Matthew Craven's latest exhibition at
DCKT, “Oblivious Path,” might be better described as an
expedition or an excavation. Craven's artistic output consists mainly
of collages of found images on found paper. His source material (high
contrast black and white photographs taken from old books) by itself
suggests the artist's participation in a form of archeology. By
isolating and collaging these images, Craven excavates these
artifacts from ancient tomes (or tombs) and removes them from their
original context of time and place. These artifacts are given a new
identity through their proximity to the other artifacts on the page,
creating collective arrangements that suggest alternative
interpretations of history.
“Explorers I (Unclassified)”
presents artifacts, landscapes, and geometric patterns arranged in a
grid-like format. Many of the entries on this grid are repeated
multiple times, recalling Peter Roehr's “montages” of identical
(also found) images taken from advertisements. Such repetition
triggers a viewer's innate instinct to search for patterns,
suggesting an underlying order in the arrangement that may not
actually exist. While most of the pieces in “Oblivious Path” are
monochrome, “Explorers I” contains a splash of color: in this
case, the same bright orange color as the gallery walls. This vibrant
orange ground on which all the pieces are displayed gives them an
element in common with each other, as well as suggesting “holes”
in both the paper and the archaeological record.
The most densely packed piece in the
show, “Arrangement 1 (Unclassified)” is just what the title
suggests: arrangement of found images of artifacts from all over the
world, unclassified by era or location or scale. A Moai statue,
monumental and monolithic in its historical setting, is presented
here as being the same size as a Grecian urn. The arrangement of
these artifacts on the page, where they fit together like puzzle
pieces, brings to mind the archeological practice of reassembling
pottery shards into their (presumably) original forms. What was the
original form of Craven's shards? Was it an antediluvian global
civilization lost to history, like Atlantis or the legendary Mu? Or
was it something more abstract, such as the universal human desire to
create such artifacts of our time on Earth?
I love how you describe the Matthew Craven’s show as an excavation, and your analysis on his use of repetition and color choice are spot on and couldn’t agree with you more. However, I can’t help noticing the downside of this show than all the positive features of it. Firstly, there is not enough space for the viewer to “dig” any deeper than decorative surface. Secondly, I kept overlapping his images with other artist’s works in mind such as Peter Roehrs’ you mentioned in the article. It simply did not seem as one of kind. Many arts are consisting of “play” and “pleasure”, but most of them are created as a means to reach out to the deeper meaning underneath the surface. Sadly, my curiosity was there at instant glimpse, but quickly vanished as I walked away.
ReplyDelete