Review: Richard Serra at the Gagosian Gallery (EXHIBITION)

This gallery is a great little find, first and foremost. The Gagosian Gallery. It's situated in North London, just around the corner (okay, probably more like a 10 minute walk) from Kings Cross St Pancras Station. It's one of those 'corporate galleries' that makes a lot of money and knows it (you can tell from the amount of security guards circling the works in their uniform black suits.) From this, you'd expect slick exhibitions showing well-established artists and this is what we get in this exhibition: Richard Serra.

Personally, this is of interest for me due to that 'D' word (dissertation - shhhh, don't speak it too loudly). But also, of general interest. Knowing Serra's previous work (large outdoor sculptures, specifically his controversial piece Tilted Arc, 1981) I wanted to see how his work would exist within the dynamics of a gallery and how they could (or couldn't) successfully pull it off.

And on a whole, I think they did I good job. Being within a gallery space, did unfortunately make me question the level of interactivity that the pieces allowed, and did have to ask one of those security guards whether or not it was allowed. (It was.)

The exhibition consisted of 4 separate pieces, each in different rooms.

1. Backdoor Pipeline
2. Ramble
3. Dead Load
4. London Cross

(Above is London Cross followed by Ramble.)

Each was a large sculptural piece made from steel. Each matched the size of the rooms. I think that spaces given to each piece was clearly given much thought, meaning that no work felt suffocated.

Very brief blurb of each piece:

Backdoor Pipeline - a large 15.2m high steel tube-like sculpture that you can walk through. The way that you see the light shift as you travel through the tube brings about a child-like attitude.

Ramble - as the name would suggest consists of 24 plates of thick steel that you walk in and out of. Some are taller than others, so despite my short height I could see over some. Yet others were too tall. I don't know why I quite enjoyed weaselling in and out of these blocks.  With other people (unfortunately it was empty when I was there) it could escalate into a game of hide and seek.

Dead Load - probably the most disappointing of the set. It is just a block of steel. Just a lump. Which someone was sat drawing at the time of my visit. Which, I'm not going to lie, I couldn't quite understand. He was just sat straight on. Looking at this block of steel.

London Cross - perhaps the most interesting of the bunch. It cuts the room is half, from corner to corner. As you enter you are affronted with a tall wall of steel. Above that is another panel of steel crossing the room again. To see the other side you have to walk back out of the room and into the room via another entrance.

All in all, it's free and interesting to see how these types of sculptures exist inside within this type of space. So I would say - go and see!

East End Secrets

This is just a quick little post to let you know about two little East End secrets that I discovered whilst on the hunt for galleries. I feel like, with independent galleries you need to know what you are looking for - otherwise you'd easily walk by.


First up. The Approach.

It is a little gallery that basically consists of just a room. But the cool thing about this space is that it sits above a pub. So when you walk to the place you think you should be - and you do see a street-like sign that says 'The Approach' you know you are in the right place. You're just a little unsure of how to proceed.

Basically. Go inside the pub! Don't walk around it like I did.

Once inside, make sure you go to left of the bar and just around the corner is a door (on the same side of where the bar finishes) and up the stairs you go!

(Luckily a man on a stool told me where to go - but I have a feeling that that isn't his permanent spot or job.)

Current exhibition: 'Who Buries Who' an installation by Amanda Ross-Ho (as seen above.)

On until 23rd November 2014.

Second up. Maureen Paley.

This felt very much like a private members club. And I understand that the ambiguous facade is probably so that people don't know what the building is, so won't try to steal stuff. So you only get people who have specifically come to see the artwork buzz to be let in.

(And although I understand this, I don't like it. But I suppose this is due to its location. By the way, both are just a short 10 minute walk from Bethnal Green tube station (the Central Line).)

In terms of finding this one, when you have to turn right and go past student accommodation, and it looks like a dead end, all I can say is this: you are on the right path my friend. When you turn into the first left, it is almost the building straight opposite you. Just look for the small words 'Maureen Paley' and the buzzer. And be brave and buzz! Once inside, you know you're in the right place. Someone opens the door for you. It's all very nice.

Current exhibition: Gillian Wearing, showing her new video work: 'We Are Here' as well photographs. (As seen above.)

On until 16th November 2014.

So there you go! Delicious East End secrets! Happy hunting!

Review: Turner Prize 2014 (EXHIBITION)

Here it is. The big one. The prize that (most) people want. The Turner Prize 2014. Exhibition showing at Tate Britain until 4th January. Now, this is my first time actually going to the exhibition, and I'm very glad I had the opportunity to do so.

Now, a little brief history on the Turner Prize:

It's an annual prize that is named after the painter J. M. W. Turner, which can only be won by a British visual artist under the age of 50. (They also get a pretty little sum of money to go along with the prestige.) It's quite a big deal on the British art scene.

So who are this year's nominees?

James Richards,
Tris Vonna-Michell,
Ciara Phillips,
Duncan Campbell.

We'll make our way through the top of the list down (as this is the order you encounter their works in the exhibition.)

James Richards
Immediately as you enter the exhibition you are facing a flat screen TV displaying images that don't seem to quite fit together yet have a cohesive element about them. The film viewed contains found and original images that are intuitively edited. (Almost as if he has created a moving collage of clips. Something of note, is the different frames used for the various clips in the video, seems to be about what isn't on show. The black and white imagery creates a sense of unity, and the chosen framing and actions within the videos feels rather sensual in choice.

(And this is quite bad, but I was a little perplexed on the choice of seating for this video. I mean, it was almost like a sofa, without the back, but the type of cushions made it look like only one person could sit on one at a time, when you could have easily fit two bottoms on one cushion. Now this probably seems trivial, but. And hear me out. But. It really affects how you view the artwork and I probably didn't stay there for as long as I should have because you feel as if you are standing in the door way, there's nowhere to sit, so you just move on. Actually, I could write a whole post about the awful choice/ position of seating at this exhibition. Which is something that really should have been taken into consideration, especially considering how the majority of the work on show, was video.)

Anyway. Moving oh so swiftly on.

As you moved away from Richards' video piece and around the corner, you are surrounded by larger hanging carpets depicting different people. These focused on people who I believe were not necessary famous - my friend informed me they were people at events (who were out of shot) that were important and noted. So again, this theme of focussing on the other.

And lastly, there were some photographs displayed via old projector slides. These didn't really bring much interest to me, so I can't say I thought anything about them worth noting. Only way the use of this method of presentation?


Tris Vonna-Michell
Again, Vonna-Michell is another video artist. The primary video contained a lot of irratic repetative speech. The imagery focused on tables, and other imagery that I didn't think was necessary. It felt as if the speech was more important then what we were watching. Almost felt as if the images were a ploy to get people to sit down and listen as we live in a massive image culture and people's attention span might not last for very long to listen to a purely sonic piece.

And once more, the position of the long benches for this piece were awful. No matter where you sat you were in someone's way or someone was in your way (unless you were fortunate enough to sit at the front.)

There was a second piece that was projector slides, that automatically changed. Along with this went a narrative that was spoken through the speakers surrounding the chairs creating a very intimate atmosphere. Now this a feel worked much better than the first piece on display. This piece was very much like story-telling.


Ciara Phillips
Quite honestly, I was a huge fan of this. As you entered the space given to Phillips, it had quite an impression - but I feel like the main reason for this was simply because of of sudden shift of medium. The previous two artists both had video pieces, and both used old projector slides for their pieces and here, we came into brightly lit room (you actually notice how high the ceiling is) and from top to toe the walls are covered in her patterned prints. And very occasionally we get a series of photographs of the artist, all looking the same.

Once you get over the sudden shift in the lighting, and the change of there being no screen, I began to feel as if she was a token vote. To change up the choice of the type of artist that they are promoting. Yet this piece still managed to have a sonic element to it. It simply read out words listed. It felt very uninspired and I did just have to leave.


Duncan Campbell
Now you've guessed it. It's another video artist! (Really, all I can say is what is the Tate thinking? But we won't get into that now, I'll moan about that later.) The first piece you see is a film with different shapes forming (as if being drawn by an invisible hand) with German words and noises erupting from speakers placed near the old film projector. I vaguely remember this piece having to do with Sigmar Polke (which seems slightly suspicious, as the Tate have a big exhibition housing his works at the moment - coincidence or planned promotion?) But this piece was entirely pointless for me.

Now the second piece (and big show stopper) there was a film. That's it. Tah-dah! A film, one displayed as you would if you went to the cinema. With a running time of 54 minutes. Which really is quite brave, so I do have to give it to Campbell for expecting people to hand around for almost an hour to watch this film in a gallery. The medium really does make a difference, and with a film you aren't going to have an immediate impact. So you do have to sit there. Also, it's a medium that we are so familiar with so it does need to leave quite an impression.

We saw the film from 20 minutes in until the end (as that was the point we happened to walk in) and that is the longest I have every sat in a gallery and watched a film piece for. It followed 'art film' conventions. Academic vocabulary. (Sometimes I had no idea what was going on.) Almost came across as a little preachy. But towards the end it did make a point about the art market, art and worth. And it wasn't that bad.


Overall, what we can gage from this exhibition is the following:

• The Tate thinks that the only art of any worth currently happening is video.
• Ditto that with sound art.
• For some reason there is a return to using traditional projectors/ slides/ film and leaving digital behind.
• The Tate NEED to sort out their seating in exhibitions.
• I think Campbell is going to win. The rest were just there to build up to his film.

Now I could be very wrong - but that's part of the fun. Guessing who is going to win. It's just like picking a couple to win on Strictly. 

I would say it was worth a look - you do have to pay though - student price being £6. However, I wish the Tate had picked a broader range of artists this year. It feels as if the British art scene has become very samey, very safe and just not that interesting.

Tower of London: Poppies

This is just a little note about the current installation at the Tower of London. It's something I have been curious to see since it started in August, and almost being 11th November (the last day of this installation) I thought it was time I paid it a visit.

(Just a little F.Y.I incase you didn't know, this has been made to commemorate the First World War centennial, created by the ceramic artist Paul Cummins.)

It really is quite breath taking as you slowly approach the Tower. From afar there is just a sea of red, and as you slowly get closer each individual flower reveals itself.

It's quite a weird one actually. It creates a strange feeling for me. On a purely aesthetic level, sculpturally it is beautiful. They've done a brilliant job of integrating this historical site with these poppies that spill from the windows onto the grounds creating this rippling red sea.

But then you start to think about what each poppy represents, and why it is there. (It makes me feel slightly uncomfortable to be honest.) But nevertheless I think it is a very fitting memorial to remember a piece of history we should never forget.

Review: Pangaea: New Art From Africa and Latin America (EXHIBITION)

Boring information first up (so we can just get it out of the way, that way we can get to the juicier stuff quicker):

1. Current exhibition at the Saatchi Gallery in London. 
2. One of the last chances to see as it ends soon - 2nd November. 
3. It's FREE.
4. It's literally the ant's pants. (Which I think is a phrase that should replace the bee's knees.)

Let me slightly expand on that very subtle introduction of ants that I just mentioned. Rafael Gomezbarros is the creator of Casa Tomada. One of the most stunning sculptural installations I have seen. As you enter the Saatchi Gallery turn left. This is the room you must go in first. And this is the room where Casa Tomada lives. (Possibly not the best place for anyone who has any sort of slight fear of creepy-crawlies (especially those of the ant type) as they are invading the first room that is part of this exhibition.)

Please stare at the picture above in horror/intrigue and you'll understand what I mean.

If you can bear to get closer and inspect the ants individually, you'll notice that their bodies are made up of the casts of human skulls. Now there is so much that you could read into this (especially if you find out about the artist and his history), but I'm going to let you make your own minds up.

Whilst in my opinion the other works in this exhibition aren't as impressive, they are most definitely worth seeing. The rest of the display contains much more 2D work: large, vibrant, colourful paintings that clash with their subject matter, photographs exploring traditional African masks and more muted large scale paintings that are balanced on numerous objects such as keyboards.

It's nice to see an exhibition that's sole purpose is to promote non-European art. And it does feel a little different from what we are usually confronted with when we enter a gallery.

So if you're intrigued by the ants alone, and happen to be in London before this exhibition closes, definitely go and see this! (And did I say it's free!!)

BBC Audiences: Hannah Gadsby

Just a quick little post on this gem of a find. I did know that you could apply to be in audiences of recordings, but for some reason this actually never really clicked in my brain as being an actual possibility. 

Until my brilliant mother set me on the trails of Hannah Gadsby. She's a comedienne from Australia (who is rather amusing.) Yet how does she relate to the world of art Hannaa? Well, funny you should ask. At her time at university (the other) Hannah (as we shall refer to her) studied Art History. And she has developed two special shows where she combines her art historian knowledge with her funny bone. Hence the title of the two shows: Hannah Gadsby Speaks from her Art.

(A little F.Y.I for you: the show is going to be broadcast on 7th January 2015 on BBC Radio 4 - unfortunately they didn't give us the time, but if you keep an eye out you should be able to spot it.)

The Broadcasting House is in London (nearest tube Oxford Circus) and it's where they film the 6 o'clock news! As you're waiting to be taken to the room for the recording, you're in a room that over looks all the blurred desks that you see in the background which is pretty cool. (If you look at a certain angle through one of the windows at the back, you can even see the news reporter reporting live! And more importantly, there's a life-size Tardis in this room.)

Went on a little tangent there, but long story short, you can apply for tickets online (just google BBC Audiences or something similar), Hannah Gadsby is rather amusing, and you should check out the broadcast of her show as it talks about two famous pieces of art over the radio. (One being above.) Easy listening. And funny. Perfect.

Review: Speed the Plow (PLAY)

Last Friday night (which we all know are famous last words) I went to go and see Speed the Plow which is currently showing in London on the West End. And I won't lie. I primarily went for one reason, and one reason only: Lohan. I wanted to see Miss Lindsay Lohan in the flesh as well as see her acting, and I am partial to a play or two so I thought, why not?

As everyone entered their seats, it didn't quite have the same atmosphere as seeing other plays. There seemed to be a buzz in the air and let's face it, everyone was probably there for the same reason I was.

I have quite an opinion on this performance as well as the play itself, as well as Lohan.

Firstly, I don't think she was as bad as everyone has been saying. I think she did well for the material she was given.

The script in my opinion is not good.

It comes across as messy, repetitive and boring. It tries to promote some sort of morals, it really tries, but it definitely does not succeed. The script seems to paint women as creatures who only seem to use their promiscuity to get what they want for no apparent reason.

You weren't sure whether or not the script was messy or their delivery was messy. (I'm leaning more towards that's how it was written.) The first 40 minutes of the play seemed unnecessary. They unnecessarily repeated unnecessary words unnecessarily. Other elements to the script didn't work either. The humour written into the script didn't come across, the banter came across as crude and humourless. Some of the lines came across as funny but mainly because we know of Lohan's past.

She did well with the material she was given. And despite having apparently forgotten her lines in previous performances, it was one of her male leads that forgot his words this time.

This play relies heavily on its leads and for me they didn't have enough sparkle needed. To be fair, they did the best they could with the material they've been given. One of the male leads did a really good job of making me hate him. So he was doing his job well as his character was insufferable. He had a terrible potty mouth. Which just annoyed me because there should be a reason why. And I just don't feel like they were trying to make any sort of point with it.

And fair play to Lindsay Lohan. The play started on time. She delivered her lines with some conviction. I just hope this is a continuing incline of improvement for someone who was a brilliant actress of my childhood.

Overall, it's not something I would recommend seeing. Not unless you just wanted to see Lohan in the flesh, and even then just go for the cheap seats.

We're Seeing Stars

There's stars in their eyes!

Or my eyes as it were.

One of the best places to learn about the stars is Greenwich. If you are in London, you must pay a visit to the Royal Observatory. The website can be a little confusing, in terms of what is free and what you have to pay for. (Unfortunately one of the thing that you have to pay for is the Meridian Courtyard where you can stand on the Greenwich Meridian Line (the centre of world time.) Which I think is awful. But anyway, I won't get into that.)

But a little gem that is completely free is the Astronomy Centre. There you can busy yourself with educational interactive games, as well as touching the oldest thing you'll ever touch: a 4.5 billion year old meteorite. Which is really cool!

But the main reason that we are here, is for the cracker that is the Planetarium.

I think everyone should go.

For a concession ticket (in my case a student) the price was £5.50. And I thought it was worth every penny.

The ticket price includes a 30 minute show in the Planetarium and dependent on the show you pick (I went for the one called 'The Sky Tonight') could include a live commentary by an astronomer. It is a fantastic way to get lost in the stars for part of your day. I really would recommend it.

Review: Antony and Cleopatra - The Globe (PLAY)

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."

Now yes, this is the wrong play, but it does nicely allude to what literary genius we are referring to!

Shakespeare.

The other day, me and my sister when to see Antony and Cleopatra at The Globe Theatre in London. I love Shakespeare, and love the theatre, so was excited to see another of his plays come to life (there's only so much you can do by readying aloud by yourself.) Despite this, I knew nothing of his play starring two of history's notorious lovers but was definitely willing to give it a go.

Especially considering that the ticket was only £5.

May I repeat.

Five. Pounds.

Throughout the summer, the Globe puts on Shakespearean plays, offering groundling tickets (a.k.a standing) for £5. This is an absolute bargain. And you must be thinking, there's a catch? Right? And yes, I suppose there are. But is it worth it? Definitely.

Here are a few pros and cons about these tickets:

• Pro: The price is fantastic.
• Con: You have to stand for the duration of the play.
• Pro: You can rest during the interval and sit on the ground.
• Con: You have to queue a little so that you can get as close to the stage as possible.
• Pro: You have one of the BEST views in the house.
• Con: If it rains, (as the theatre is open-air) you are left standing there in the wet. (Only macs are allowed for protection - no umbrellas.)
• Pro: You have some cheeky little secret eye contact with the actors.

Now briefly onto the play itself. As all good Shakespearean plays, this tragedy ends in a way you would expect, following the story of Roman General (Antony) turned to a fool through his love for Cleopatra. There is a balance of love and violence peppered with a clash of the East and the West. The production itself was very dynamic, and they really engaged with the whole audience by using the whole of the stage. I did enjoy watching this play, but it doesn't make it onto my list of favourites. But what I think really helped me enjoy my experience was the design of the theatre itself.

Being an open air theatre, there is a strong feeling of freedom that surrounds the production of the play. There is a feeling of anything-could-happen and a sense of improvisation if needed (even though no-one would change Shakespeare.) Because you aren't enclosed within a roofed building, you are opened to the elements. Which, of course, could be distracting - but luckily for me provided the perfect real-life pathetic fallacy. As Antony's power diminished, the sun went away and the clouds came out, offering a smattering of rain. (There was also the odd pigeon at the most dramatic points, just to add tension. If anything having no roof, somehow made the environment feel more true to life.)

At one point, Cleopatra even began talking to an airplane overhead, as it just happened that her line made sense to do so. (You had to be there.)

So in essence, in a really rambling way of saying so - if you're ever around in London at this time of year, grab yourself one of those £5 tickets and stick it out just like them peasants used to. (It really is worth it.)

And one last thing worth mentioning - slightly similar to the Art Everywhere Project previously mentioned, there is a bench hunt called Books about Town going on in London, where 50 book bench sculptures have been plotted around the city. Each bench depicts a different story. This one was outside the Globe, and of course featured the one and only, Mr W. Shakespeare. (These benches are only around until 15th September 2014 - so keep an eye out!)

#arteverywhere

Art is indeed everywhere. Just a quick little post about this art project that is happening around the country! This is something I just stumbled upon - which I think is great, which means that you don't have to know about it to actually notice it.

Art Everywhere is presenting a summer of art. From 21st July to 31st August 2014 many different art works have been chosen as part of this nationwide exhibition. Poster sites and billboards have been infiltrated with fine art instead of the usual adverts for things we don't really need.

Above is one I snapped on the tube - one of my favourites that I've seen (an art work by Ms Gillian Wearing.)

I've noticed this slowly ends up becoming an art treasure hunt.

So if you're in the UK, you should see how many you can spot!

Review: Mood Indigo (FILM)

So this first review comes in the form of a film.

Please let me introduce you to Mood Indigo.



Director: Michel Gondry (most known for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.)

Starring: Romain Duris, Audrey Tautou, Gad Elmaleh and Omar Sy.

Despite having been released in France in 2013, we've only just had the film released here in the UK. (1st August 2014 to be precise.) So if you're hoping to catch this in cinemas here, I have a feeling you'll have to be quick as it probably has a limited release.

Now enough of the word 'release' in its various incarnations. To the film. Honestly put, it wasn't what I was expecting. Is this a bad thing? No. It just took me a while to adjust to this wonderfully weird world I had been thrust into without fully informed consent.

The trailer does slightly allude to this, but there is so much more of a surreal element to the film than what is revealed (but you would expect as much from a film that has a protagonist who gets ill from a water lily growing in her lung.)

At its heart this film is a love story. A boy meets girl. Happiness ensues for a while, until tragedy strikes. As for the ending, I won't ruin the surprise.

Although at times the absurd nature of this film can overwhelm you whilst watching and sometimes distract from the plot, at the same time, it does manage to appropriately mirror the emotion of the characters in the story. (For those interested, this is an adaptation of the book: L'ecume Des Jours.)

I did leave the cinema a little shell shocked, but I did find myself with a smile on face. And it is a film who's story has lingered with me. I think it is one of those films that grows on you after a couple of days having seen it. (Also have to mention that this has a brilliant soundtrack if nothing else.)

This wasn't the best film I've ever seen, but nor was it the worst.

Basically, if you're in the mood for some Duke Ellington, love Tautou and Duris as I do, and want to experience something a little different I would give this a go. It's something that will keep you intrigued for an hour and a half. As my mother put it: 'I didn't look at my watch once, but it was kind of weird.' 

That's a good recommendation if I ever heard one.

Teapots and Introductions

It is customary when meeting new people to introduce yourself.

So basically I would like to say hey, hi, hello!

I'm a Fine Art student (studying in London) about to go into my final year of university and have been toying with the idea of setting up a space to share my thoughts on exhibitions visited, fact files on artists and general art-related chatter.

If this happens to be useful or interesting to just one other person, then I feel that this blog is doing its job.

Being UK based, these reviews will primarily be based around London, but I shall branch out to places around the country - as well as the odd place around Europe.

So sit back, relax, while I spout out jumbled excitedness about various arty things like the teapot I am.