Last night we held an evening reception for our current exhibition - Liam O'Brien's Shooting Blanks. Thanks to all of the wonderful art viewers who came out to see the show and share a drink with us. We had a really super evening. Here are some social images from the night mixed up with a few images of the show...
Tuesday, 11 September 2012
Monday, 13 August 2012
Liam O'Brien Interview
Next up in Current Projects’ series of solo exhibitions at Metro
Arts this year is Liam O’Brien, a Brisbane-based emerging artist. Liam caught
up with Current Projects’ curator for the exhibition, Richard Stride, for an
interview to give you a little insight into the show.
RS: For those unfamiliar with your practice, what are the
interests that drive it and how do you approach them?
LO: I think
this is something I'm still struggling to come to terms with myself. Looking
back over the
past few years, the majority of my work could
be summarised as a critical response to the aspects
of capitalism that impede personal freedoms - specifically in
relation to the body. However, as
much as this
was based on my own personal experience, it was also a product of art school,
in which I felt
pressured into making work that, to a large extent, had social reform as its
primary
objective. However, since graduating I've
been considering the function of art on a personal
and social level. Whilst every expression is to a certain extent
political, I don't think that art is
the most effective
medium for seeking political change. In addition to this, given my own cultural
perspective, I don't feel like I'm in a position to be telling
anybody how to live. So now I'm trying to
distance
myself from making didactic or semiotically-driven work. I'm responding more to
aspects
of my daily life, and using particular occurrences
as the inception for new works. Obviously concepts and aesthetics are still
important, but at this stage I'm focusing more on
trying to
generate emotive and non-verbal responses for the audience. It’s not an easy
transition though.
RS: So do you hope that by shifting the focus from language to the
sensory or emotive when creating your work, the viewer’s response will
similarly shift?
LO: Yes, that’s my intention. If I have one main criticism of contemporary art (based on my own engagements) it’s that a lot of work is either too conceptually or too aesthetically driven, and does nothing for me emotionally. This reason, along with those I listed above, are why I’m currently focusing on this type of engagement. If you reject language as the basis for understanding a work, it becomes about trying to communicate on a more subconscious level, and towards a more shared experience.
LO: Yes, that’s my intention. If I have one main criticism of contemporary art (based on my own engagements) it’s that a lot of work is either too conceptually or too aesthetically driven, and does nothing for me emotionally. This reason, along with those I listed above, are why I’m currently focusing on this type of engagement. If you reject language as the basis for understanding a work, it becomes about trying to communicate on a more subconscious level, and towards a more shared experience.
RS: In the roles you play in your
performances, do you hope to explore issues that are broadly
relevant to the everyday person, or are they
a more personal or introspective process?
LO: In the past, my performances were about
translating my personal responses to certain issues into a generic ‘everyman’
performing identity onto which people could potentially project themselves. In
this way, I was attempting to address issues relating to broader social
experience. However, I’m currently unsure of where I stand on the issue.
Certainly, I am trying to reach people on the level of shared (emotive)
experience, but whether I can position this experience in relation to specific
issues (eg. employment or alcoholism) is uncertain. Whilst my work does come
from personal responses to the outside world, my daily experience (presumably
one of privilege) is potentially much different to many other peoples, so what
right do I have to assume this ‘everyman’ role? I’m beginning to think that
whilst it’s important for me to be aware of my responses to the outside world
and use these as the inception for new works, it may not be as important to
communicate what the response is actually in relation to. That way the audience
can only respond to the performance on experiential terms.
RS: In some recent performances, you have invited the audience to
re-enact your original performances. How does that fit into this process, and
what are your motives for it?
LO: Here
you’re referring to the participatory work that I presented at the 2012 Brisbane
Emerging Art Festival. This work was an extension of my ‘Proposals’ series,
which focused on the creative re-appropriation and repurposing of urban space
for the individual. For B.E.A.F I wanted to expand the scale of the work from
an individual to a more social level in order to see whether that increase would
make the work more successful - successful in the sense of inviting people to
experience what I had felt in carrying out the initial engagements, and the
existence of that feeling as proof of a particular ideology at work. In the end
it was a bit hit-and-miss, and only one of the engagements (involving flour)
really communicated the intention. At this stage I’m not interested in pursuing
this type of participatory practice.
RS: Where do you situate your art in regard
to your actual performances and their video and
photographic documentation; or are you more
inclined to see your practice holistically as art
without concern for such distinctions?
LO: Whilst in the past I have presented the
same action across multiple mediums, I wouldn’t go as far as saying that my
practice is holistic. I think it has more to do with being inexperienced and
trying to become a better practitioner. I’d definitely say that the majority of
my practice is performative, but whether an action is most effectively
expressed as a live performance, video or photograph is often difficult to
determine – hence the production of multiple forms. It may be something that
diminishes with practice, however I do like being able to chop-and-change. I
guess you need to consider commodification as well, and whether you ever want
your practice to be profitable.
RS: Where do you see your exhibition at
Current Projects heading?
LO: The exhibition at Current Projects will
be my first proper solo-show, and to a certain extent I’m feeling the pressure
of that – of everything being on me and not wanting to disappoint. I want to
use the opportunity to push my practice into areas that I’m not entirely
comfortable with, and at this stage am planning on presenting a couple of more
installation-based ideas. Overall, it definitely feels like a departure from my
previous work. Whether it’ll pay off - I don’t know. I’m interested to see how
people react.
RS: Is there anything you would like the
audience to bring to the experience of viewing your work at
this exhibition?
LO: No, not
really. If people come that'll be good enough. If they take something away from
it, that'll be better.
Thursday, 26 July 2012
So where the bloody hell are you? | Interview with Clark Beaumont
In conjunction with their solo exhibition So where the bloody hell are you? Clark Beaumont talk collaboration, performance, and the 'Aussie' identity with Katherine Dionysius from Current Projects.
KD: You’ve
said that you work exclusively as Clark Beaumont – neither of you have pursued
solo practices for a few years. What were your individual
practices like before? What inspired you to start working collaboratively?
CB: Our individual practices explored similar
themes to the ones we delve into now as a collaboration. We just function better
together. Our individual practices often, in the past, seemed problematic,
stunted and generally less interesting to us.
Our collaboration began in university,
sparked and fuelled by our mutual interests in performance art, youtube, cinema
and television. We instantly had great chemistry and through collaborating, we have
been able to create a stimulating and supportive environment, allowing for both
a friendship and artistic practice to develop.
KD: The first work you
created together was Undress in
2010, a performance video work, in which you begin tied together from head to
toe in a web of string, and proceed to untangle yourself throughout the
duration of the work. In subsequent works like Clark Beaumont Self-Portrait you attempt to
‘become’ each other. Can you talk a bit about the significance of ‘becoming’
other characters (particularly Australian women) in So Where the bloody hell
are you?
CB: Within our works, we’re interested in
exploring the multiple facets of our identities, as: females, Australians,
individuals, as a duo, fellow collaborators, consumers, creators, etc.
In So
Where the Bloody Hell are you? (SWTBHAY) we focus on the
relationship between ourselves and the ‘Aussie’ identity that ‘iconic’
Australian films project to us (Australians) and internationally, as well as
our relationship with film in general, as a strong informative tool that
assists in the construction of these identities.
In SWTBHAY,
similarly to in Clark
Beaumont Self-Portrait, we utilise role reversal as a key form of
personal critique and reflection. As a duo in SWTBHAY, we play multiple personas, presenting our identities as
somewhat fluid and intangible. Through transformation and characterisation, we
attempt to create and recreate ourselves simultaneously. Rather than creating
another stereotype within our video, we wanted to allow room for a multiplicity
of identities on an individual scale, as well as on a national one. We believe
that in doing this, we can create something more complex and true,
comparatively to the common portrayal.
KD: SWTBHAY differs
from your previous works in that it doesn’t so much take ‘collaboration’ as a
central theme – your previous works really focus on your relationship with each
other, particularly Future Predictions,
which plays out various hypothetical scenarios about how your partnership may
eventually come to an end. Looking at your practice from the outside, it seems
to me as though this work suppressed your fears and freed you to explore ideas
of identity outside your relationship with each other. Is that how you see it?
Or do you feel that you’re still unpacking ideas about your relationship?
CB: We’re pretty natural in our creative process
and so we trusted our need for introspection in Future Predictions. It was a cathartic endeavour created at a time
of uncertainty as collaborators, as we both looked into the future, facing the
end of our shared degree, concerned with how much longer this good thing could
last. The artwork was developed on the premise that through living out these
potential traumatic ‘breakups’ we would be able to, therefore, free ourselves
of any genuine concerns, as, in a strange way, we would already have lived out those
realities - like ticking an item off of a checklist and being able to move on.
SWTBHAY, on the other hand,
was inspired by our recent time travelling overseas. Travelling is such an
overwhelming experience that opens you up to the world and
provides you with a better vantage point to consider life’s bigger questions.
Travelling also makes you more aware of your nationality: you, as an
Australian.
We’re interested in the Australian identity, how it’s constructed and how we may or may not identify with it. In this artwork, we do, therefore, take the main focus away from our relationship. However, the artwork’s disjointed narrative does lend itself to bleed throughs between the characters’ identities and we like to think that sometimes we’re interacting with each other even though only one of us is actually on screen.
Our natural creative process allows us to
make whatever feels right at the time. The work we’re making at the moment is
less epic, monumental and national; we are bringing it back down to a simmer
and getting a little introspective once again.
KD: Your practice seems to
have become more elaborate, work by work – from simple gestures of untangling (Undress 2010) or tracing each
other’s shadows (Crossing Over 2010)
to more scripted performances using costumes and props in the work you produced
for BEAF earlier this year. SWTBHAY – perhaps your most
ambitious work yet – uses a green screen to insert your own footage into
existing films. Was this an intentional progression? What’s next?
CB: Video editing has become a crucial component
to our practice, as previously our collaboration was predominantly focused upon
the performance using video only as a source for documentation. Our early
works, Undress and Crossing Over were predominantly about
the physical and our relationship, using the camera only for documentation
purposes. As our collaboration progressed, we have found editing our footage
more and more appealing, as it allowed for greater perimeters to our
performances. The video editing process provides us with the power to
manipulate our image and actions even further, inserting ourselves into the
digital world, and enabling us to explore key ideas within our collaboration
such as escapism, duality, identity, and kinship on the big screen. Video has
also become a powerful source of reflection and critique for us, allowing for a
newfound awareness of our bodies – how they perform and interact – to develop.
Who knows what comes
next! We don’t.
Sunday, 22 July 2012
Monday, 16 July 2012
So where the bloody hell are you?
25 July 2012, 6 - 8pm
Current Projects presents recent video work by Brisbane emerging artist duo Clark Beaumont, in which the artists unpack the 'Aussie' identity and construct new narratives for both themselves and the audience. Originally created for SafARI 2012 in Sydney, So where the bloody hell are you? 'premieres' in Brisbane as the second instalment of Current Projects' Pear shaped series - a number of one-night exhibitions that present work by collaborative pairs.
Image: Clark Beaumont, So where the bloody hell are you? 2012, video still, courtesy the artists.
Thursday, 5 July 2012
Rachel Maclean opening night...
Last night we celebrated the opening of Rachel Maclean's The Lion and The Unicorn. It was a great night of art viewing and frivolity. We had a fantastic turn out of wonderful art lovers and received lots of feedback about the work. We'll be sure to pass it on to Rachel, who due to geographic impediments, couldn't be here for the show! Here are some social snaps from the evening.
If you missed the opening, the show will remain open until July 14. We are open Wednesday to Friday 11 - 4.30 and Saturday 2 - 5. Don't miss this great show!
Monday, 18 June 2012
The Lion and The Unicorn | Rachel Maclean
The Lion and the Unicorn | Rachel Maclean
Opening Wednesday 4 July, 6 – 8pm
4 July - 14 July 2012
Current Projects presents a solo exhibition of video works by Glasgow artist Rachel Maclean. The exhibition examines Scottish identity in relation to history, mythology and popular culture.
Please join us for the exhibition opening on Wednesday 4 July, 6 - 8pm.
The Lion and the Unicorn is Rachel’s first Australian exhibition. The exhibition will be open for viewing from 4 - 14 July.
Image: The Lion and The Unicorn 2012, digital print, courtesy the artist.
Opening Wednesday 4 July, 6 – 8pm
4 July - 14 July 2012
Current Projects presents a solo exhibition of video works by Glasgow artist Rachel Maclean. The exhibition examines Scottish identity in relation to history, mythology and popular culture.
Please join us for the exhibition opening on Wednesday 4 July, 6 - 8pm.
The Lion and the Unicorn is Rachel’s first Australian exhibition. The exhibition will be open for viewing from 4 - 14 July.
Image: The Lion and The Unicorn 2012, digital print, courtesy the artist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)