Nora’s installation
Change of mood in the window room:
While we were setting up Nora´s installation in the window room we were struck by the different energy the whole room got from Noras work. There was a very intense talk about the work; about surface, skin, interaction of the two pieces you will see; about softness, disappearance and about time. About colour, the quality of white and the function of a painting.
Three words in the very well-phrased introduction have a key role for me: Skin, light, interaction. I felt the transparent container acted as a caption - a caption not to read, but to unfold. Soon I realised that to reach anywhere near the many layers of illusory paint, I had to do much more than just metaphorically unfolding a few trapped pieces in the transparent container. The canvas changed its texture slightly as I made a minute move in any direction. The vague and undefined patterns of colour began to give a live performance while at the same time the trick of lights from the windows added to the magic.
If ever there is a third dimension in a two dimensional work, it is in Nora’s painting, and she creates it not by conventional shading, but by a vigorous light which radiates from the surface and travels in all directions conjuring up unseen colours.
Abbas
Comment by Abbas Hashemi — June 2, 2008 @ 8:28 pm
whilst having lunch the other day, there did seem to be a different/new energy to the room - more reflexive perhaps?
I am curious to know more about the relationship between the ‘carefully’ folded canvas in the vase and the skin-like (potted, freckled,sun-drenched, bleached out, surgically enhanced?) canvas on the wall. At first glance there doesn’t seem to be any obvious relationship but because of their close proximity i can’t help but try and make some association. In some respects the vase on the floor is a distraction from my experience with the canvas - my eye keeps getting distracted.
what do other people think?
Comment by davidk — June 4, 2008 @ 10:29 am
Hi Kiki and Nora,
I’m intrigued about the conversations you refer to and the question that David poses in his comment above. Nora, this is why I brought up the question at lunchtime. It would be great if you could write any of your thoughts regarding the process of selecting and hanging this work here on the blog.
I feel that it would open up this dialogue more if both the artist and the artist/curator (selector) for the ‘window room project’ both wrote a short bit about the experience or reflections at the end of the week would be interesting.
what does everyone think?
Comment by sarah — June 6, 2008 @ 3:35 pm
Nora’s work did bring a very different sensibility to the space of the window room…..I’ve been wondering whether its effect related to the previous work- work that had been made directly onto the wall. There had been maybe four weeks in which the work was directly on the wall, so the physical depth of the canvas immediately brings it into the room more, especially in comparison to previous work…..
I walked through the window room as the work was being installed and my immediate reaction was to question why this vase had been placed to the left of the painting….I’ve seen this work in the studio, but I’ve never read them together…more like components of someone’s practice. Nora, I think I’ve already said this to you, but I can’t get away from the vase…and for that reason I find it difficult….however it’s really interesting to think of this work in relation to the work you showed in the gallery in February, and it opens up the work in the window room more…that there is an action suggested other than brush in hand applying paint….a glance towards how the crushed and crumpled (the action of making that part of the work) relates back to the painting, if only hinting at a conversation between the making of the two, the process of the two coming together..
..and it’s position in the space, the viewer must walk past it, and I think again back to the work in the gallery in February…
I’m interested in the visual of this crumpled fabric in the container in relation to the painting- they have a relationship…and in Kiki’s notes about the installation, this idea of skin keeps coming back to me….there’s a physicality to the work, and the container has a crucial role in that…. how would a less functional container work…a square/rectangle glass vessel say….something of the same proportions as the painting?
Comment by Katherine — June 12, 2008 @ 10:10 am
Well, it’s the end of my week or weeks (as it turned out) in the window room. I have to say, it was well worth doing. The comments here on the blog and also the feedback I got through private conversations have made the experience are very worthwhile one. When myself and Kiki were talking a couple of weeks ago about what I might show, Kiki came up with the idea of showing the painting and object together. She fealt that the object helped frame the canvas conceptually … I had hoped that the canvas would frame itself conceptually but was open to Kikis feedback and also willing to use the Window Room Project as an experimental space to try out something untested. And as predicted, the relationship between object and painting became the focus of much debate. Fear not those who hate the vase, it was never intended as a finished piece, simply a test piece for a bigger idea. Now that I’ve test run the idea of relating an object (or something external to the painting) to a hung painting I feel energised and ready to explore new visual avenues in the work. Not because this exhibition was deemed so successful, in fact most of you objected to the object (but in fairness it was the actual vase itself you were adverse to, not it’s function as an object) but because so many new ideas have sprung from this test piece. So overall for me the Window Room Project was a resounding success and Kiki’s suggestion of combining object with painting a resolute hit. Thanks Kiki for all your input and for taking such a thoughtful approach when reading my work.
Comment by nora — June 12, 2008 @ 6:16 pm