We went to Tate Modern to see some of the pieces we had been discussing in our lectures/seminars in real life. The idea was that they might have more of an impact on us that the photo’s. In some cases this was true, but in the case of Carl Andre’s Equivalent VIII below, I’m afraid it had the opposite effect on me. In theory I can see that it is an example of minimalism – the use of a single material – 120 firebricks stacked 10 x 6, 2 deep, the simple geometric shape, human sized so not making a grandiose statement about being an impressive sculpture. No plinth or showcase – “what you see is what you see” (a phrase commonly attributed to Frank Stella). No hidden meanings, although it was discussed that the size and shape is reminiscent of a tombstone, especially with the low rail around it to stop visitors getting too close.
But I still find it incredibly irritating. It is just a pile of bricks like you would see on a pallett in B&Q and walk straight past. I get it, but I just don’t appreciate it! Not my cup of tea.
I felt a bit differently about Roni Horn’s ‘Pink Ton’. It still has the same minimalist qualities – single material, big but not larger than life (although it weighs a tonne, it isn’t much bigger than a kitchen table), a simple glass cube not pertaining to be anything else. But it’s beautiful and interesting. I love how it changes as you walk around it because of the light and the surface texture. In the light you can see it is pink glass and the rough outer texture is just where it sat in the mould, but away from the light it looks like it’s been painted with pink paint all around the outside. Where the glass curves at the edges, a naturally occuring effect from the mould process, it almost creates an optical illusion – you don’t know how deep the glass is as it distorts the perspective and the light reflections on the smooth surface make interesting patterns…so whilst it is still a minimalist piece, I still found it to be beautiful and interesting. I still think, personally, that in order for an object to be considered art, it needs to have that special something about it.
And the Kusama mirror cube piece! I am using a photo of this piece that was put on moodle as one of my inspiration pictures for my 2d to 3d piece, so it was wonderful to see it properly. Again, something simple and minimalist – one material, simple geometric shape, not too big or small, it is what it is, but the patterns and colours from reflected clothing that it created were the opposite of minimalism! It gave me a new perspective on why she calls them infinity cubes – I had thought it was because the reflections appear to go on forever, but also the combination of patterns and colours are infinite and constantly changing.
After the Between Object and Architecture display that had been the purpose of our visit, we were set free to explore on our own. I found another Barbara Hepworth sculpture – I am fast becoming a fan of hers! I have said it before but her sculptures are so tactile and inviting, which isn’t a good thing when they’re in a gallery and you aren’t allowed to touch them! Smooth like an eggshell on the outside, yet you can see the making marks on the inside – in this case it’s cast and carved plaster rather than the polished and painted wood of ‘The Wave’ that has inspired my design sheet. I love the idea that the inside is as, if not more interesting and complex than the outside.
I didn’t have long at Tate Brittain – only 30 mins, so I dashed around taking photo’s of anything that caught my eye. On looking through my photo’s I see a lot of the work that interested me was by Lynn Chadwick, who I had not previously heard of. There are obvious similarities between ‘Fisheater’ and Alexander Calders mobiles, whom we have been learning about in Facture, but they are given life and personality rather than being totally abstract and scientific. I wonder if it would move if a breeze blew through, and if so what would the movement be? It is beautiful and scary at the same time.
clairemaloney 