Smoking Ban May Now Include Your Apartment
Giuliani Livid Over Bringing 9/11 Trials to NYC
House Cat Terrorizes Family In Dramatic Hostage Situation
Access-A-Ride Nailed by Local News
Oreo The Dog Is Dead, Blame Game Is Not
In 1859, one of the stars of the Hudson River School of painting, Frederic Church, unveiled his massive landscape, Heart of the Andes, complete with theatrical lighting, to an audience of New Yorkers eager to pay an admission price just to sit in the presence of the work’s profound pictorial beauty.
While painting’s ability to provide meaningful, visceral beauty to an audience of paying customers has become increasingly suspect (and rare) ever since, the demand for a pleasurable art experience persists. Olafur Eliasson’s work fills that void, but in excitingly fresh, intelligent ways that fulfill the promise of formal beauty as explored by minimalism but without the oppressively dry, utopian idealism.
His recently closed New York exhibition, Your Engagement Sequence, presents installations of light and water in physical form, as opposed to Church’s painterly-mediated mimetic representations, manipulating these elements in a presentation that challenges the viewer’s preconceived notions by expanding on the possibilities for illuminated beauty.
The best work, Your Negotiable Panorama, leads the viewer through a small break in a nearly-enclosed circular wall that separates the installation from the rest of the gallery space. At its solaric center, a construction of light and water rests on the floor, emitting a band of light reflected from the still pool of water. This thin beam, projected on the manufactured wall, encircles the installation, its soft light subtly affected by the water’s gentle shifts.
But Eliasson is careful to include the viewer’s own self-awareness as part of his project, disallowing a detached, voyeuristic experience. The viewer’s presence can not only affect the water’s stillness and resulting reflection, but creates a disruptive shadow regardless of one’s viewing position within the installation. This interaction only adds to an already thought-provoking engagement – a conceptual element that affronts the viewer while distracting little from a fully-pleasurable aesthetic spectacle.
top image of "Your negotiable panorama," (courtesy Tanya Bonakdar Gallery) from Olafur Eliasson's "Your engagement sequence," which was on view at Tanya Bonakdar Gallery from April 24 to May 27
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
why does gothamist insist on writing about closed exhibitions, which we can't see anymore? you could have written about this on April 25th. we could have made a date to check it out. but now it's over. the thrill is gone. thanks. a. lot.
I agree, I saw this and wanted to see the exhibition only to notice its closed. Who does it benefit to run this weeks after its appeared, not the gallery, not the artist and surely not the art viewer.
i echo the above. this really is profoundly pointless. a big slap on the wrist to you folks.
ditto
Why, Mike, Echo Why, and Anon:
While posting any art-writing specific to a particular art exhibition in advance of its closure is highly desirable, given the blog format and the possibility for expedited publishing, it is not always possible. In this case, I wasn't able to view the work until the last day of its showing, and so, even if I were to post it the day I viewed it, it still wouldn't have provided you with an opportunity to visit the exhibition. Would you rather I had not posted it at all?
Further, this post, and those like them, are not intended to function as advertisements for gallery exhibitions (for that, Gothamist has the "Pencil This In" posts that list events for the day). Instead, I would only hope that these short essays could serve as an impetus for, or contribution to, a larger conversation pertaining to specific art exhibitions. Many times (or, in the case of art-magazine reviews, always -- sometimes even a year later) this conversation continues long after the exhibition has closed. I hardly consider this to be "profoundly pointless," as many who have already seen the artworks, or were unable to see them, will appreciate the dialogue.
Cheers,
J
but this isn't an art blog, Jason.