intransit

To write a review of an art show from the perspective of one of the exhibiting artists presents an interesting challenge. One cannot hope to be detached and objectively critical. However, I hope that my involvement can reveal a useful insight into the creative process that was so central to this event.

Domino Effect was curated at Motorcade/FlashParade (BV Studios, Phillip Street, Bedminster, Bristol) by Emma Lilwall, Ella Riggs and Kaja Brockington – the concept was innovative: five artists were selected to install their work in succession: each having 24 hours in the gallery before handing on the baton to the next artist. A simple idea but one that, in practice, presented increasing complexity to succeeding artists in the adaption of their proposals in response to the previous work. The importance of the creative process itself was emphasised by broadcasting live video from the gallery throughout the five days; the artists could be seen creating their work, sometimes through the night. Viewers could exchange written comments with the artists on the live-streaming website, and a photographic record of the process was built on an accompanying blog.

The curators had, in effect, founded a community; a society working in the same habitat over several generations. It was also reminiscent of a Victorian vivarium where the curious voyeur could peer in and observe art in the making. The first settler was Katie O’Brien whose architectonic painting, inspired by the gallery space itself, laid a mesh of shapes and lines linking the walls and floor. Her strong work would, in other circumstance, have stood in its own right had this been a solo show.

Following O’Brien was difficult and I was conscious of intruding into a space that she had already claimed very effectively. My own work involved extending two lines of freshly laundered clothes along the length of the gallery. The washing line, where the intimate becomes public, is a global sight connoting community, family and personal relationships. The positions of the lines were chosen to spring from the painted lines of O’Brien’s work. Together the two installations melded together to form a habitat for the succeeding artists to work within. Motorcade/ Flashparade can be a difficult space to use to good effect, but the framework created at the end of day two had laid claim to the space and created a foundation for others to colonise.

Sound artists Helibase become the third domino. Helibase (Shaun Badham and Sarah Züst) is an experimental, performative, interactive musical practise. With Züst in Rotterdam and Badham in the gallery, Helibase extended the online elements of Domino Effect to collaboration in the making of the art itself, both in the music-making and in the recording of the comments of people watching the live-stream which were transcribed onto a handwritten 22 metre scroll.

WT-1 (Sarah Wilson, Lucy Tylecote Theirl and Georgina Wood) then took their turn in the gallery. Central to their work were two videos of observations of the mundane and everyday made the day before. Their work in the gallery then became the construction of platforms for the screening of the videos from recycled materials also sourced the previous day. The artists appeared to respond to the event’s community/settlement zeitgeist in their choice of materials and structure. One video was set up to project onto a salvaged divan bed and an assemblage reminiscent of a makeshift shelter was built nestled against one of the laundry line props.

Finally the gallery was inherited by Sam Francis. Working primarily with text, Francis used words cut from that day’s newspapers, and the text left by Helibase, in interventions that were both witty and observant.

The show was remarkedly cohesive; the work of a community of artists rather than individuals. One observer commented that the process was a ‘mini version of society, but one that works’. It was not a community without its tensions though. The Domino Effect concept required that each artist respect the work of those before them, and to accept any changes to their own work that a subsequent artist might make. It is the later that proved to be the most challenging. The decision by one artist to reverse changes made by Francis to their work just minutes before the private view proved to be controversial and divisive. It was implicit that each artist should let go of the ownership of their work after their day of occupation of the gallery – their work then became group work, part of the whole – to extend the society metaphor, it became part of the community’s heritage. This show raised interesting questions concerning the boundaries of property ownership, collaboration, cooperation both in the gallery and outside.

Domino Effect highlighted the important role that curators play in shaping contemporary art. Much of the success of the show was due to its curation. Artists were chosen that had very different, but potentially complimentary and constructive, practises. How different would have been the outcome if they had selected the artist who had proposed he should come in on the fifth day and smash everything he found with a baseball bat!

Contemporary art can at times appear austere, academic and stripped of meaning. It can feel like arriving too late at a party when the guests have gone and just the leftovers remain. What is always interesting is the artist’s processes. In Domino Effect we had the best of both worlds: the process was laid bare for all to see and the completed installation was interesting and complex. Having seen the show online did the audience actually need to see it in reality? Well judging by the enthusiastic and good-humoured crowd at the private view the answer has to be yes – it whetted their appetite to see it in reality.

Domino Effect at Motorcade/ Flashparade, BV Studios, 27 February to 3 March 2012

[A photographic record of the Domino Effect show can be seen at dominoeffect-mcfp.tumblr.com ]