Out of the City and Into the Suburbs; "Thrashold", "Flames" and Faking It" at Highland Park Art Center.
Review by Kathryn Born
These are three separate, unconnected shows in the same center.
Flames: Burnt Drawings by David Gista
Let's start with Flames because I don't know anything about it except that it's done by French artist David Gista and made using "burning techniques".
Subtle, straightforward work that I suspect is difficult to execute based on the idea of controlled scorching. I'll add that the highly textured paper adds to the effect.
"Faking It?"
I'll also be brief because (full disclosure) Stephanie Burke wrote the essay and I could swear I've heard that name somewhere. But I will cut and paste a line from the handout that talks about images being "real" or "fake". "In portrait photography, this concept reflects the question of whether an image is truly documentary or in fact reveals a staged moment."
And in the game "real or fake" I vote "real" on the next one - because I live in the suburbs.
I agree there is a resurgence in photo-portraiture due to so many ordinary people now needing an equivalent of a "headshot". It becomes our only way to see what our Internet-only "friends" look like, and puts great pressure on a photo that will be the only indicator of who you are behind the screen.
More cut n' paste: Curated by Regina Mamou with an essay by Stephanie Burke, this exhibition challenges the notion of portraiture as capturing truth and how the line between fact and fiction is received. Featuring work by Chase Browder, Helen Maurene Cooper, Jill Frank, Seung Jae Kim, Jason Lazarus, Aspen Mays, Lindsay Page, Kurt Von Stetten, Scott Patrick Wiener and Krista Wortendyke.
"Thrashold" a group show by women artists
"Works by six Contemporary Women Artists. Participating artists include Ailine Cautis, Youni Chae, Dana DeGiulio, Judith Geichman, Kaylee Rae Wyant, and Molly Zuckerman-Hartung. Collaboratively - Curated by all the above artists - Organized by Judith Geichman."
The history is that these six women did a round-the-clock shift of continuous painting for a week, covering the walls and floors of Julius Caesar Gallery in June. Now they're together again in this overall strong group show.
But let me say this, and get it over with, knowing I'm perceived as a peasant for saying this, but here it is anyway:
I read some other reviews of Dana DeGiulio's work and there's a lot of emphasis on these paintings being an artifact of a spontaneous painting moment. But yikes, isn't that what all painting is about? Personally, I'm doing a text series where I scribble words, and I really have to get in the zone and scribble it out so it's just the right mix of flowing script and wild illegibility. It has to be scrawled fast, but I'll do the gesture twenty times until I get it right, and only use the best one. This one, I think, should have been left on the cutting room floor. (I've seen this painting before at Secrist and have hated those loops twice now)
And this one I like, it's balanced.
I mean, you can't win an argument about compositional principals, you can argue symmetry and subordination and the like, but the reality is that bad art can have solid color balance, be compositionally solid and look like something out of a "how to paint" book. Conversely, great artists break the rules to extreme degrees.
So arguing about paintings like this can be a catch-22 argument that dead ends by mumbling about intentionality I ask only this, knowing I'll get slaughtered for it: would these pieces stand up in a different context? Would you be able to pick them out as fine works in a school gym, or hotel art sale? You can judge me for bringing this up, but there is a statistical history of art critics not being able to discern the work of talented artists from those done by elephants (or cats, monkeys, or mice). Nuf said, now go ahead and attack at will in the comments.
This one is from Rowley Kennerk's Gallery, and it's different in real life than it appears in the photo, it's cutouts from a dropcloth and it sags in spots. And again, to go back to compositional setup, it's hard to argue against this piece. It's really very sensible and graceful.
I like the photograph by Jason Lazarus(?) pouring gasoline on the steps of the MCA. Well constructed and framed.
It bothered me that a couple of David Gista's burnt drawings were on the backside of the paper, but maybe that's just printmaker-nerdiness on my part. I liked the vaguely Cy Twombleyish freedom and the subtlety of deGuilio's black to white palette, but I am often attracted to gestural sloppiness because I can't do it myself. It always seems to me like something the cool kids can do (and pull off).
The crappy-painting thing only works when it pulls me in with some kind of charm or interest or it whistles at me or something. Almost none of what up at the Art Center (sorry, didn't go to art school - is there a better term than "crappy painting?")was sending out the right vibe.
i guess it depends on what kind of pedistal you put art on. if you concentrate on the name of the artist more than the work, then of course you're going to bring up an argument about people choosing work done by "unlearned" artists. but what difference does that make?
degiulio is a master at not knowing what she's doing, and is that not the best place to be?