Evolution: Curators Panel Discussion
Today I attended a panel discussion that initially posed the question What is the future of new Media Art? As the discussion progressed, it became much more about New Media in the present, and how it sits within the historical framework surrounding the way in which we present art to an audience. The discussion was part of the Evolution festival, which is an annual showcase of exceptional programmes of work from artists that use media in their art.
An Art Gallery is a space that connects the artist, artwork and its audience, through the interpretation and expertise of the curator. How can galleries and museums be used to re-present new media works to an audience successfully, given financial, spatial and logistical constraints now presented to us through this complex genre of contemporary art?
A painting or photograph hung on a wall is contained within the boundaries of the frame or canvas. It exists as an individual entity, unaffected by the context in which it is placed. New media presents us with an image that is absorbed or reflected off a surface plain. Thus the space in which a projected image is shown is the structure that allows the piece to exist. A room supplies power, provides a surface to project on to, or a screen on which to present imagery. The space, like a canvas, becomes the frame in which the work is viewed; and is very much intrinsic to how the work is interpreted.
This relationship between digital space and the space that supports it is something that art galleries are becoming increasingly aware of, as constantly advancing technology and digital mediums become broader and less easy to control. Control is an interesting concept for me, particularly as an artist who uses various forms of new media. At what point do artists hand over control of the work they have produced to another, and what effect does this removed responsibility have to a piece of artwork?
I showed a video as part of an installation in a gallery in Stroud a few years ago. It was a small show, and I travelled to the space especially to install the work. When I came back a few weeks later to de-install, the work had significantly changed. Invigilators had accessed the installation, in order to turn the power on and off at the start and end of each day. I had left specific instructions on how the piece should be presented, and the gallery had not respected these simple requirements. As a result, the piece was ruined, and I had lost control of the piece though no fault of my own.
A discussion I attended at Art Forum in Berlin last year touched upon this topic of control. Video artist Phil Collins stated that when he sells his work to a collector or gallery, the only control that he has is through the instructions he supplies on how to install the work. To him, this was an intrinsic part of the process, and I feel that collectors and curators should consider taking on this responsibility of following guidelines supplied with new media as a vital part of the creative process.
Nigel Walsh contributed to the talk at the Burton Gallery today, recalling a sound piece from the Leeds Art Gallery collection created by artist Tacita Dean. He and his colleagues worked closely with the artist when installing her work, combining their expertise on audience engagement with the artist’s conceptual intention.
Separations, the exhibition that I created almost a year ago with colleague Andy Broadey, was for me very much a way of reflecting concerns regarding the relationship between art and context. Sourcing an alternative exhibition space, I used the site to create a piece of work that existed solely in the space in which it was created and exhibited. I used the space as my resource, filming minutiae and happenings that occurred during two weeks leading up to the show. What was interesting about the work was the fact that without the space surrounding the films presented on multiple screens, the work would not exist. The space and films worked symbiotically, only physically existing for two-weeks during the exhibition. The work was very much about experiencing a context, and reflected the temporal qualities of the moving image and how we can relate that to our own actuality.
This work, entitled Fragments (2008), now exists solely through the medium of photography. As a result, the integral part of experiencing the work first hand by an audience has been removed; thus the act of preserving the work so that it can be archived and experienced beyond the event itself is impossible. The fear that new media works will be lost to time, as the memory of an event such as Separation fades, is something that concerns me as a practitioner.
Fragments 2008 Photo: © David Lindsey
