Site Navigation

Twitter Feed

Monday, 11 June 2012
By James Baker

The tale of a man who came to see some Gillrays but was drawn to a video of a man sneezing out rabbits.

Mika Rottenberg, Cheese (installation view), Photo by Andy Keate
I lever myself into the wooden structure before me. Standing at over 6 foot my body bends and twists unconformably. I seek out screens. Led by sound I find videos of long haired women milking cattle and combing hair. My handbook tells me the work is called Cheese. I exit feeling confused and disorientated. I suspect that might have been the point.
Mika Rottenberg, Sneeze, installation view, Photo by Andy Keate
Mika Rottenberg is not a name familiar to me. But given that James Gillray is, I was keen to unpick the logic of having exhibitions of the two artists side-by-side. If Cheese was Gillray-esque only in the bodily contortions I was forced into just to see the work (I’m sure Gillray himself would have found the scene I presented worthy of a pencil sketch), irreverent Georgian humour was more evident in Sneeze. This 3 minute video had a simple premise. A man in a business suit sits at a table in a damp, drab room. He has a gross, distended nose, rendered itchy by some unknown aggressor. After some suspense he sneezes. And what does he sneeze out? Well rabbits of course. Or lightbulbs. After a sufficiently long fit of sneezing we move onto a second man, and a finally a third before the video returns to the beginning, creating an unending and unceasing loop of violent comic sneezing. I, for many repeat viewings, roared with laughter. But the comic hilarity of this scenario is brilliantly undercut by the discomfort of each man scratching the concrete floor with their jagged, painted toenails. For each laugh the work focuses in on a moment of chalkboard scraping hell, thus amplifying the former and the latter into a ball of confused sensory euphoria.

So, confused again, but this time with my own senses, I move on. A woman, dressed somewhere between a stewardess and a department store manager, proudly holds aloft (but slightly away from her) a cube of identifiable filth - a cacophony of greenery, metal, and other detritus. The meaning of this is a mystery (you guessed it, confused again...) but a rumble of machinery promises to hold the answer. I follow that sound, but no answers are forthcoming. I see some women in a field, possibly of Central or South American origin. They stretch their arms through holes in the ground which emerge in front of a row of Chinese women who moisturise and massage the limbs before them. With a telling slap, each arm is sent away, and the field workers amble towards a large mechanical apparatus with wheels, arms, and conveyor belts. Upon this they throw lettuce, freshly chopped from the an apparently limitless field. The machine rumbles on. They keep feeding it lettuce. The cycle could last forever.

Mika Rottenberg, Squeeze, 2010, Image courtesy of Nicole Klagsbrun and Andrea Rosen Gallery.
Suffice to say the 20 minutes of film which make up Squeeze lie beyond my descriptive powers. Or indeed your patience as a reader. Quite simply, to roll out an old cliche, it demands to be seen to be believed. Female workers drain rubber from trees. A bored woman is heated, cooled, and fed, occasionally accompanied by an obese black woman rotating on a plinth. Another woman has blusher literally squeezed from her. And lettuce is crushed. All of these processes interconnected by some Heath Robinson esque causality, and all are demanding and unceasing for those involved.

I watched Squeeze twice. 40 minutes of fascinating monotony left little appetite for further stimulation. The corny inanity of Tropical Breeze raised a laugh, yet Dough, made 4 years before Squeeze, seemed inadequate in comparison, dwarfed by the complexity, polish, and ambiguity of her newer, shinier stablemate. In some ways placing Squeeze alongside Rottenberg’s other work is akin to placing a Gillray in a room of works designed by his contemporaries, men such as Thomas Rowlandson, Richard Newton, and Isaac Cruikshank. For once the Gillray is in the room all eyes are drawn to it, and all minds see its competitors as inferior.

I shouldn’t comment on what Gillray would make of Rottenberg. To do so would be crass and meaningless. Moreover, logically speaking, we just can’t know. But if I were to be so crass as to do so, I might say that he would understand the decision by Rottenberg to present extremity, be that bodily or situationally, to challenge her audience. Whether or not we understand Gillray or Rottenberg is perhaps not the point. We approach their work with a desire to enquire and to learn. If we leave them a little confused, then what I ask is the harm in that?

James Baker j.w.baker@kent.ac.uk
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.

 

Posted by Anonymous at 23:52    COMMENTS
Wednesday, 23 May 2012
By John Leighton

John LeightonI first experienced Derek Jarman in the mid eighties. It wasn’t because of the groundbreaking films like Sebastiane and Jubilee, nor was it his re-imagining of Shakespeare, his version of the Tempest included Toyah Wilcox and liberal amounts of nudity which seemed important at the time (I was deep into my adolescence!) No, I discovered Derek Jarman because Caravaggio’s paintings looked like film stills!

I was at the beginning of what was to prove a diverting if eventually fruitless art education and those early days were peppered with art history lessons which seemed a deadening extension of the curriculum you wanted to escape. I now leaf through my tattered edition of Gombrich with fondness, but at the time endless examinations of renaissance perspective very rarely caught the imagination, although we did enjoy Bellini’s fuzzy felt period.

But then the lesson arrived at Caravaggio, some 500 years old and yet the drama and impact were as immediate as when they were first unveiled to an unsuspecting Milanese audience. This was more like it and right at the moment I discovered Caravaggio, Jarman’s film was released.By far the most accessible and commercial of his films it was never the less and work of an accomplished artist and film maker. Each frame was designed to capture the atmosphere and intensity of a Caravaggio painting and while the themes Jarman highlighted were chosen to compliment his own interests, the overall film was to me, very satisfying.

Not surprisingly I had encountered Jarman at the height of his exposure to the wider world. Sebastiene and Jubilee had established Jarman as a film maker capable of pushing both political and artistic boundaries. Caravaggio and the elegiac ‘Last of England’ gave him some commercial recognition but his exposure to the public conscious had as much to do with his outspoken views on gay rights and his own very public fight against Aids as it did his artistic output. He was everywhere, chat shows, late night discussions on channel 4, directing pop videos and opera, and then there was the Garden.

Towards the end of his life Jarman lost his sight, his breathtaking film ‘Blue’, is a treatise on Jarman’s life and art and a very immediate response to the loss of a sense. He also wrote a book, ‘Chroma’ which expanded on these themes through this failing prism.

Chroma displays an acceptance and peace in an almost meditative narrative. For a glimpse of the Artist as more angry and driven, his journals that accompany the film, Last of England, published by the university of Minnesota press as ‘Kicking the pricks’ is a shockingly honest account of a man squaring up to taboo, censorship  and his fast and loose life. One of the themes running through these journals are Jarman’s father, the ‘classic fag’s father’ as he is described. These glimpses of autobiography leaves one a little disappointed that he was unable or unwilling to leave us with more.

 

Occasionally you find yourself holding a weighty biography and wonder how one life could fill so many pages. Tony Peake was and continues to be Derek Jarman’s literary agent and his biography of Jarman is a fair old size. There’s no padding here though, anyone wishing to get an insight into this remarkable man and remarkable life will find this the perfect accompaniment for a journey with the artist and the man. (Derek Jarman by Tony Peake, Minnesota University Press, £18.50)

Also Available to 

buy at Nottingham Contemporary:

Derek Jarman’s Garden by Derek Jarman and Howard Sooley, Thames and Hudson, £16.95
Chroma by Derek Jarman, Minnesota University Press, £11.95
Kicking the Pricks by Derek Jarman, Minnesota University Press, £14.99
Derek Jarman by Michael Charlesworth, Reaktion Press, £10.9

 

Jubilee will be screened at 7pm on Tuesday the 5th of June. Find out more and book a place here.

Posted by Anonymous at 17:57    COMMENTS

Blog

Welcome to our blog, written by the Nottingham Contemporary team and guests.

Blog Archive

Supporters