Showing posts with label Deluge Contemporary Art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Deluge Contemporary Art. Show all posts
Friday, April 8, 2022
Thursday, July 16, 2020
Sunday, April 15, 2018
James Lindsay - Lance Austin Olsen at Deluge Contemporary Art
![]() |
| James Lindsay |
in 2016 and managed to upset a few people by mentioning death. There was more than
a whiff of big D in that show to my mind but talking about it was seen for some
reason as negative. In an age when skulls are everywhere, as tattoos, T-shirts,bumper
stickers etc. and we seem to live with constant reminders of the end of times, it's
surprising that it would cause such alarm. Monty Python even made jokes about it.
But we must remind positive and this is Victoria where we need to read gently which
makes art reviewing especially difficult. It's ok for Jonathan Jones in London and
Jerry Saltz in New York to say pretty much whatever comes into their mindsbut 77
years old unpaid provincial dilettantes like myself must choose our words carefully.
You are on safe ground with comments like "Great Show", "Strong work", and "Great use
of colour". But beyond that it's a minefield some thoughts are best kept to ourselves.
Sorry about that. My mind wanders. Fortunately Lindsay and Olsen have done it again
with separate shows at Deluge Contemporary Art so I get a chance to redeem myself.
This time the overall feeling is upbeat without any overt hints of mortality. 'The state
of things (in two parts)" is billed as continuation and evolution of the previous
pairing, 'hide in plain sight' but the shows may just as well be a testament of the
rejuvenating power of art.
Apart for both being UK transplants in their later years with strong personalities
Lindsay and Olsen don't seem to have a lot in common. Perhaps there are faint echoes
of per-conceptualist British art schools in their respective styles but time and distance
have made them difficult to discern.
Lindsay presents a suite of 19 new paintings that "document our contentment with the
unpalatable parts per million in our nature". This paintings are a harmonious fusion of
abstraction and landscape suggesting any conflict between nature and intellect may have
been at least partially resolved. His environmental concerns are obvious and the
paintings clearly represent the increasingly critical relationship between humanity and
the planet we live on. Mountains and forests struggle with the pipelines and oil spills
but the paintings themselves are bright, lively and colourful as if the artist has
succeeded in finding some hope in the precarious state of things.
Olsen's work comes across at first sight as pure abstraction. There are no obvious
figurative reference points, viewers are free to provide their own, and almost seems to
defy any kind of analysis of definition. But, just my opinion of course, there is no escaping
the language of expressionism. It's the compulsion with which Olsen works that tells the
story. The paintings he has chosen to show are mostly monochromatic but highly
emotive and loaded with a finely balanced tension. His output is enormous and what
may seem repetitive is actually in constant state of flux. Each painting is a mark of
passage. The paintings and prints are complemented by "Plato's cave" a sound work
composed of guitar, fields recordings, stones and assorted objects scored from dry-point
plates.
Certainly is continuation here but to what extend has the work evolved ? When in doubt
ask the artist.
James Lindsay: "It all evolved over the last 18 months. Oil spills and pipelines have been
much on my mind.I guess you could say it started with a small leak and spread outwards".
Lance Olsen: "Evolution ? How the **** would I know? I just keep working.There's so
much work to do. I had to sort through 500 paintings to pick out 12. It's always evolving".
We live in interesting times. Missiles are flying over Syria and World War 3 can start at
any minute.Ordinary folk have not a lot of say in the matter. Will Lindsay's warnings
go unheeded or will Kinder Morgan get their new pipeline?
Olsen distrusts words and reduces them to sound and symbols. A lot of physical and mental
energy has gone into these shows."Lindsay and Olsen are both at an age that death is no
longer an abstraction" (their words) and they both agree that careerism is an anathema
to life. Neither artist shows any sign of slowing down however and it will be interesting
to see where they go from here.
Philip Willey
The State of Things (in two parts)
Deluge Contemporary Art
March 17 to May 5, 2018
![]() |
| Lance Olsen |
Saturday, March 3, 2018
Real Tears exhibition reviewed by John Luna
Real Tears (2018), the work that lends its title to
the exhibition, consists of three stands (like music stands), each featuring a
hologram projection of the image of a different crumpled tissue. Are the
surfaces of the holograms themselves stained with weeping, or is that sheen just
fingerprints left by touchy-feely viewers at the opening? I read that they
represent tears shed by three living generations of women in the artist’s
family, although this story, in tandem with the formality of the stands, could also
be taken for pataphysical persona-apocrypha. The aura of subjectivity in the
work’s titling-as-testimony is implicit rather than explicit, a history
gesturally sketched by proxied proof. The sense is of the subjects’ being
worried, pulled, plucked and balled, simultaneously present-tense and remote in
rainbow air-quotes, their definition elusive in the translucent capture of the
medium’s elision.
On the facing wall of the gallery are two iterations of Unfinished
Jokes (Feminist, 2012/2017 & Male, 2017), in the form of
openers without punchlines, printed on posters arranged in stacks, recalling
the ‘endless supply’ prints of Félix González-Torres. The stack on the left reads, “A feminist, a lesbian, and
a nun walk into a bar”, while
the one on the right asks
the question, “What did one male artist say to the other male artist?”
That the jokes are posed sans answers (the reverse sides are blank), adds tart
gravitas to their endless-ness. This comes to mean more as I move to consider
the adjacent piece, a shelf on which sits Feminist Joke Book (Lightbulb)
(2011) its accordion-fold-format presenting most all of the answers one might
ever expect to encounter to the question, “How many feminists does it take to change
a lightbulb?”
The dialogic provocation inherent in the structure of these
kinds of classic, ‘question-(repetition)-reply- reaction’ jokes has been
explored before, by for instance, Richard Prince’s recycling of Borscht-belt
groaners on the surfaces of expansive canvasses. Prince’s work is
characteristically passive aggressive, using pictorial hauteur to leverage
cliché, and in so doing revealing a pathos of defeatist tact latent in both the
joke’s origin and the phenomenon of its ever-increasing fatigue. I think of the
refrain in the maudlin denouement of the Smiths’ song, “That Joke isn’t Funny
Anymore”:
I've seen this
happen in other people's
Lives
And now it's happening in mine
Lives
And now it's happening in mine
Of course, the absence of answers to a question asked
repeatedly might function as an answer in itself, either as a pointed
demonstration to a non responsive audience, or, more interestingly, a
theoretical echo-chamber towards posterity and possibility. Asking what one male
artist said to the other (forever) might be regarded as an address to art
history’s often airless (but never heirless) dialogue, while a, “feminist, a
lesbian and a nun,” are the usual suspects when it comes to woman intellectuals
in the history of modernity – what schemes might they come up with together in
that theoretical bar? The lightbulb joke features answers both nervily absurd
and bitterly clipped (“none: feminists can’t change anything”.) Actually, while
trying to recall more of the answers, I ended up searching the joke online (the
first hit was Reddit, which was, as they say, a huge mistake – those
comment threads! I can’t help but feel that this choice, pitfalls and all, is
part & parcel of the will of the piece.)
Playing D’Onofrio’s accordion of answers reminds me of all
of the times I’ve heard myself add that sibilant terminal consonant to adjust
my phrasing of, “feminism” to “feminisms”, the dilemma of its being
subject to multiple interventions and judgements (a kind of liberation too, a
freefall through interpretive hells or heavens…) That these options or
alternatives appear in the format of a single text (sheet of paper) whose
action (unfolding) is presumptively interactive, makes their deadpan delivery
more acidly lucid. Like the light-emitting diode delivery of some of Jenny
Holzer’s Truisms, Feminist Joke Book is a text-as-visual-object-as- object-lesson
whose dissolution into a social space of uncertain status quo as to
for-or-against inclines towards some future resolution (when, for instance, the
lightbulb is finally changed). As such, it becomes a critical counterbalance to
the operation of the hankies with their amorphous physicality-cum-crypto- biographical
currency. To bring the two together into a common subjectivity is to imagine an
inquisition in the form of a pageant, something like the oratorio Anne Carson
wrote for Gertrude Stein, with its sweeping gestures and halting pauses:
Your veto is unreasonable.
Your reason is a mystery.
Your mystery is way of lying.
This concept is no longer in use.
Your reason is a mystery.
Your mystery is way of lying.
This concept is no longer in use.
Between these works (and, indeed, between a votive evocation
and theatricalized inquisition) is a video piece, Falling Woman
(2008), projected onto the gallery wall opposite the entrance. It features the
image of a figure in freefall through a blue sky filled with clouds. The figure
wears a dress, the skirt of which is blown up over its face by the air current
(only in brief glimpses to we spy fingertips or a flash of hair), exposing a
naked stomach, pelvis and legs, with feet clad in streamlined flats. It’s odd
how in describing this figure, I find myself avoiding gendering the (clearly
female) body – why is that? It seems really strange that what amounts to legs
and a vagina plummeting through space should evoke this response from me. It
may be because if I write, ‘she’, I feel as if I am encroaching on some
assurance of personhood ahead of gender, and to assume the agency of knowing anything
for sure about this female who is falling, her face cloaked, even smothered, by
the rippling fabric, I am assuming a familiarity, a confidence of outcome that
I don’t possess. As if to reinforce this point, the falling narrative, with its
stock audio whistling whoosh, is routinely interrupted by an almost blank,
still shot, in which only a tiny cluster of specs in the center of the screen
indicate some far-off action. One might suppose that this is a distant view of
the descent, so remote as to promise no impending development. Perhaps this is
what it is to be outside of the space of the blinded/obscured falling figure, a
contemplative but wholly uninformative point of view. Between these intervals, she-just-keeps-falling,
at closer or farther distances, the softly modeled relief of
dress-over-the-face becoming something consolidated as a fetish, as in the non-finito
narrative of Michelangelo’s Awakening Slave, or the ambiguous cruelty (either
sadistic and masochistic, depending on whether you regard or relate) of
Magritte’s hooded Lovers.
Some variations of the fall feel almost easeful and others
very hapless-seeming, less a dread, dead drop than a soft panic of awkwardness
blossoming into the headlong rush of having no tools whatsoever to address the
situation; a kind of social/vestibular horror combo one would feel in media
res of a falling dream combined with an at-work-with-no-pants-dream. So
very odd and suspenseful and titillating and funny are these sequences, that I
am loath to find evidence of a loop. But there is a moment when the pelvis
twists in a baroque diagonal from vertical to near-horizontal, as if momentarily
miming that familial mascot of the male gaze, Courbet’s Origin of the World,
and a little passage of music appears, like a sentimental leitmotif that I am
not sure one should take at its word. Is it a moment of poignant comfort or nostalgic
trance? Is the body partaking of its space in a way that reorients falling
through to falling into? Does the fragmented descent from from
towards towards contain an attitude of plateau, whose momentary horizon orients
lyrical transit within the contour of its unending conundrum?
The space of the fall is really well crafted, technically speaking.
I am reminded of the way the term, “holding space” is used as a signal of
non-judgmental support, here dramatized into a fiction of radical commitment:
just how much space can you hold, when a true crisis arrives, or when you
realize that your idea of “holding” something is, from a different perspective,
the madly willful insistence on an intersubjective state of grace? This notion
of falling, stripped of the sidebars of memory or taxonomy that form the
video’s altarpiece wings, becomes paradoxically heavier in recollection, as if
the suspense of that figure was becoming more urgent now with myself as witness
partaking in its pilgrim plight, an unknown unknown.
A statement on D’Onofrio’s website concludes, “As feminism asks for a liberation
of identity, liberation only exists when it does not know its end.” There is,
in the moment of the loop’s catch, a question that might arise as to whether
the moment of horizontal ease or invitation the body provides is a kind of
narcissistic fishing or a reflection of liberation; that only in this moment of
staging the end in terms of a terminal velocity, ambivalent or hysterical,
self-obsessed or authentically invested, does the potential of the figure as
affect become a subject and not an object. I feel that my own staging of
uncertainty as a passionate brink is a bit of moral cowardice on my part, but
I’m infatuated by the dilemma of the image and its drama and their seamlessness.
It’s a credit to the work that this marriage, so compelling in itself, suggests
at once an opaque, figural placeholder for two words I am in palpable, culpable
and wholly regrettable flight from defining: art and feminism.
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Neil McClelland at Deluge Contemporary Art. Feb 3rd – Mar 4th. 2017 by Philip Willey
Neil McClelland is originally from Quebec and he graduated with
an MFA from Victoria University where he now teaches sessionally. He also
teaches at the Vancouver Island School of Art.
I first saw his paintings at Open space in a show called ‘Realities,
Follies’ curated by Lynda Gammon and Wendy Welch and remember being impressed. In
that show McClelland took the opportunity to explore the historical
relationship of Cezanne’s bathers to the kind of snapshots people like to take
on beaches. There was nothing irreverent about the paintings but it was obvious
that Cezanne was getting updated.
A similar attitude towards history was evident in a series of
paintings shown at Vernon Gallery in 2014. In this show McClelland dealt with
the way we perceive art works in a gallery setting “….exploring connections and
disconnections between the art historical tradition and contemporary, digitally-mediated
visual culture”. ‘Approaching Rembrandt’ seems to encapsulate his intentions
i.e. it’s not the actual painting that is central but the approach. In
conversation he talks a lot about perception…..or how the way we see works of
art defines who we are.
Being confronted by McClelland’s work in his Fisgard Street
studio I was struck by the unreality. There’s an elusive strangeness that made
me think of Peter Doig. The work is figurative but other-worldly. It’s a
distortion of reality but not without an underlying meaning, familiar but
remote. Like Doig, McClelland takes a
painterly approach. Take ‘The Ancient Sickness of Dreams’ for instance, a tropical
setting clearly but where? For some reason it reminds me of a scene from Paul
Theroux’s ‘Mosquito Coast’. ‘In the West the Sky Contracted’ shows a burning
building, horses, a truck, that evoke ‘Black Beauty’ by Anna Sewell.
These are personal memories of course. Our minds are full of
them waiting to be triggered. In fact the horses are a truckload of statues the
artist saw during the fire in Edmonton. He uses photographs but photographic
reality is superseded by the painting process. But what to make of ‘The Wild
State of Freedom’ where we see some sort of oneiric procession,
suited figures bearing a panoply around an arena that could be BC Place, …. what does it mean? Or ‘The Beneficent Net’ with
semi-nude people surrounding some kind of fishing net? What strange catch have
they made? ‘Everything is Being Perfected’ shows humans interacting with
nature, young men amusing themselves with turtles (though the turtles don’t
seem to be having much fun).These are symbols beneath which we sense, but can’t
quite pinpoint, some universal absolutes.
There is a consistency to these paintings. They are intriguing
precisely because they aren’t explicit and the political references aren’t
overstated. Aesthetics and dialectics are finely balanced. In conversation McClelland
talks about Utopia and Dystopia, philosophical issues that lie beneath our
everyday concerns, as being inherently political. He sees the act of imagining
futures as a political act. The paintings engage with the problems of our times
and our hopes for the future but in a subtle way. Something is wrong in
paradise. There’s a rift between culture and nature. An ominous crack in the
earth is forming next to what appears to be a tranquil painting of a swimming
pool.
It’s the possibility of human perfectibility that interests him he
says, optimism and pessimism being two sides of the same coin, which prompts me
to ask if he is optimistic. Well he isn’t gloomy he says though the omens
aren’t great. Global warming, pollution, competition for resources, super-power
rivalry, a general feeling of malaise. These are anxious times and we certainly
have a way to go before we reach Utopia. Dystopia is much more likely.
Nevertheless there is always the possibility of new beginnings.
Time, existence, human survival, these are major themes and most
of the works are correspondingly large in scale. There’s nothing timid about
them. These aren’t paintings that were made for quick sale. McClelland is
aiming higher than that. But the paintings at Deluge aren’t just physically
large they are large in scope. Perhaps even museum caliber. It would be
interesting to see how they measure up to broader exposure. Neil McClelland is
energetic and ambitious so hopefully one day we will find out.
Tuesday, January 31, 2017
Neil McClelland at Deluge Contemporary Art
Everything is Being Perfected
Neil McClelland
Neil McClelland
Opening Friday, February 3, 7pm @
Deluge Contemporary Art
Deluge Contemporary Art
Sunday, December 4, 2016
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
Rachel Vanderzwet at Deluge Contemporary Art - 2016
Rachel Bangels
Rachel Vanderzwet
Nov. 11 to Dec.10, 2016
Approaching her practice with curiosity and a desire to explore the complexity and allure of contemporary visual culture, Vanderzwet is drawn to source imagery often fraught with what she terms “bubble gum” qualities. Her work is bright and cheeky, loud and alluring, energetic and humorous, but it never loses touch with the the quotidian and familiar. The surfaces of her paintings and large scale mediated collages flirt with the edges of recognition, engaging in a playful negotiation of material, composition and subject matter which is sometimes fully realized and at other times falls into abstraction. Vanderzwet’s layered compositions offer the viewer the possibility of untangling her unabashed and engaging surfaces while simultaneously creating further intrigue through her sure-handed manipulation of colour, material and form.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
















