Illumination

I was surprised by the energy as i walked into the exhibition space. the unused office space with people and artworks sprawled through its gutted interior, demanded that the space be considered in light of its previous existence. set in the gentrified heart of glitzy corporate bars, the lack of order and structure in a place of order spoke in a cacophony of anarchic tones. People and artworks mixed and mingled as one, light, shadow, sound, structure and bodies amassed in an unstructured shambolic manner in direct contrast to how the building was intended. I find this even more satisfyingly ironic that all this was taking place opposite bars with names like 'revolution', bars who pre-package some kind of insane 20 something consumer culture and force feed it to you in the form of branded German beer, only if you are dressed appropriately.

The artworks themselves spoke in subtle tones, sometimes autonomously and sometimes as a screaming collective. as a viewer ones senses were pulled from one art work to another. The absence of 'titles' near any of the art works forced the viewer to consider the works as individual pieces but also as a larger collective of work. through sound, light and the ready made corridors and offices, the viewer was bounced from one work to the next. the experience was a multi sensory bombardment in which works struggled and pushed in one and many voices. after time one became aware of subtlety within the artworks as visually loud works contrasted with very quiet pieces allowing the viewer to move from piece to piece. the subtle works gave one reprise from the louder pieces, and vice versa enabling the viewer to navigate the space whilst engaging in a rich dialogue with the works, like a busy conversation at a party in which one is a part of many conversations at once. 

This multi dialogue that takes place at 'illuminations' may be comparable to our existence within the world today. our existence is one of multi dialogue, in which we are bombarded with thousands of messages a day through TV, bus advertisements, logos, whiter whites, and cool sneakers. sound, video, colour scream at us relentlessly as we go about our day. there are some important differences though in the messages received our day to day lives and those received in 'illuminations'. The later has a dialogue which is far less sinister, and honest. the language of illuminations is revealing, humorous, honest and strips away the at the veneer of our multinational, multi-corporate, multi-military existence by altering the both the the aesthetics of multimedia and the messages of multimedia that invade our space every day.

contrast seemed to be one of the prevailing curatorial motifs within the exhibition. on the ground floor of the exhibition tucked away in the corner, wedged between two large projections was one such work. 'Pages' by Andrew Ranville consisted of just three screen printed wooden blocks. in all its subtlety, the work spoke loudly in comparison to its surrounding multimedia pieces. its simple message of 'teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime, teach a man to be a shark and he will eat everyone' made me laugh out loud. the instant dialogue, and understanding of this artwork was not only refreshing, but gave substance to its surrounding more involved works. 

Consuming video art is an involved process. one must be totally present as time is governed by the video itself, unlike other artforms in which time belongs to the viewer. The sense of time one looses when viewing video art, or any other multi media experience for that matter was highlighted for me by Carolina Vasquez's work '25 years in six minutes and 15 secs'. initially this worked seemed schizophrenic in its delivery of very fast cuts of video. from the outside the room buzzed like a caricature of someone's front room,in which the TV can be seen flickering from the street. upon entering the room it took time to adjust to the fast flickering upon the screen.  It was not until i was immersed in the film that i began to recognise that the video edits, although separated, created a larger narrative. the films fragmentation was both calm, yet manic and highlighted the way in which life is can become digitised and transient as it collides with the forced memory narrative given to us via the internet and other forms of digital representation that conflict with ones actual memory. the work questions the way in which life itself can be broken down into a flickr slide show.

as the works vied for space within the space one work in particular used the space in a most subversive anarchic manner. 'Magnificent Glasses' by Hiromi Kawasaki was both dependant on the other works, yet was its own entity. magnifying glasses hung from the ceiling both altering the videos around it and manipulating the space in which the viewer had to navigate. this work alluded to the building space and made one aware of their own existence by changing the rooms perspective. through its subtle change in perspective the work allowed me to place the whole exhibition under the magnifying glass illuminating the subversive, anarchic dialogue present in the illumination exhibition.

Thanks for reading my waffle. i wrote some notes on the way home in the bus, and though id share them in a loose essay format. does anyone else have any similar or conflicting thoughts on the exhibition? are there any works which you enjoyed?