|
|
|
Against Design |
 |
|
|
|
|
Not All Is Lost |
|
The requirement for explanation that weighs upon most of the works in "Against Design" lifts on only two occasions.
The more obvious of these is a simple wood table with a glass vase holding a spray of yellow flowers. Amidst this generally dreary exhibition, this creation by Joe Scanlan jumps out like a ray of sunshine after a days of drizzle and gray. Its appearance is deceiving, however, and the artist insists that you know it. So he titles the work "Pay Attention Motherfuckers." Heeding this advice, and reading all the title card's details, it's learned that the flower blossoms are actually crumpled-up post-it notes and the stems are made from coat hangers.
Joe Scanlan, "Pay
Attention Motherfuckers," 1999
In true Against Design fashion, knowledge of these facts (plus the shrill title) deflates any pleasure the piece generates on first impression, and turns the experience into a contemplation of the artist's cleverness. Once in that domain, it's not too big a step to realize that Scanlan's piece is no more clever than the equally deceptive paper flowers available by the bin-full at 99cent Stores. Only the title and the hallowed halls of the art museum make it different.
Roy McMakin, "Chest of
Drawers," 2000
While Roy McMakin produced some of the dreariest content in the show, he also produced the only piece that's capable of being appreciated in purely visual terms.
The work is "Chest of Drawers," a darkly painted, nearly characterless "antique" hunk of domestic furniture raised a couple of inches off the floor on a white steel pedestal.
The work offers plenty for the eye to dwell on: the character and contrast of the old chest and the shiny steel column; the lightness and odd nobility the chest acquires by resting atop the powerful base; the anti-gravitational feeling generated by the slight elevation of the chest above the floor.
Against Design's rationalizations can be attached to the piece, and there's no reason not to consider how they might apply here. But fundamentally, these rationalizations are not nearly as interesting nor as worthwhile as what the eye can see all by itself.
This is what visual art is. It's visual.
