment of both failure and secondariness. The recognition of being too late and therefore unable to recapture what has come before, results inevitably in the self-consciousness from which failure and impotence spring.

When the storm cleared I was once again at the rim of the Abyss. Directly across I could make out the layers of rock of the opposite wall; from the 1.7 billion year old Vishnu Schist to the pale caprock Kaibab Limestone deposited 250 million years ago, to the 1 million year old black lava flows, and onto the mud that covered my shoes. Nearly half the earth's 4.6 billion year history was on display there. It took a mere 4 to 6 million years to cut through it. The 6,000 foot deep, 10 mile wide gorge that is Grand Canyon is the result of the inability of materials to withstand the lapping assault of the Colorado River and maintain their physical integrity. Even the Grand Canyon is an epic monument to the grandness of Failure.

Dion Kliner New York 1998
First published in Flash Art, Summer Issue, Vol. XXXI, number 201.

A Tale of Two Spheres

A Tale of Two Spheres
Seeing is Believing: 700 Year of Scientific and Medical Illustration.

Everything which I have thus far accepted as entirely true and assured has been acquired from the senses or by means of the senses. But I have learned by experience that these senses sometimes mislead me, and it is prudent never to trust wholly those things which have once deceived us.
Rene Descartes, Philosophical Essays, First Meditation, Concerning Things That Can Be Doubted.

On the first snowy day of the year, while on the subway to the New York Public Library's exhibition Seeing Is Believing: 700 Years of Scientific and Medical Illustration, I began thinking of the relationship between image and text, and the jejune aphorism a picture's worth a thousand words slowly floated into my head. No matter how hackneyed, when it comes to the phenomenal world, it's one thing to write about the inner workings of the human body, or what a flea looks like up close, or the order of strata in a geologic formation, but to see a rendering or a photograph is to understand it more deeply, more quickly. And as in the classic example of trying to describe the color blue to someone who's never seen it, sometimes there is no substitute.

One of the stated subjects of Seeing Is Believing is the importance of illustration in the progress of science. To convey this, the New York Public Library has brought together hundreds of artifacts covering the 13th through the beginning of the 20th century from the four research centers of the Library's vast collections, as well as materials loaned from The New York Academy of Medicine. Beginning with a section entitled Medieval Worldview, further division is made not chronologically, but by field: Natural History, Medicine, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, Astronomy, and Illustration Processes - an informative section detailing many of the methods seen throughout. What is made clear is that illustration and science were roped together like mountaineers during their parallel development. The move from a style of drawing that could be described as speculative and decorative to one more factual and descriptive coincided with the development of knowledge from anecdotally based evidence to evidence based on direct observation and experimentation during the mid-16th century.

Wandering slowly from field to field in the subdued lighting, case after glass case presents itself filled with books each open to a page that includes an illustration. They're all here. All the luminaries of Western science, and some not as well known: the work of Andreas Vesalius, who in 1543 established the process of direct observation for human anatomy; John James Audubon's color-plate "Iceland or Jer Falcon" from The Birds of America (1860-61) is perched near Sir Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology: being an attempt to explain the former changes of the Earth's surface, by reference to causes now in operation (1830-33), one of the first arguments in favor of the principle of gradual change over that of catastrophic change - the effect is seismic; and of course Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859).

Less familiar, and the more interesting for being so, is a woodcut from Dell'historia naturale (1599) considered the first printed illustration of the precursor of the modern museum: several men stand in the library of the pharmacist Ferrante Imperato, a room filled with shelves of books. Every other surface is covered with specimens representing all the phyla, the ceiling dominated by a large crocodile which hangs above their heads. Next to Dell'historia naturale is Robert Hooke's giant engraving of a flea from Micrographia, or, Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies Made by Magnifying Glasses (1665), the first book devoted to reproductions of microscopical observations.

In a case of its own is Photographs of British Algae: Cyanotype Impressions (1843-53), a book containing the work of Anna Atkins, the first woman photographer. Nearby are albumen print photographs by Guillaume-Benjamin-Armand Duchenne from Mecanisme de la Physionomie humaine, ou analyse electrophysiologique de l'expression des passions...(1876) in which Duchenne hooked electrodes to his subjects' faces to deliver an electric current that would trace the neurological paths in the muscles that produce expressions of emotion.

Halfway through the exhibition I realize how much time has passed and how little I mind. The room has become crowded yet remains strangely quiet. We seem to have become hypnotized by the worlds being presented. A docent steps near with her group and points out a work of Louis Pasteur containing a wood engraving of the first X-ray image of a full skeleton by William Konrad Rontgen from 1896. I move on and find Marie Sklodowska Curie's Rescherches sur les substances radioactives (1904), a halftone photograph showing the effects of beta and gamma rays through nonmetallic substances, and Henry Honeychurch Gorringe's Egyptian Obelisks with photographs detailing how he erected the obelisk outside the Metropolitan Museum of Art in Central Park. Close by, a single case has made strange bedfellows of Sir Issac Newton's Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica (1687) and Edwin A. Abbott's Flatland (1884) a geometric Alice in Wonderland. Towards the end I find an illustration and a name that have long captivated me. The image is an engraving showing the direct relationship between the number, size, and arrangement of the planetary orbits and the five regular geometric solids is from The Cosmographic Mystery (1596) the first published work of Johannes Kepler. The name is Galileo Galilei whose The Starry Messenger (1653) is opened to an engraving of the Pleiades.

There are a lot of firsts in Seeing Is Believing even if they aren't all first editions. These are powerful, moving documents not for the advance in empirical knowledge or scientific method that they represent, but for what they say about the human spirit and the strength of individual thought. It is impossible to look at Galileo, for instance, and not think of his trials before the Inquisition. For some of these early scientists the risk wasn't a question of success or failure, it was a matter of life and death.

A Tale of Two Spheres

Three illustrations summarize and characterize the trajectory of the long and varied relationship of seeing and believing which is stated so emphatically in the title. Entering the exhibition, the first display contains a manuscript of Joannes de Sacro Bosco, Comptus, quadrans, de sphaera algorismus (1275) showing an illustration of the Medieval cosmos hand-painted and illuminated on vellum. Just two cases and 20 feet away, but separated by a gulf of unfathomable dimensions, is Nicolaus Copernicus' On the Revolution of the Heavenly Spheres (1543) with a simple woodcut of the most famed illustration of Western science. Graphically similar, these two diagrams demonstrate the deceptively simple power of illustration. Each composed of a sphere ringed by concentric circles, the first shows the Earth at the center of the universe. The second has the sun in this central position. Erase the text from both books, leaving only these two illustrations, and the earthshaking effect would be the same. The shift from a world defined by what we believe to one defined by what we see is radically there.

Notwithstanding the philosophical skepticism of Descartes and others like him, at one time - during which Copernicus drew his version of the spheres and for centuries afterwards - seeing was believing. Before and after the relationship has been more strained. In a side case of the Medieval Worldview is an anonymous book titled Antichrist (1482) with a hand-colored woodcut which is probably the earliest illustration of a Cesarean section. Demons attend the birth. It didn't matter that demons had probably never been seen. For a long time it didn't matter what we saw. We didn't believe our eyes because we believed even more strongly that there were overwhelming powers, like the Devil, that could play tricks on our eyes and deceive us.

Since the late 19th century, our manipulation of the processes of illustration has become more skillful. What began with staged and doctored photographs and developed into film clips of UFOs, has become computer generated images and a movie like Wag the Dog where a whole fictional conflict is created by a Hollywood producer. After 700 years of the development of trust in direct observation, we are beginning once again to doubt what we see. We still believe that there are overwhelming powers out there to deceive us, but they have been secularized into the powers of Government, Big Business, Advertising, and the Media.

By the time I emerged from the library back onto 42nd and 5th Avenue, the snow had begun to drift as had my thoughts, through 700 years of staggering human achievement. Passing the stone lions that flank the main entrance, I overheard a woman who had just seen the exhibition say to her friend, This isn't a library, it's a jewelry store. Every case is full of gems.

Dion Kliner New York 2000

Saturday, May 07, 2005


Graham Gillmore - Ploy

Through the gallery’s window, the painting was unmistakably Graham Gillmore’s. The surface was sultry red and the distinctively routered text promised Girls Girls Girls, but like all such come-ons, this one was a ploy, his exhibition is riddled with them. Fold - ins (Ploy) is a small work made by folding a cover of Playboy to get the titular Ploy. Twenty-five similar works arranged in a cluster show other gleefully maligned printed matter from which Gillmore has teased a Clit, a Canadian Ho, and an Anal Hic. Another version of Fold - ins (Ploy) makes an appearance in the painting Ploy. This is Gillmore’s Johnsian summation of his work to this point, and a glimpse of what will follow. Beneath his characteristic red and blue texts, in this case the broken English of Russian mail order brides looped through the sexual preferences of “men seeking women”, and atop his familiar ledger pages, are reproductions from a book on taxidermy, a small version of a masonite painting that transforms Mondrian to wet dream, and numerous other allusions. Towards the bottom of this picture the quality of paint changes and is continued in the pictures which face it. Road Block and In This Group have Gillmore throwing caution to the wind as he pushes material around with a robust painterliness. The texts in these are fully frontal so the space is a shallow text over paint over paper over canvas. Constant here and throughout Gillmore’s work over the years is the singularity of the voice heard in texts which are by turns humorous, and expressive of the uncertainty, difficulty, and fragility of the human condition, and of the tenuous relations that exist between us, so that even in the epic Ploy one can find “this is the epitome of everything that sucks”.

Dion Kliner Vancouver 2004
Published in Flash Art, May - June, Vol.XXXVII, No.236.


Sunday, May 01, 2005

Etienne Zack

Looking at the paintings of Etienne Zack makes me think of the thing which I love, which is art. They don't make me think about thinking about art, they elicit the joy of looking at art together with the remembrance of similar occasions past. The reminder isn't of other artists, but about them, and about the experience of having looked at them.  

Spending Time shows an interior.  Alternating bands of pink and yellow insulation sit between the studs of a framed wall with red and blue wiring running through.  A tile floor runs in diagonals towards it.  I recognize the scene as a construction site, but it has the orange flush of a Bonnard.  In front of the wall sits a grayish boxy object with drawing on it which doesn't seem to belong.  Many of the pictures have an object that seems plunked in.  Most have been made by Zack and then painted into remembered sites.  They hover like something coming into or maybe fading from memory and being captured as it does - like coalesced ideas.  To the right is a wooden block with nails partially set in.  Nails appear in four other of Zack's pictures.  Through them the memory of the nails of 17th and 18th century trompe l'oeil still life painters like William Harnett, those of the cubist canvasses of Picasso and Braque, and the nails of Guston all come into consciousness.  

This isn't to say that Zack isn't making pictures which are distinctly his own because he is.  It's that while looking at them one feels the warm glow of history.  What Zack does isn't new.  It isn't shocking or spectacular.  Yet what he does is so little seen and felt as to make it remarkable.