Showing posts with label contemporary art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label contemporary art. Show all posts

Friday, August 28, 2026

In Minor Keys? That's not the music I heard.

This is not a very serious survey of the Venice Biennale of 2026, yet some of the points I make are important to me. Now you're warned. - Also blogspot is an old platform and I've been here for many years: its formatting is a bit problematic! 
In my opinion, the title for the 2026 Biennale In Minor Keys** is a bit of a joke for this show. 
Opinion*, because this is what this text is about. I'm not sure about anything except what my reaction is. No one knows, not even critics with a PhD in Art History. Everyone can look at art and have a valid reaction to art. 
The exhibition was conceived and curated by Koyo Kouoh, who died unexpectedly in 2025 from liver cancer, before she could see it open. The Biennale decided to realize the exhibition according to her vision, including the artists, works and overall curatorial project.
I was impressed by the strong curatorial direction to the Biennale. I could tell they were very personal choices, yet the personality of the curator was not intrusive. 

But to me, it's anything but minor keys. It's spectacular. Impressive. Beautiful. Striking. Intriguing. It has a lot of "wow" factor. Many of the works come from Africa, and many, whether African or not, offer a profusion of images. A lot of African art is highly stylized. In fact it hugely influenced 20th century contemporary art, allowing to get rid of the overwrought styles of the 19th century Western art.  The curator went for complexity and exuberance. 
Africa seems to be in creative effervescence: literature, music, cinema, visual arts. Maybe it always was but we didn't know. It's the moment for Africa right now internationally: a long history of beautiful art and lots to say from being the most direly exploited continent by capitalist forces.

The blue walls give the work the magical quality of the night: glamorous, mysterious, unexpected.
 
Many of the works are intricate, convoluted, bizarre. That's what the world is like. Human emotions are complicated when not contradictory. Nature is complicated. Economy is complicated. Politics are complicated.

Fascists try to tell us things are simple: you're hurting financially? It's the fault of the immigrants that take away our jobs! Your energy and food are more expensive? It's the fault of the environmentalists! 

In this sense, this Biennale is a great antidote to the veering of the world toward the far right.

110 artists participated but it feels like there are less in this Biennale than in others because some of the artists are represented by many works. I enjoyed that an artist's work might be in more than one room. 

The juxtaposition with other works brings out different qualities in a particular artist's art. I found that I appreciated an artist's work in one room, after having been left indifferent by that same artist's work in another room's juxtaposition. 

I realized that I like to marvel when I see art. I'm not saying that's a particularly appropriate way to approach art, to criticize, to curate. Everyone is different in their approach to art, and that's one of the beauties of our humanity. 

Some people might want to be stimulated intellectually: think conceptual art. Others are looking to be impressed by skills and techniques: think oil painting and sculpture. Others look for narrative, and they find it in figurative art. Other prefer subtlety and understatement rather than big and powerful.

I prefer to look at art like a four year old sitting at the circus for the first time. I like the spectacular, the dramatic, the stunning effects. And there is plenty of that in this Biennale. 

I like large works, and many were offered, it gets monumental when people are represented larger than in life, and then arises the question of a monument to what? And very small can be dramatic too.

So I am renaming the Biennale. And I'm not going to look for something smart along the lines of "Personal Structures" or "The Exchange Value" or "Memory For The Future" but here are some:

Wait Until You See This!

If This Doesn't Blow You Away, Nothing Will!
The Bold and The Beautiful.

I Prefer Art That Is Strong, Daring, Exciting, Powerful, Dazzling. How About You?

The Big Exhibit With Big Art for Big Hearts And Big Minds.

A few years ago, exhibit titles had to be long, at least one sentence, such as It Doesn't Have To Make Sense. A great title - not that long even - for a show by Amoako Boafo, but now the trend for titles is back to being short. This Argentinian artist also didn't catch the trend, and just as well that not all artists & curators follow the same trend.

First I went to the Giardini, enjoyed it thoroughly though I did skip some pavilions, and that include the Russian Pavilion. I would have also skpped the Israeli pavilion and it seemed closed.















Then I went to the Arsenale. And I did get a bit numb from the art after a few rooms. This is the pieces where I felt I had seen something like it before, and had no reaction to it:

I spoke with a German man at the restaurant. I asked him how he liked  The Biennale. He said: It's too much. I asked: Is it too much art (it is) or is the art too much? He said the art was too much. I understood what he meant.

The pavilions at the Arsenale ended up being a relief from the main show. I enjoyed the Italian pavilion, the Indian one, and one I didn't identify that seemed to be a large landscape made out of salt and ashes.
But I always get numb by the end of the Arsenale. My mind, my psyche, whatever it is, stops taking in the art, it refuses to wrap itself around a new perspective, a new process, a new creativity.

Nota bene: An untold theme of the Biennale is its challenge to the visitors to find the bathrooms. They're few bathrooms, they're few stalls, and they certainly don't put them on their map. Also, once you're in the Arsenale it's very difficult to find an exit. Typically you have to go through exhibits that you've already taken in, adding to the saturation.

By that time, I was  reconsidering contemporary art. Maybe it should be just really different, fill in simple needs, answer simple quesions. Does it have to be so esoteric? So unclear? So complex (wait, I'm contradicting what I said above)? So challenging? So provocative? Then I run into this video, and it's so simple, yet not fascistic at all: It shows the pure joy of people of modest means as they have a day of leisure. It's so beautiful. So needed.


I hope my reaction is of interest to other people, whether they have visited the Biennale and want to compare notes, or have not visited and want to have an idea what it's about.

Also here's an art installation for our enjoyment, that has something contemporary in its randomness:
*Opinion:a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular mattera belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge

 A minor key;**a minor key is a tonal system based on a minor scale. It uses a specific set of seven notes that generally create a darker, sad, or melancholy sound compared to a major key.

I really apologize that I can't name the works and the artists, I am on vacation, and it was too much organization for a leisurely stay. After the Biennale, I went to eat bacalà with cuttlefish-inked polenta that was blacker than the night. 

Some of the artists whose works figure below.
Khaled Sabsabi Pauline Oliveros Kaloki Nyamai Tammy Nguyen Manuel Mathieu Issa Samb Josephine Alacu Kambui Olijimi Daniel Lind-Ramos Ebony G. Patterson
And here's an installation by Nature, the great artist:

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Not a review: Michael Rakowitz at the Jane Lombard Gallery


Michael Rakowitz is showing work at the Jane Lombard Gallery in an exhibition entitled:

Detail of work at the top
THE INVISIBLE ENEMY SHOULD NOT EXIST  (ROOM F, SECTION 1, NORTHWEST PALACE OF NIMRUD).

He has recreated his versions of those particular works that have been destroyed by ISIS at Nimrud. Above is an example, the bright colors coming from wrappings with arabic branding on them. The relationship between the destruction of the art and the wrappings is unclear. ISIS can not be accused of promoting consumerism, they don't promote anything but nihilism, the only relationship seems to be that the wrappings are Arabic. ISIS has been able to establish itself in Iraq following the chaos left by the American invasion. This military action was justified as a response to Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction". It appeared later that there were no such weapons and that US intelligence had no convincing evidence that they ever existed, and that the motivation was purely to access petrol.

In that sense, the destruction of these world heirlooms can be imputed to the interference of the US in the region. The same could be said of the destruction of art such as the Buddha statues by the Taliban, as the US armed the mujahhideen when the enemy was the USSR. We had no idea when the Taliban blew these statues that one day the Taliban would seem rather mild and self disciplined in comparison to ISIS. Ironically, the Assyrian civilization was one of brutal militarism.

Organisations such as the Taliban and ISIS would not waste their time and dynamite blowing ancient monuments if they did not purpose to antagonize the West. One can feel quite helpless if this iconoclasm is only attributed to fundamentalism. But if these actions are, correctly, imputed to Western inference in the Middle East, we can exercise our political rights to prevent this kind of short sightedness in the case of the Taliban, and self serving politics in the case of Iraq. Imagine a foreign power (no names here, as I prefer my coffee non radioactive) poured funds into survivalist groups in the US, we would soon have a number of Timothy McVeigh empowered to blow up more buildings with babies. 

The ancient Assyrian reliefs that were acquired in various ways by institutions in the Western World were saved from destruction by ISIS, necessarily. The show seems to be an indictment of the movement pressuring these institutions to return the work to their originating countries. Also the stunning beauty of the original reliefs contrasts jarringly with the current branded look, providing added motivation the original work not be destroyed (See beautiful original on the left). At least, that's how I perceived it, which was somewhat puzzling. I'm quite ready to believe that Rakowitz had good intentions, I wish they had been clearer.



Caption accompanying the work above at the gallery


Written and published by  - -  Arabella von Arx


Monday, January 27, 2020

Not a review: Wheeler at Zwirner

The title states that this is not a review, in the sense that I try to communicate my personal experience of a gallery event in Chelsea rather than discussing the work which I will let speak for itself.

I have a problem with a panel with 3 white guys even if one has a charming Italian accent, I know I'm being dogmatic, but it does feel terribly déjà vu. I was incapable of listening to anything Germano Celant said, maybe it's his accent, and he is likely to have said some very interesting things, he is the guy who coined the term "Arte povera" and who heads the Prada Foundation in Milano - maybe he is better with the written word. He does have a most charming name too, a whole story could be imagined around that name!

Doug Wheeler was more arresting. He stuck me as being the interesting case of a man who was shy to start with in life. Had he chosen another path, he would have had to overcome it. But he has become a famous artist, and  this allows for every idiosyncrasy of the personality. The artist is sold "as is" :with the understanding he is not able, nor expected to conform, and his failings are his qualities as they are linked to his creativity.

Wheeler, 81, has a handsome mane of long white hair. Its always a fun exercise to imagine a man with his long hair trimmed short. And I thought, imagine, imagine this doctor's son had had a career in a corporation. Or had started his own business of medical supplies. He might have had to beat the shyness out of his system, as is expected of what one calls a real man, of a breadwinner. And I can see his face shorn of hair, he would have had to compact into something showing power and control his spread out sitting position that is a self conscious attempt at appearing relaxed, and why not, It is a very different person yet the divergence in these paths might have been caused by something seemingly benign, like a bit of bullying by a cousin or an over demanding father.

My impression is that Wheeler knows the show business. He's been there for a while now. He probably doesn't really like it but it's the ransom of celebrity, and he'll play along, which is fair enough. He tells his stories, gamely. Does he tell these stories repeatedly? You would think, from their content's relationship to his artistic path, but if he has told them before, it's not obvious from the fresh, convincing delivery he achieves. He's a good story teller. He recalls his father the surgeon flying his small plane to remote areas in Arizona. Scary landings on high streets when there was no runway. His father would say: see that patch of the sky over there that's particularly blue? Don't go there. They're turbulences. John Wayne! In fact, minimalism has something macho about it. For a start, there is a certain arrogance in asserting that a very simple piece is a worthy art work just because the artist says so. Nothing soft or intricate or empathic about minimalism or conceptual art, these qualities typically needing figurative art or complex abstraction.

He tells of his father letting him fly the plane. Of the  landscapes seen from above, of the different
experience of the world. Of wanting to communicate his sensory experience of the world to others. 
He speaks simply, he is humble, he often seeks the gaze of his wife in the audience, the Hollywood producer Bridget Johnson, and mentions her by name. He also refers to another man in the audience by name, maybe to break the mythology of the famous artist on stage addressing the anonymous reverential audience, which is sympathique.

But still he is there, and he speaks, filling his expected role. The Zwirner son, Lucas, moderates. He's the picture of the young golden boy, well to do, confident, educated, handsome. WASP. Does he know suffering? I guess everyone suffers at some point. It's not a criticism of Lucas. It's a genuine question. The people  I know personally that have been born into exceptional privilege do not strike me as happier than the average Josephine (the average woman informed me she prefers Josephine to Jane).

At the end of the show, people take selfies in the Infinity Room.

And this ... is definitely not a review.



Written and contributed - reluctantly - by  - -  Arabella von Arx



Older Posts Home