The title of the work in question, “The Gun Sculpture“, is actually something of a misnomer, for a few reasons. Firstly, as this censorship episode makes plain, the artists consider their full project to consist of three elements: a large cube made from weapons, a series of photographs and text on victims of violence, and a blackboard for visitor comments. Obviously, such a diverse and diffuse presentation of content is not a ’sculpture’, per se, but rather is an installation. Their title ignores these latter components, and focuses attention primarily on the large 3D cube of weaponry (arguably the “artwork” of the piece, as the photos, text, and guestbook don’t really merit that appellation) which includes “a variety of anti-tank and anti-personnel landmines, mortar shells, 110 mm recoilless rifles, AK47s, sawed-off shotguns of different makes, knives and other non-fire arm weapons“. So plainly, not just “guns”. Plus, the Borg-ship-like block is not as solid as it appears in photographs, since it is in reality a cell-like room, its thin walls wired and welded with weapons on the outside. A weapon hut, sure, but not really a “gun sculpture” at all. (The piece would be better as a sculpture, per se, if it were a solid cube, since as it stands, in the flesh it feels disappointingly thin, like an unconvincing facade, and works much better in photos. A solid lump of guns and ammo would have far more sculptural impact).

Perhaps this misnaming of the work explains why Antonio Costa, director general of the United Nations Office in Vienna, can perhaps be forgiven for thinking the comparatively inartistic supplementary portion of photos and text on victims of violence was not “integral” to “The Gun Sculpture”, since it is quite clearly NOT integral to what most people would think of as the ‘artwork’, which is the cell covered in weapons. But, since Kendal and Bromley’s work is not simply the 3D element, but is in fact a mixed media installation on violence that includes other components, then it is beyond obvious that removing a portion of the thing by definition damages that thing’s integrity (“the quality or state of being complete or undivided”… Dictionaries FTW!). With a more appropriately descriptive name for the installation, Mr. Costa’s claim “that nothing was done to undermine the integrity of the artwork and that the UN supported the installation” would be seen as akin to a claim that black is white, and just as contrary to established facts.

Although none of the coverage on this issue has included any quotes from the mysterious Wallis Kendal himself, Sandra Bromley says “Social issues like this, not everybody likes them, but most people respect the right to look at issues and discuss issues. I hope the artistic community is riled by this. I hope they speak out loudly about it.” (The Edmonton Journal also quotes Bromley as stating “We don’t look at this art as a political statement”, but that’s obviously utter nonsense.) This isn’t really an issue merely for the arts community, but for civil society at large, to be riled by, just as any other instance of censorious interference should rile those who cherish the freedoms set out in the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which includes the right to free expression. And while China has long shown their disregard for basic human rights, in far worse ways than this, a commitment to free expression is something you would think the UN’s own Vienna Director-General would understand better, and hold more dear.

Unfortunately, it seems that Antonio Costa takes a rather squint-eyed view of human rights, which leads one to wonder what he’s doing in running a UN office in the first place? Perhaps it’s time for him to retire…

Cassady McCourt Collection:

February 24: Nude 1 (B.R.), Franklin Einspruch, 2006.

.

June 29: Nude 3 (C.A.), Franklin Einspruch, 2005.

.

February: M.L. on the Cushions in the Studio, Franklin Einspruch, 2004.

.

November: K.R. with Mirror and Self Portrait, Franklin Einspruch, 2003.

.

December: A.F. with Goddaughter 1, Franklin Einspruch, 2002.

.

And yet, here we are.

Now, I find out there’s an automatic ambigram generator. I should have guessed there was an easier way.

Helm of the Artist

Did you know the EAC now awards project grants of up to $25,000 to visual artists?
Did you know the deadline for applications is July 1?
Do they know that’s a holiday?

Whatever the answers to those questions… better send off an application.

You’ve got to be in it to win it.

“From vibrant vintage Japanese woodblock prints originally purchased by Cassady’s grandmother, to Rob Willms’ stark line sketches of the alleyway behind the gallery and McCourt’s own scenic brass sculptures hewn of Goodwill-bin rescue ornaments reworked into new life, the show is at once a broad roundup of local and international artists and a subtle narrative of Cassady and McCourt’s life together to date.”

- Robin Schroffel,  See Magazine

Cover art for the Viva la Fry project.

Are we supposed to know facts about the artists and their works? Are we supposed to talk? Shall we be entirely silent and slowly stand and stare at works without comment and without revealing what we feel or shall we occasionally dare to say that we like this expression, or that shape, or those colours? Do we whisper to our companions, or do we imitate that awful show-off over there who is talking so knowledgeably and loudly about morbidezza, sfumato and golden sections? And isn’t it actually snobbish of us to disapprove of him, he is obviously enjoying himself and what is wrong with him imparting his enthusiasm and knowledge to his companion? Why should we assume he is showing off, doesn’t that assumption reveal nothing but our own self-conscious insecurity? Oh dear. It’s all so complicated. Aren’t we just striking a pose too, the pose of one who refuses to listen to any nonsense about art history, or pay any attention to the tradition or biographical background of the works before us. In fact we are going to ignore the so-called masterpiece in front of us and stylishly prefer the lesser known work next to it, just to show how original we are and how unswayed by reputations.

“A Private View at the Royal Academy” by William Frith.

Even if we avoid all those contortions we still have to stand before art works that might have us entranced, or confused or perplexed, or shocked or bored or thrilled or hungry for more while at the same time knowing that there are others clamouring to see them as well, so we mustn’t hog the space directly in front, yet we are conscious too that we don’t know how far away to stand – should we step right back and risk other people getting in the way? On the other hand if we go too close are we pretentiously implying a connoisseur’s expertise in brushwork and technique? Oh dear, all I want to do is engage with the piece sincerely, with no pre-conceptions or prejudices but my own manners, fears and anxieties and my awareness of myself and of others, all obtrude. There’s always someone blocking my clear view of an artwork and that someone turns out to be myself.

All this self-consciousness. It sometimes seems that the only safe way to go round an exhibition is entirely on one’s own, otherwise we’re in terrible fear of looking like a show-off, or an ignoramus, or affected or blasé or pretentious or philistine or something equally shaming and dreadful. We yearn to be open, to learn, to be provoked, to engage honestly, simply and truthfully with a work, but to do so we must leave our self-aware, social, verbal and public selves behind. But how hard that is when we are in such a public sphere. The very fact of our being in a populous gathering automatically activates all those tribal status, power and perception regions of our brain that are death to plain, honest, naked encounters with art.”

[Excerpted from a Speech Given by Stephen Fry at a Dinner for the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition - 8th June 2010]

Ryan McCourt
The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, by the Grace of God and the Constitution of the Dominion, Prime Minister of Canada, Protector of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Calgary Southwest, Mediator of the Notwithstanding Clause.
2010
ink-jet print on glossy photo paper
8 ½” x 11”

National Portrait Gallery

Village Near Futamigaura, Tsuchiya Koitsu

Mt. Fuji Seen From Tagonura, Evening, Kawase Hasui

Geisha and Cherry Tree, Tsuchiya Koitsu

Sunset at Tomonotsu, Inland Sea, Tsuchiya Koitsu

Harvesting, Shiro Kasamatsu

Fall on the North Saskatchewan, David Shkolny

Foreword, Winter Morning, SK, Terry Fenton

Powerscourt Hosta, Nola Cassady

River Valley View, Nola Cassady

Powerscourt Blue in Green, Nola Cassady

Garden Reflection, Ryan McCourt

Jardin d'Amour, Ryan McCourt

Even in Arcadia, Ryan McCourt

The River City, Ryan McCourt

Dreamland, Ryan McCourt

Nature of the Scrapyard, Rob Willms

Alley Detritus, Rob Willms

Spring Sprouting, Gwen Bailey

Forest - Under, Jodie Harpe-Lesperance

]]> http://nesw.ca/2010/06/09/sights-to-see-list-of-works/feed/ 0