Saturday, August 26, 2006
That's Nott Art!
Art isn't everyone's bag. One of the unique aspects of a visual art exhibit, is that it may be one of the only times when the audience is required to think. Whereas the general public seem content to veg in front of the tube or the silver screen, art shows draw a more select following. Opening night at the Bonington Gallery illustrated this fact. Their last exhibit, intersection Nottingham, was intended in the words of curator/organiser Sorrel Muggridge, "...to initiate a dialogue between artists". What she hadn't counted on was input from a disgruntled visitor.
After the opening, artists and common folk alike were invited back to attend three workshops run by artists from the show. Michael Bowdidge headed a lecture of sorts on deconstruction theory which gradually digressed into an open discussion about responses to the show from opening night. While the comment book had been generally overlooked, remarks heard in passing had implied it was the best thing many of the guests had seen at Bonington in a while. Jeannie Clark, another featured artist, offered a different perspective. She'd invited several of her friends who were not art enthusiasts so much as they were there to show a friend support. One of these women had expressed her frustration over not understanding what the artists were trying to say. When Jeannie would explain something her friend became even more irritated and said, "Well why couldn't they just say that?"
Upon hearing this Michael asserted that all the audience needed to know was in the statements each artist submitted for the program. Michael's submission reads: "I am interested in breaking down identity and reclaiming and transforming the overlooked...Something always happens, usually the unexpected." His piece included a wooden construction mounted on the wall with a passage printed on the floor below. The passage described plaques found on Maid Marian Way and St. James Street commemorating stays there by the Duc de Tallard and Lord Byron, respectively. The string of facts tied neatly together as the Duc was a POW from the battle of Blenheim and Byron's longstanding rival Southey penned a poem called 'The Battle of Blenheim'. A nice 'unexpected' link between two residences in Nottingham. The key here, however, was the viewer picking up on the link and the suggestion of the unexpected in the statement.
Other voices from around the table insisted individual interpretation was surely meant to play a part. Didn't the artist communicate everything the viewer needed to know in the information provided? What was the artist's responsibility to the viewer? Complaints like this obviously frustrated the artist who felt the job was done. Yet consider the position the complaint came from. For someone unfamiliar with openings and indeed contemporary art in general, how easy would it be to feel ignorant or unsure in a room full of people who seem to get it all? By saying the show was the best thing they'd seen at Bonington in a while, the satisfied guests revealed the fact that they frequented the gallery. They had a relationship with the space. Additionally many were connected to Trent* and had experience working in the art department or even with artists in intersection. Bad enough having to read something, never mind doing so in a gathering of the initiated.
The pieces in Bonington were created by the artists to illustrate their personal takes on areas of Nottingham. They were not geared specifically to satisfy the audience, a fact that places a sharp divide between them and what was on television or at the cinema that night. Questions like that of Jeannie's friend are essential to a visual artist, giving much needed feedback on the work. The fear of 'getting it wrong' should not be a deter people from galleries. Nor should viewers' confusion irritate artists. intersection succeeded as Sorrel had hoped in initiating dialogue between artists, but went beyond to address a more important discussion- the ever present exchange between artist and audience.
*The Bonington Gallery is part of Nottingham Trent University's School of Art and Design
After the opening, artists and common folk alike were invited back to attend three workshops run by artists from the show. Michael Bowdidge headed a lecture of sorts on deconstruction theory which gradually digressed into an open discussion about responses to the show from opening night. While the comment book had been generally overlooked, remarks heard in passing had implied it was the best thing many of the guests had seen at Bonington in a while. Jeannie Clark, another featured artist, offered a different perspective. She'd invited several of her friends who were not art enthusiasts so much as they were there to show a friend support. One of these women had expressed her frustration over not understanding what the artists were trying to say. When Jeannie would explain something her friend became even more irritated and said, "Well why couldn't they just say that?"
Upon hearing this Michael asserted that all the audience needed to know was in the statements each artist submitted for the program. Michael's submission reads: "I am interested in breaking down identity and reclaiming and transforming the overlooked...Something always happens, usually the unexpected." His piece included a wooden construction mounted on the wall with a passage printed on the floor below. The passage described plaques found on Maid Marian Way and St. James Street commemorating stays there by the Duc de Tallard and Lord Byron, respectively. The string of facts tied neatly together as the Duc was a POW from the battle of Blenheim and Byron's longstanding rival Southey penned a poem called 'The Battle of Blenheim'. A nice 'unexpected' link between two residences in Nottingham. The key here, however, was the viewer picking up on the link and the suggestion of the unexpected in the statement.
Other voices from around the table insisted individual interpretation was surely meant to play a part. Didn't the artist communicate everything the viewer needed to know in the information provided? What was the artist's responsibility to the viewer? Complaints like this obviously frustrated the artist who felt the job was done. Yet consider the position the complaint came from. For someone unfamiliar with openings and indeed contemporary art in general, how easy would it be to feel ignorant or unsure in a room full of people who seem to get it all? By saying the show was the best thing they'd seen at Bonington in a while, the satisfied guests revealed the fact that they frequented the gallery. They had a relationship with the space. Additionally many were connected to Trent* and had experience working in the art department or even with artists in intersection. Bad enough having to read something, never mind doing so in a gathering of the initiated.
The pieces in Bonington were created by the artists to illustrate their personal takes on areas of Nottingham. They were not geared specifically to satisfy the audience, a fact that places a sharp divide between them and what was on television or at the cinema that night. Questions like that of Jeannie's friend are essential to a visual artist, giving much needed feedback on the work. The fear of 'getting it wrong' should not be a deter people from galleries. Nor should viewers' confusion irritate artists. intersection succeeded as Sorrel had hoped in initiating dialogue between artists, but went beyond to address a more important discussion- the ever present exchange between artist and audience.
*The Bonington Gallery is part of Nottingham Trent University's School of Art and Design
# posted by Kielty @ 9:20 AM 
