I cannot say that I was overly thrilled about going to this artist lecture. For one, it was completely last minute. Well, when I say "last minute," I mean the fact that the school did not advertise for Phillip Andrew Lewis as they had with the previous artist, Mark Dion. So it did not shock me when I walked into the auditorium and practically found it empty (only a couple of rows were filled). So my initially impression was lowered just by noticing my surroundings. Honestly, this is a slap to Lewis's face who took the time to come to the school (he's an alumni for crying out loud) and then do his lecture to a couple of rows of people whereas other visiting artists practically had the auditorium packed!
But perhaps this was a blessing in disguise for him.
At first, it seemed he was nervous by saying "uh" a lot, but that happens to everyone. Later on in his lecture, he seemed to gain more confidence and even treated the audience as if they were close to him (not like friends that haven't seen each other for years, but close enough to actually hang out with him).
I will say in advance that I have been weary about this type of craft. When I think digital media, my mind usually goes to artists like Freddie Wong. So, when I saw the type of art Lewis does - I know, this is bad - I tend to roll my eyes. And the first pieces he showed did not help get rid of my attitude.
His piece, "Counterpoint," was a balloon that was close to the same color as the sky, flying to the cloudless sky. That was the video. And he was saying how he was making it so that a certain point, the viewer could not see the balloon anymore. Have you guys ever seen American Beauty? If you haven't, I recommend it, it is a fantastic movie. But there is one part of the movie that his pieces remind me of, and it would have to be the plastic bag scene. Don't worry, this part is not a huge spoiler (or really a spoiler at all except for the fact it was in the movie). Out of context, it would make no sense is what I'm trying to say.
Sometimes I see the point that the artist is trying to make...
And other times I just think that artists try to jam meaning in something that's, well, senseless!
Perhaps I'm being too rude about this. Perhaps I'm being too narrow-minded. So instead of just speaking of the result, I'll go a bit into depth about his process because that's what made the lecture more interesting. There were these landscape photographs that he took, far away from Memphis so that you couldn't see the city anymore. The photographs were basically blue with a darker blue horizon line showing that it was, indeed, a landscape. (In other words, they were boring to look at). But his process was interesting. Instead of taking a photograph right there on the spot, he he exposed the photos for 2-6 hours long, moving the camera left and right. What astonishes me is that he had the patience to do that! How did he not get bored?
Okay, I see that I'm being a bit mean about it. But to have the patience for long exposure film is, well, amazing! I don't have the patience for that. I mean, I have a different type of patience. I have a multitask patience, where I wait for one thing while working on a different thing. The result was something I didn't expect.
There was a dangling TV over a mirror projecting that "landscape" image. It just dangled over the mirror, and I thought "how the hell does that TV not snap and break the mirror?" People could step on the mirror and see this image, and it sort of tricks the mind into thinking that the image is coming from the mirror because the room itself is dark. The dark TV dangling in a dark room and the picture is what lights it all up. Presentation wise, it was smart.
I did enjoy this collaboration project.
There were two box fans dangling from the ceiling. Both of them were turned on, and then (after like a minute or so) they danced together. They brawled together. They interacted with each other. And the cords continuously twirled with each others until one of them was unplugged, in which the other box fan seemed to live its short celebration before its cord was yanked out by itself. It was fun seeing these two inanimate objects interact with each other. And I think at this point in the lecture, he was getting friendlier with the audience too. Perhaps I have a childish mind when it comes to these things because I was giggling like an idiot when I was watching this video. But Lewis did state that "maybe [his] work is best for kids."
He later did a collaboration project with a friend of his, I believe his name was Peter H..., completely by accident. They were both asked by the curator to be in his show. So, instead of doing separate projects, they collaborated together. The videos were interesting to watch, although the immediate subject was boring to see. The inspiration itself perked my interest. The way the boats were filmed was appealing. It was split down the middle with two different scenes going on. On the left was a scene of a boat being pulled up, slowly and meticulously. On the right, it seemed like nothing was going on until you heard this low thunderous roar of the boat hitting the ground in slow motion. Then it faded away as if nothing had happened as the left side was still trying to bring the boat back up.
And with the broken pieces.
He exhibited them too.
I'm not a huge fan of this type of art, but I can definitely see where people would be intrigued by this.
No comments:
Post a Comment