I made a stop at University of Virginia's Off-Grounds Gallery this weekend. I'm kind of fascinated with this little space and like to check out what is going on there. Unfortunately, it takes a little shoe leather to stay up on its happenings – I wish there was better advertising for the shows. Yet, it is an invaluable learning opportunity for UVa art students to get their work out there in a commercial gallery setting.
I also like to analyze the exhibits. Not necessarily for my own purposes, but, I think it is important for someone from outside the University to review the work. From my experience, art students get a bulk of their reviews from friends ("Oh my gosh! You are like sooooo talented. I could never draw an apple to look that real. Do you think you could draw a picture of this beer bottle for me?"), their parents ("Oh, honey, we are just so proud of you. No one in our family has ever had any artistic talent. I don't know where you get it from."), and teachers ("Uh, right, yes… Good use of tonal contrasts and color. You get a B-."). Bottom line… It’s a real challenge for a student to get objective criticism. Even harder in Charlottesville where there are only a few art critics in the mainstream media. With that said, I offer my opinions in a constructive manner and with no hidden agenda.
So, I trundled over to the Off Grounds Gallery with pen and paper in hand and checked out the photography of James Scheuren and Cecilia Steel. My first impression was good. The last exhibit there was haphazardly hung and unprofessional. This one was smartly hung - I say this because each photo measured 16"x16", was framed exactly the same, hung perfectly in align and spaced equally apart. Although appealing to my Monk-like need for order, this uniform presentation ultimately gave the grouping of 32 photos a homogenous feel. I almost lost interest in the first minute. But I broke it down, examined the individual pieces, and made it make sense.
The obvious theme here is Nature in one form or another. James Scheuren's 16 photos seemed to speak of the age old battle of Man versus Nature. But was it about urban decay? Urban renewal? Or maybe the plight of the environment? Hard to tell. I found intrigue in the strong images of a landscape zambonied by a line up of bulldozers making room for the next Wal-Mart. And, the most powerful images offer signs of Nature springing forth from the raped landscapes. In those, I felt hope and a promise of Nature overcoming Man's destruction. For me, Scheuren's best photo, titled "27 November 2007", pictures a sweet dew covered field of grass belittling the mechanical power towers cast in the unfocused distance. The effect is accomplished by Scheuren resting his camera on the ground allowing us to stand eye-to-eye with the blades of grass. It is this altered perspective that makes this piece stand out. Virtually all the others are taken from the obvious and readable point of view of a person standing on the ground before the images. Mixing up vantage points would satisfy a need for drama. Without it, the images are all too easily readable and don’t say much.
Going back to the homogeneity issue… All of Scheuren's photos are simply titled by the date they were taken. Sixteen photos taken from June 2007 through December 2007. That’s fine. What bothered me, however, was that the photos all look like they were taken on the exact same clear, sunny day. Possibly just a few hours apart. There is very little atmospheric variance or change in the weather. No foreboding storm clouds on the horizon. No darkness in the destruction. No mist shrouding the steel and concrete constructions looming over us. No tension. No drama. Just clear, sunny days.
In Cecilia Steel's photos I had a much better sense that Nature is the clear winner in its struggles with Man. Made me feel better inside. For Steel, manmade objects are pictured in a state of decay instead of birth. Linear elements are overcome by the organic ones that surround and overtake them. Pretty and a little easier to look at.
Steel's raises the level of her art in the photos that shorten the focal point. As in "Footpath", she has rendered the backdrop a mere abstraction of leaves and the focal point rests on a single unobtrusive branch. Takes a moment to read, but is effective due to the beauty of the colors and patterns captured.
Unfortunately, Steel runs into the same problem as Scheuren: A majority of her photos seem to have been shot on that same clear, sunny day. Early fall, maybe? When Steel submits herself to the weather, she is more successful. Two photos stand out: "James" includes a discernable change in weather - maybe a misty morning or the moment following a light rain. Regardless, "James" is more about neglect, desperation and loneliness and less about the beauty of the natural world. The same with "Stasis"; its touch of fog and predominant use of red make this image unique.
As I stood in the middle of the Gallery, the 32 photos framed identically, lined up perfectly, spaced exactly, and captured on what felt like the exact same cloudless day did not represent two bodies of work to me. The art of landscape photography should convey that single special image captured at that single special moment. The intensity of the light, the shadows, the mist in the air, the hues of the sky, the altered perspective… they all must play a part.
Recent Comments