| |
|
A group of people sit on an art museum bench in front of
rembrandt’s painting, the night watch. we see them from the point
of view of the work. The gallery’s green walls can be seen off to
the side. the gallery’s entryway frames most of the group and provides
a view of other galleries that recede into the background. reverent and
awed hardly describe their collective attitude. more like indifferent and
bored, skittish.
though bunched together like tired tourists waiting for a bus, they each
inhabit their own private world. They resemble participants in a living
tableau of a disheveled and suburban last supper. one points to the left.
another stares to the right. two read by themselves. one speaks to someone
behind him. two converse with each other. they do everything but study what’s
in front of them. this indifference is not a coincidence: the same disinterest
can be seen in other scenes from the 6-minute dvd loop.
If this is reflection on a classic piece of art, then our public is not
a very reflective one. If we cannot grant a work of art its requisite attention,
then how can we reflect on other things matters of import: our lives, our
destinies, our place in the scheme of things?
Katrin Korfmann’s photographs, installations, and videos describe
with subtlety, grace, and humor our indifference to art. sometimes a studied
indifference to art and its trappings on the part of artists can serve as
a viable subject. the whole arte povera movement, for instance, showed a
delicious indifference to the ideas of quality and to the sanctity of the
viewing space. but that’s not the case here. here we talk about viewers
- not makers - of art
lost in the shuffle is the personal space within which we experience and
understand art and by extension experience and understand ourselves. In
his piece entitled pensees, Blaise Pascal described this state of restless
superficiality that Korfmann pictures as the essence of the human condition:
the product of the inability to sit alone in an empty state for an extended
period of time.
this indifference is not so much an indictment as a diagnosis of a sociological
situation. no matter where Korfmann situates her work (indoors, outdoors,
in museums, in public spaces) you encounter the same irreverence. photoshop
editing removes the original art pieces and leaves only disenchanted viewers.
the remaining figures stand in for the experience one is supposed to have
in front of an artwork, thereby personifying the occasion for reflection.
the piece itself is as anonymous as a sugar cube.
unsatisfied with the mere description of indifference, Korfmann offers three
explanations for why, despite the ubiquity of international art fairs, art
offers no common ground that holds people together. instead, the common
ground is divided by constant shifts in attention. In the video installation
counter-strike, each of six wall-mounted monitors show the face of a young
boy as he plays a round of the Internet-based game, "counter-strike"
in a cyber café. as with the night watch, we look at faces of people
otherwise occupied. each face barely moves: eyes barely blink, as if they
are enraptured by an icon. they share a common experience, a common (albeit
cyber) space, and focus their energy into a common pursuit. but it’s
not art, it’s a video game. at the turn of the last century art was
thought to be a universal language. now, over a century later, it’s
the intersection of video games and the Internet that commands interest.
to account for our attention-drift, Korfmann suggests that our brains cannot
possibly process the stampede of visual stimuli that they encounter on a
moment-by-moment basis. lightboxes shows video stills of cibrachrome duratrans
mounted in lightboxes. each one is pulled from a one- to two-minute video
of an outdoor activity. she creates a backlit mosaic from every sixth frame.
green shows a slightly jerky scan of a soccer game on a lush green field.
plays appear and reappear as if dancing in a disco under a strobe light.
similarly, hospital, one-month shows a backlit mosaic of images of the same
three floors of a hospital building taken once a day for a month and then
mounts the results. the result is a subtle gradation of light and slow-motion
kinetics as people and objects change positions.
In white wall, Korfmann places two 250 x 800 cm white panels on each side
of a pedestrian walkway in amsterdam. the empty panels look like primed
billboard panels about to be covered with advertisements or graffiti. there
is no prompt that announces, "this is art. you are having an art experience."
as a result, people may notice the walls but they don’t necessarily
realize that they are instituted to generate "the art experience."
Instead of us framing the piece, the piece frames passersby who inadvertently
become works of art themselves.
Korfmann creates a similar effect with pink wall, a pink wall, 6 x 25 meters,
that she installed in the piazza castello in torino, italy. the pink is
bright and stands in stark contrast to the neoclassical faces that frame
the piazza. like white wall, it also frames passers-by. what’s surprising
is not so much that the artist has put a large pink rectangle in the middle
of a piazza but the fact that, as a work of art, it is barely recognized
as art. Some people may notice it, some may pose in front of it as they
would in front of a fake seashore at a coney Island tourist photograph stand,
but it is a mere backdrop, not a final destination.
Korfmann’s work also provides a remedy to the indifference it represents.
whether or not art can compete with things like video games is beside the
point. Indeed as we look at these images and situations mediated by video
and photographic film, we complete the missing links between the fragmented
images. we look at ourselves: we project ourselves into the work and thus
complete it. and it requires concentration.
Korfmann shows us that art loses its privileged status once it becomes neutral
because it turns invisible, irrelevant. She can show how once the viewing
context has been bleached of the aura of sanctity and possibility, we lose
the opportunism of a common and shared experience. but the one thing she
cannot alter is the viewer, not the ones in the scenes but the ones looking
at the pictures. because hers is the esthetic of the conscientious fragment,
her film mediates the rampant pictorial fragments. Korfmann contends that
while life may be experienced as flux, we can only perceive it in individualized
fragments. we re-imagine the absent connections.
It is always the viewer, me, you, who completes the work, gives it legs
and sense and resonance. through scenic fragments and de-estheticized contexts,
Korfmann subtly forces us to reflect on what is before us. through this
reflection we individually become aware of art and its manifold possibilities
of expression and transcendence. In turn, we return to it some of art’s
formally privileged status and once again read it as a unifying language
of humanity, rather than the babble of warring, distinct, and discrete tribes.
while we may still squirm a little, or let our eyes and minds wander in
puzzlement at what’s before us, if we take the time to give these
fragmented images the benefit of the doubt, if we can permit ourselves to
momentarily suspend disbelief, then perhaps we will once again find the
grace that lies at the fissure between art and life. |
|