The exhibition at the Grand Palais, Dynamo covered an entire century worth of art dealing with Light and/or Movement. The works presented ranged from overwhelming light installations, to op-art paintings. As an enthusiastic, rather naive viewer, the exhibition itself proved to defeat me, mentally and physically. The works were organized according to sixteens perceptual themes : openwork, permutation, concentric/eccentric, interference, immersion, distortion, tactile, grid, pulsing, abyss, force field, cloud, halo, maelstrom, uncertain space, and celestial. That certainly seems like a whole lot for one person to think about in the course of a few hours.
Truth be told, I couldn’t wait to leave Dynamo. I wanted to see everything, but after the first third of the exhibition, my head was throbbing, and my mind was exhausted. I am enamored with simplicity, and Dynamo absolutely lacked this. From one moment, I as bombarded by flashing bulbs, and almost immediately, another work was demanding my attention. Contemplation was at a premium, and sensory experience demanded quite a lot from a viewer. Dynamo took on a huge task conceptually. If we consider light and movement as separate conceptual undertakings, there is surely enough quality content available to fill a space like the Grand Palais. The institution was kind enough to provide sofas periodically for viewers to lounge between rooms, and take a short break, but I argue that the exhibition as a whole would have been stronger if these breaks were curated in to the space to create a more leisurely pace. Just because movement is a focus in the exhibition, one cannot forget the many forms human movement takes, especially moments of stillness.
Even as viewers moved in to spaces of darkness or slight blindness, the entry to these spaces was clumsy and anxious. Entering James Turrell’s work “Cherry” I gripped the walls, stumbling in to other confused viewers and by the time I reached the space, my experience was disturbed. I believe that the curators had good intentions by developing an anxious speed to move throughout the work, and by using moments of complete darkness to accentuate the presence of light, but these kinds of experiences are not welcome to groups of viewers. When I attend an exhibition, I don’t go to be alone, I am aware that there will be many other people attempting to experience the work.
Fairly soon after entering the space, I felt my eyes tiring, repulsed by op-art. I imagine the rooms of paintings were designed to allow the viewer to rest for a moment and contemplate the work, but the images were visually harsh. I appreciate ample space between objects, and felt the rooms of Dynamo were far too clustered. It became easy to pass up whole walls of works because I was so
overwhelmed by the density of objects. I wish that the curators at the Grand Palais had taken advantage of the abundant space by filling it sparsely, and really honing in on fewer works that better defined their goals rather than filling a space with vaguely connected works. Sixteen topics of conversation is at least eleven too many topics for any exhibition. While I appreciate taking on huge tasks, simplicity to me is poetry, and has a greater lasting effect.
No comments:
Post a Comment