(under) Exposed at Carl Hammer Gallery, was a sort of pupu platter of contemporary work. Work ranged from a painting of refugees by Grace Graupe Pillard to a dodecahedron of “Cloud Gate” by Nathaniel Smyth. While it is difficult to judge the show as a whole because of the disparity of work, there were a few artists who stood out amongst the pack.
Alex Fleming's Flying Carpets were tucked away behind the gallery desk and didn't receive the visibility they deserve. The work consisted of two Persian rugs cut into the shape of airplanes. While the two were similar, the more successful was when the carpet was cut to mimic the interior forms of the plane. Whereas the other just seemed to be two scrap pieces combined to fill the space. Fleming's work addresses the issue of globalization in a very simple yet sophisticated way.
South Korean artist, Seung Wook Sim, displayed the work Black Mutated Ornamentation. The piece was a black, oblong blob consisting of layered hot glue on top of a non-visible metal structure. While the work itself is nothing new (actually somewhat reminiscent of some Eva Hesse work), it was a great opportunity to see some of the work coming out of Korea.
The most exciting pieces in the show came from artist Rebecca Kardong. Her works Reverse Alchemy and Inverted Void look like two cherubs gone horribly wrong. The works, which are an extension of her early work with dolls and figurines, are like over exaggerations of fleshy baby dolls. The figures bulge and twist in a way that show off Kardong's strong knowledge of anatomy, to the point she can manipulate it into a believable contorted form. The forms are finished of with iridescent coats of paint, which contribute too their eeriness. I was impressed by what I saw of Kardong's work in the gallery and then online, I highly recommend you take a look.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Framework
Framework, a show hosted by the David Weinberg Gallery, featured the sculpture of Bob Emser and photography of David Weinberg. Overall, the two artists' work complemented each other well, because the general focus of both bodies of work is the breaking down and building up of structures into their component parts. While this was the focus, the most interesting aspect of all the work was the interaction between structure and light.
Bob Emser's work consisted of maquettes for larger public sculptures, and sculptural wall hangings. His materials include steel, wood, and glass and create an overall industrial feel that is furthered by his minimalist, clean lined construction. The work itself is a microcosm of architecture and design, and begins to address the question as to how these differ from fine art. As stated above, the element of light is what gives Emser's work life. The shadows created by the work are probably the most interesting aspect of the work. The level at which some of the sculptures were hung became very distracting. They quickly went from art to shelves when hung at eye level. While the work borrows from design and architecture, I don't think it wants to mimic it exactly, so next time just hang it a little higher to avoid misinterpretation.
David Weinberg's black and white photographs are abstract images of buildings. His works, which are titled Deconstruction and assigned a number, rely on making the familiar unfamiliar. He does so by photographing reflections of buildings, or zooming in on different parts of a structure to eliminate their use and focus on their form. Part of the fun of looking at his work, is trying to figure out exactly what is being photographed. In one of the secondary gallery rooms there is a photograph of an entire greenhouse that explains what the other photographs are of, and really ruins part of the experience. The strength of his work is really in not knowing, and having to appreciate form itself.
Framework was a successful show. The work complemented each other well, and worked towards a common goal. However, the minimal aesthetic combined with notions of construction and destruction, and industrial materials really make for a masculine feeling show.
Bob Emser's work consisted of maquettes for larger public sculptures, and sculptural wall hangings. His materials include steel, wood, and glass and create an overall industrial feel that is furthered by his minimalist, clean lined construction. The work itself is a microcosm of architecture and design, and begins to address the question as to how these differ from fine art. As stated above, the element of light is what gives Emser's work life. The shadows created by the work are probably the most interesting aspect of the work. The level at which some of the sculptures were hung became very distracting. They quickly went from art to shelves when hung at eye level. While the work borrows from design and architecture, I don't think it wants to mimic it exactly, so next time just hang it a little higher to avoid misinterpretation.
David Weinberg's black and white photographs are abstract images of buildings. His works, which are titled Deconstruction and assigned a number, rely on making the familiar unfamiliar. He does so by photographing reflections of buildings, or zooming in on different parts of a structure to eliminate their use and focus on their form. Part of the fun of looking at his work, is trying to figure out exactly what is being photographed. In one of the secondary gallery rooms there is a photograph of an entire greenhouse that explains what the other photographs are of, and really ruins part of the experience. The strength of his work is really in not knowing, and having to appreciate form itself.
Framework was a successful show. The work complemented each other well, and worked towards a common goal. However, the minimal aesthetic combined with notions of construction and destruction, and industrial materials really make for a masculine feeling show.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Gallery KH
Gallery KH's latest show celebrates new work from artists Michael Fitts and Cristine Guerrero. While both artists have very different content and style, the ways in which they paint are very similar to one another. In both cases, the artists paint on flat backgrounds; Guerrero on stark white and Fitts on scrap metal. The two also paint in a photo-realistic way. While from there on, the two bodies of work diverge, these common denominators make for a solid pairing.
One man's trash is Michael Fitts's treasure. His body of work consists of paintings of throw away items on pieces of metal. The subjects, which were meant to be hauled off to the garbage dump to eventually decay, are now memorialized on a material that will span the test of time. Items Fitts has chosen to freeze frame include a Twinkie package, paper planes, a popcorn box, and dress patterns. While the other subjects are classic items that resist dating, the dress patterns are clearly from the 1960's era. They also stand out because the subject matter being painted is flat and more readily shows flaws in creating form, making these works appear less realistic than the others. Overall though, Fitts's body of work is a very poignant way of addressing throw-away culture.
Cristine Guerrero's work consists of several pairs of images in which the formal elements mimic each other. In Dulce IV, a woman wearing a shiny-red dress with a sweetheart neckline is matched up with a red heart-shaped lollipop. Fresquita Como Una Rosa II pairs a pink frilly skirt with a pink rose. A woman's behind is paired with ice cream in Quedarse Helado. These and all the other works juxtapose parts of women's bodies with food, flowers, or objects from traditional women's work (i.e. sewing needles). The work has good intentions in addressing the commodification of parts of the female anatomy and clothing contributing to this, but the way the work is executed takes away from the content. Each juxtaposition is created by accentuating common formal elements between the two images, and the work goes directly to the same sort of strategy used in advertising a few years back.
One man's trash is Michael Fitts's treasure. His body of work consists of paintings of throw away items on pieces of metal. The subjects, which were meant to be hauled off to the garbage dump to eventually decay, are now memorialized on a material that will span the test of time. Items Fitts has chosen to freeze frame include a Twinkie package, paper planes, a popcorn box, and dress patterns. While the other subjects are classic items that resist dating, the dress patterns are clearly from the 1960's era. They also stand out because the subject matter being painted is flat and more readily shows flaws in creating form, making these works appear less realistic than the others. Overall though, Fitts's body of work is a very poignant way of addressing throw-away culture.
Cristine Guerrero's work consists of several pairs of images in which the formal elements mimic each other. In Dulce IV, a woman wearing a shiny-red dress with a sweetheart neckline is matched up with a red heart-shaped lollipop. Fresquita Como Una Rosa II pairs a pink frilly skirt with a pink rose. A woman's behind is paired with ice cream in Quedarse Helado. These and all the other works juxtapose parts of women's bodies with food, flowers, or objects from traditional women's work (i.e. sewing needles). The work has good intentions in addressing the commodification of parts of the female anatomy and clothing contributing to this, but the way the work is executed takes away from the content. Each juxtaposition is created by accentuating common formal elements between the two images, and the work goes directly to the same sort of strategy used in advertising a few years back.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Magnificent Mile Arts Festival
The Magnificent Mile Arts Festival was a major let down to say the least. I had good expectations for it, considering it was a juried show, but left thinking , “Who's responsible for this mess?”
The general set up of the festival was not clear. It was easy to navigate, but there was no flow or continuity from tent to tent. The show had painting, photography, sculpture, and jewelry. It felt really odd going from a jewelry tent into a painting tent. It seemed like it was set up so there were different types of work sprinkled everywhere, but it failed to create any sense of unity within the festival as a whole.
The show featured very traditional work, and didn't try to push the envelope. It was weighed down by paintings of landscapes/seascapes, flowers, and abstract work. One of the most interesting phenomena I noticed were a number of “self-taught” women painting in a type of abstract expressionist style (wrong gender and 70 years too late). The show ignores art movements from the second half of the 20th century, let alone post-modernism. The show just felt very pedestrian, and like connoisseurship was put on hold so the work would appeal to a greater audience base (and most likely have a greater chance of selling). However, to show watered down work to people only perpetuates the “my five year old could make that” attitude towards contemporary work. I'm not saying the whole show needed to be super progressive, but maybe challenge the viewers (just a little)?
On top of expecting a higher caliber of art, because it was a juried show, I expected the artists to be there to talk. I don't know the exact rules for being nominated, but I do know they are expected to show. However, a number of artists were not there; some had a friend or family member in their place (who typically didn't know much about the work) and others had no one. I feel like if you're going to have proxies at the festival, you might as well just have gallerists representing their clients work.
There was good art there, but it was overshadowed by the festival's faults. I will do those artists a favor and not mention their names. The names I should be mentioning are the jurors, but unfortunately I couldn't get a hold of them.
The general set up of the festival was not clear. It was easy to navigate, but there was no flow or continuity from tent to tent. The show had painting, photography, sculpture, and jewelry. It felt really odd going from a jewelry tent into a painting tent. It seemed like it was set up so there were different types of work sprinkled everywhere, but it failed to create any sense of unity within the festival as a whole.
The show featured very traditional work, and didn't try to push the envelope. It was weighed down by paintings of landscapes/seascapes, flowers, and abstract work. One of the most interesting phenomena I noticed were a number of “self-taught” women painting in a type of abstract expressionist style (wrong gender and 70 years too late). The show ignores art movements from the second half of the 20th century, let alone post-modernism. The show just felt very pedestrian, and like connoisseurship was put on hold so the work would appeal to a greater audience base (and most likely have a greater chance of selling). However, to show watered down work to people only perpetuates the “my five year old could make that” attitude towards contemporary work. I'm not saying the whole show needed to be super progressive, but maybe challenge the viewers (just a little)?
On top of expecting a higher caliber of art, because it was a juried show, I expected the artists to be there to talk. I don't know the exact rules for being nominated, but I do know they are expected to show. However, a number of artists were not there; some had a friend or family member in their place (who typically didn't know much about the work) and others had no one. I feel like if you're going to have proxies at the festival, you might as well just have gallerists representing their clients work.
There was good art there, but it was overshadowed by the festival's faults. I will do those artists a favor and not mention their names. The names I should be mentioning are the jurors, but unfortunately I couldn't get a hold of them.
Kasia Kay Summer Show
The work on show as part of the Kasia Kay Art Projects Gallery's summer show was all top notch. Amongst the work there was a black plexiglass cutout of a chandelier by Sandra Bermudez, a gouache and collage piece on paper by Diane Christiansen and Jason Dunda, and figurines by Duncan Anderson (with a title like Mercy Killing (once you realize it's pointless, it's easier that way) forcible, fatal anesthetization of inconsolable, irrational ghost: dismembering and disbanding pleasant but useless and irrelevant memories), how could you go wrong?).
The artist who really stood out from the rest of the pack was Maleonn. His photographs were playful, whimsical, and nostalgic. Days on the Cotton Candy #1, shows a woman standing inside a tub, in a giant bathroom. She's holding a vacuum and looking surprised as it produces clouds of cotton candy. Postman 1 shows a postman, with his bicycle and parachute, about to jump off the roof of a building. In both pieces, the incorporation of older objects like the vacuum cleaner, bicycle, and suitcase add a nostalgic feel to the photos, which is then furthered by the dusty color saturation. The contraptions and their functions feel a little Michel Gondry-esque, and are equally as fun as his work. The photographs are very sweet and whimsical, but with just enough edge and uncertainty.
The artist who really stood out from the rest of the pack was Maleonn. His photographs were playful, whimsical, and nostalgic. Days on the Cotton Candy #1, shows a woman standing inside a tub, in a giant bathroom. She's holding a vacuum and looking surprised as it produces clouds of cotton candy. Postman 1 shows a postman, with his bicycle and parachute, about to jump off the roof of a building. In both pieces, the incorporation of older objects like the vacuum cleaner, bicycle, and suitcase add a nostalgic feel to the photos, which is then furthered by the dusty color saturation. The contraptions and their functions feel a little Michel Gondry-esque, and are equally as fun as his work. The photographs are very sweet and whimsical, but with just enough edge and uncertainty.
Interactive @ Woman Made
Interactive was curated by Karen Hamner, a Chicago based book artist, and hence book art was well represented in the show. Book artists such as Alex Appella, Lucy Childs, Amanda Meeks, and others were represented. Book art seems like too easy a solution for the prerequisite “interactive,” and hence the show's more interesting work took other forms.
Abstract Hexaflexagon: To and Fro, In and Out, was a combined effort between Susan Finsen and Jane Bortnick Griffin, in which one painted the object and the other created the form. It is a hexagon that the viewer can manipulate in order to create different ways of viewing the abstract surface. In this way, the viewer becomes the third contributer to the project.
Catherine Blackwell Pena had two works in the show: Viewers of Views and Visual Green. Both critique the ways in which experiences are constructed for people, by creating ways for viewer to experience her work. In Viewers of Views the patron is invited to stand on a cement platform to view a photograph of someone standing on a cement platform to view a landscape. The work invokes ideas of the construction of tourism, and the notion of “must see” sites and of certain ways of viewing them. This idea carries back into the gallery, in that the work is chosen for a show, tacked on the wall, and expected to be viewed a certain way. Visual Green is a photograph of a couple having a picnic on a grassy median in a city locale, and then extends into the gallery with a patch of grass surrounded by a street curb. The misuse of a designated space again address institution, but in a more successful way than her first work. In Viewers of Views the act of going along with the plan is so natural that the intent can be lost on some, but the breaking of rules in Visual Green makes the content more apparent.
One of the most interesting works in the show, was unfortunately hidden downstairs. For the Birds, by Jessica Witte invites viewers to take her work outside the gallery FOR FREE!The work consists of two different types of birdseed arranged in a type of doily arrangement, as a record of the artists labor, and then invites viewers to rearrange it and create their own images and/or take the birdseeds outside the gallery and feed birds. The concept of interactivity in this piece is great, but the preciousness of her designs makes participating feel more like destroying.
On top of Interactive, The Woman Made Gallery is also hosting a solo show for Kong Xin Shi, a Buddhist nun. Her work addresses one of the three Buddhist Three Marks of Reality: change. The show features a setup of beautifully arranged stones at the center, which is surrounded by works of forms evolving. Her work Who I Am is a morphing of a nose into a kite form sprouting hands, and then to a body, and this morphing is continued in all the other forms. The highlight of the exhibit was a sculpture titled Here I Am, that consisted of an old sink dripping water that morphed into a human like form, that was then dripping snot that was flowing down the drain. The mood of the exhibit was very serene and joyous, and it was a pleasure just to sit and enjoy.
Abstract Hexaflexagon: To and Fro, In and Out, was a combined effort between Susan Finsen and Jane Bortnick Griffin, in which one painted the object and the other created the form. It is a hexagon that the viewer can manipulate in order to create different ways of viewing the abstract surface. In this way, the viewer becomes the third contributer to the project.
Catherine Blackwell Pena had two works in the show: Viewers of Views and Visual Green. Both critique the ways in which experiences are constructed for people, by creating ways for viewer to experience her work. In Viewers of Views the patron is invited to stand on a cement platform to view a photograph of someone standing on a cement platform to view a landscape. The work invokes ideas of the construction of tourism, and the notion of “must see” sites and of certain ways of viewing them. This idea carries back into the gallery, in that the work is chosen for a show, tacked on the wall, and expected to be viewed a certain way. Visual Green is a photograph of a couple having a picnic on a grassy median in a city locale, and then extends into the gallery with a patch of grass surrounded by a street curb. The misuse of a designated space again address institution, but in a more successful way than her first work. In Viewers of Views the act of going along with the plan is so natural that the intent can be lost on some, but the breaking of rules in Visual Green makes the content more apparent.
One of the most interesting works in the show, was unfortunately hidden downstairs. For the Birds, by Jessica Witte invites viewers to take her work outside the gallery FOR FREE!The work consists of two different types of birdseed arranged in a type of doily arrangement, as a record of the artists labor, and then invites viewers to rearrange it and create their own images and/or take the birdseeds outside the gallery and feed birds. The concept of interactivity in this piece is great, but the preciousness of her designs makes participating feel more like destroying.
On top of Interactive, The Woman Made Gallery is also hosting a solo show for Kong Xin Shi, a Buddhist nun. Her work addresses one of the three Buddhist Three Marks of Reality: change. The show features a setup of beautifully arranged stones at the center, which is surrounded by works of forms evolving. Her work Who I Am is a morphing of a nose into a kite form sprouting hands, and then to a body, and this morphing is continued in all the other forms. The highlight of the exhibit was a sculpture titled Here I Am, that consisted of an old sink dripping water that morphed into a human like form, that was then dripping snot that was flowing down the drain. The mood of the exhibit was very serene and joyous, and it was a pleasure just to sit and enjoy.
Taxonomies @ Thomas Robertello
Taxonomies at Thomas Robertello Gallery featured the work of Sarah Hicks and Peter Barrett. The two artists' work did not complement each other well, which was a shame because each body of work could look better if placed with something else. The title Taxonomies also has to be called into question; it applies readily to Hicks's work, but takes a bit of a stretch for Barrett's. Basically, the fault with the show lies in curation, not in the art itself.
Sarah Hicks ceramic work is both elegant and playful, and borders between decoration and toys. The work, which is divided between “spores” and “specimens” distorts the familiar and sheds new light on the everyday. Hicks takes ordinary objects, casts them in ceramic, and rearranges their parts. She uses a color palette that seems to draw from contemporary interior colors, but arranges them in an unexpected way. Some pieces are glazed so carefully they resemble the skin of an apple or grape, and are absolutely wonderful. The smooth surfaces of the work is contrasted with tiny dots carefully arranged so as to look like mechanical mold. Some of the pieces displayed by themselves on the wall are interesting, but Hicks's work has the most impact when several of the pieces are arranged together, like they were on a mirror at the center of the gallery.
Peter Barrett's work can easily be written off as op-art. Within the several hexagons around the gallery, he uses pattern and color to create illusions of form and movement on paper. What really supports his work is that it is all done by hand. The same outcome could be achieved quickly on the computer, but the fact that he made an arduous process of the work brings it to a new realm and questions what is an artist in the age of computers.
Sarah Hicks ceramic work is both elegant and playful, and borders between decoration and toys. The work, which is divided between “spores” and “specimens” distorts the familiar and sheds new light on the everyday. Hicks takes ordinary objects, casts them in ceramic, and rearranges their parts. She uses a color palette that seems to draw from contemporary interior colors, but arranges them in an unexpected way. Some pieces are glazed so carefully they resemble the skin of an apple or grape, and are absolutely wonderful. The smooth surfaces of the work is contrasted with tiny dots carefully arranged so as to look like mechanical mold. Some of the pieces displayed by themselves on the wall are interesting, but Hicks's work has the most impact when several of the pieces are arranged together, like they were on a mirror at the center of the gallery.
Peter Barrett's work can easily be written off as op-art. Within the several hexagons around the gallery, he uses pattern and color to create illusions of form and movement on paper. What really supports his work is that it is all done by hand. The same outcome could be achieved quickly on the computer, but the fact that he made an arduous process of the work brings it to a new realm and questions what is an artist in the age of computers.
David Leonardis
Tucked away, just off Milwaukee Avenue in Wicker Park, sits the David Leonardis Gallery. The gallery is small on space, but takes advantage of every bit of wall space by hanging work from floor to ceiling. Upon first walking in, visual overload takes hold which is only furthered by trying to figure out which work is what from the gallery listing. After deciphering the gallery list, it becomes clear there is some method to the madness. The chaos helps support a lot of the work in the gallery, which mainly draws from popular culture icons. The visual bombardment mimics what we experience in everyday life. Amongst the hodgepodge, three artists stand out for very different reasons: Sue Zola, Chris Peldo, and Laura Collins.
Sue Zola's work is small in scale and executed using glitter. Her choice in material, colors and subject matter make the work seem childish, in the best way possible. Three of her works feature cupcakes at the center with 60's inspired patterns in the background. The background colors are either orange and gold or green and blue, and clash with the cupcakes. All her choices are nostalgic, naive, and indulgent to the point of sugary. This holds true with Lucky Charms and Kiss as well. Zola's work straddles the line between kitsch and too much, in a way that feels as much like idolatry as it does a social critique.
Chris Peldo, has the most work in the gallery. His works range from small scale screen prints of layered pop imagery to frames filled with everyday things. His smaller works are much stronger than his larger ones. The sheer amount of images piled into a small space, addresses the issue of pop culture much more readily. In his larger works, Peldo fills the frames with garbage and Heineken bottle caps. The frame fillers seem very contrived. In Garbage Head and Garbage Cross the 'garbage' doesn't feel candid, its clear Peldo combed through his trash and selected things to try and create an image for himself. The Heineken caps give the same sort of vibe, although hats off if he drank all those on his own. His work also has a reoccurring theme of heads with mapped out brains, but the labels change from head to head. For two heads placed next to each other its interesting to compare the differences, but when almost all of his larger scale work is this its redundant and becomes boring really quick.
Laura Collins work stands out, because its not pop or kitsch, but rather rooted in real life. Collins has a washy style of painting, that shows off her great brushwork. Her work includes two paintings Sunburn and Untitled, and a series titled Fight. All are reminders of the body and flesh, and their part in life and death. Sunburn is an image of a woman's torso that has been burned in a yellow bikini bottom, and set against a stark white background. Untitled is a black and white painting of two skeletons huddled together, and is executed in a very graphic style. Her series Fight features several vignettes of women fighting with one another in public places. The works become a type of competition to see which was the juiciest fight, while at the same time bringing up the issue of how women relate to one another. Collins's work strikes an equal balance between content and appearance.
Sue Zola's work is small in scale and executed using glitter. Her choice in material, colors and subject matter make the work seem childish, in the best way possible. Three of her works feature cupcakes at the center with 60's inspired patterns in the background. The background colors are either orange and gold or green and blue, and clash with the cupcakes. All her choices are nostalgic, naive, and indulgent to the point of sugary. This holds true with Lucky Charms and Kiss as well. Zola's work straddles the line between kitsch and too much, in a way that feels as much like idolatry as it does a social critique.
Chris Peldo, has the most work in the gallery. His works range from small scale screen prints of layered pop imagery to frames filled with everyday things. His smaller works are much stronger than his larger ones. The sheer amount of images piled into a small space, addresses the issue of pop culture much more readily. In his larger works, Peldo fills the frames with garbage and Heineken bottle caps. The frame fillers seem very contrived. In Garbage Head and Garbage Cross the 'garbage' doesn't feel candid, its clear Peldo combed through his trash and selected things to try and create an image for himself. The Heineken caps give the same sort of vibe, although hats off if he drank all those on his own. His work also has a reoccurring theme of heads with mapped out brains, but the labels change from head to head. For two heads placed next to each other its interesting to compare the differences, but when almost all of his larger scale work is this its redundant and becomes boring really quick.
Laura Collins work stands out, because its not pop or kitsch, but rather rooted in real life. Collins has a washy style of painting, that shows off her great brushwork. Her work includes two paintings Sunburn and Untitled, and a series titled Fight. All are reminders of the body and flesh, and their part in life and death. Sunburn is an image of a woman's torso that has been burned in a yellow bikini bottom, and set against a stark white background. Untitled is a black and white painting of two skeletons huddled together, and is executed in a very graphic style. Her series Fight features several vignettes of women fighting with one another in public places. The works become a type of competition to see which was the juiciest fight, while at the same time bringing up the issue of how women relate to one another. Collins's work strikes an equal balance between content and appearance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)