The Next Stop will be. . .
This essay was written to accompany the exhibition "Ian Gates: recent work by Ian Gates" at the Ian Gates Gallery.
For centuries art has been seen as the realm of the intellectual. This came to a head in the 1970's with conceptual art. This movement in art history was arguably doomed to failure from the beginning due to it's reliance on philosophy and theory. Very few people in the art world could understand the work, and as for the general public, they just felt alienated by the work. Then in 1988 a new group of artists emerged. They offered a cool new approach to art making that allowed the general public a way in, a chance to feel that they were involved. And because they were involved it made them feel intelligent. They liked this.
This group, now commonly known as YBa's, produced work that was high on humour, low on theory. Their subject matter was the sort of things likely to appeal to a wide audience, especially a young audience. They produced work that was easy to reproduce in the media, and in some instances actively involved the media. They dealt with everyday concerns and down to earth ideas. Suddenly art seemed 'cool' again. People were talking about it, and in the case of some pieces were actually making a trip specially to see the work.
This group reached their peak in 1997 with the blockbuster 'Sensation' exhibition at the Royal Academy. Every newspaper talked about it in some way or other. It was on the TV, in Magazines, and spoken about on the radio. Thanks to this group British art reached it's highest level of recognition worldwide, ever.
Unfortunately, following this the public began to lose interest, the work began to seem hollow, it often looked like they were churning out the same idea time after time, just in a different guise. People were beginning to demand more. They had been to art galleries, and brought books, they were beginning to become savvy with the basic principles and ideas that fine art is built on. They wanted something that was going to challenge them. Into this space falls a new generation of young British artists. Raised on the shock and spin principles of YBa, they have had a chance to absorb and analyze this group in much the same way that they would any other historical movement. They have seen the power that artists can wield in contemporary culture, and have learned the tricks employed by YBa's in terms of courting the media. They realize that as important as people like Charles Saatchi are, this isn't the only way to become recognized, that the all important self promotion is equally as important. The work should be simple, and easily reproducible, should engage with everyday issues, that heavy theory is no longer acceptable. However a complete abstinence from theory is also unacceptable. People like to be challenged, but not so much that they begin to feel stupid.
The work of Ian Gates fits into this category beautifully. In this exhibition of recent work he has presented four pieces. They are all based on a piece from art history, three from the twentieth century, and one from the fifteenth century. His premise was simple, take an object from art history, and re present it, having filtered it through contemporary culture. All the original pieces are relatively well known, from the very famous 'last supper', by Leonardo Da Vinci, or the Andy Warhol screen print of Marilyn Monroe, through to the less well known (yet still quite famous in art circles) 'Oak Tree' by Michael Craig Martin, or 'Diagonal of May 25th, 1963' by Dan Flavin. He has taken away the original object and left simply the shell of the work. In this way Andy Warhol's screen print of Marilyn Monroe, has been reduced in size to a media friendly 20 x 20 cm, and then been printed digitally. The original work is still very obvious, yet now, instead of using the older method of a screen print, he has used the much more contemporary idea of a digital print. The work makes reference to the contemporary world where many people own a home PC, and in theory, anybody can scan, and then print a copy of Andy Warhol's 'Marilyn.' The original work maintained a degree of originality, in that few people would go to the trouble of setting up a screen print of their own, just to have an authentic copy of the work of art. However in todays computer literate world, it takes just a few seconds for people to scan and print their own copy of Ian Gates' art work. In this way he challenges the notion of the work of art as an irreducible object. The notion of doing a series of prints no longer has meaning, as anyone can produce a copy, thus producing an infinite edition.
Ian's 'Last Supper' piece is drawn from the very famous painting by Leonardo DaVinci, in Milan. Again the work has been reduced in size to a more media friendly 20 x 39 cm, and presented in a format that most people will recognize, that of the film poster. He has incorporated the story of the 'last supper' as well as the history of the painting itself, and once all this has been taken into account, he has run it through the filter of contemporary culture. The work draws on the idea central to most films, that of the good guy and the #bad guy. He has set up his two main characters as being Jesus Christ and Judas Iscariot. This is in keeping with contemporary life. We live in an increasingly secularized world. People no longer see religion as the powerful force that it once was. With todays increasingly hectic life styles, people no longer have the time to think about this life, let alone the next life. Some ideas, and predominantly, stories still remain with us though, probably from our school days. One such story is that of the last supper, and whilst people may not remember the details, they do remember that Judas was the bad guy. Thus it makes sense that Ian should use these two names as his leading 'actors.' Lower down he lists the names of all the saints present in the work. The work also offers a lesson in art history. Where a normal film poster would have all the credits of people who worked on the film, Ian has listed people who were associated with the painting over the years. The Dominicans of Saint Marie Delle Grazie for instance (where the work was made), or Lodovico Sforza, (the man who commissioned it). Also under edited by he lists all the people who over the years have attempted to preserve the work, in one way or another. In this way the work acts as a lesson in art history, whilst simultaneously engaging us on the level of contemporary culture.
In 'The evolution of conceptual art stage two. Bottle of Lager. (dedicated to the memory of Spangle)' Ian has remade Michael Craig Martins 'Oak tree' of 1973. The original piece was one of the high points of conceptual art. The original work was simply a glass shelf, on which Michael Craig Martin placed a glass of water. This was all placed 9 feet off the ground, out of reach of any thirsty viewers! It was accompanied by a text whereby Michael Craig Martin outlined the basic premise. That using the power of conceptual art he had turned the glass of water into an oak tree, without changing the accidents (size, weight, shape etc.). In order to understand the work, the viewer was expected to have a deep knowledge of conceptual art history, as well as to spot the use of scholastic philosophy. This was too much for some people, and so Ian has simplified the piece. In an accompanying text Ian claims to have converted the oak tree into a bottle of lager. A humorous take on the original, as nobody would believe that he had actually, physically changed an oak tree into a bottle of lager anyway (why would an oak tree be on a glass shelf in the first place?). The bottle of lager is used as both a marker of our time (in the same way that people collect coca cola bottles from various ages), and also to represent todays brand conscious youth culture. In the title Ian has also mentioned that it is 'dedicated to the memory of Spangle,' This is a sarcastic take on the highly sterile feel that much conceptual art had. By dedicating it to the memory of his late pet dog, Ian has created a much more personal element to the work, something that much conceptual art lacked, but todays media obsessed public finds particularly endearing (tales of compassion, sob stories etc.).
The Great Minimalist Rip-off' is another very simple, clean cut piece of work, that goes straight to the heart of the matter. Those people who possess sufficient knowledge of art history will instantly recognize that it is modeled on the work of Dan Flavin. A minimalist artist who did things with fluorescent light's, usually sticking them to walls in various guises. His first one was simply a single light, placed at a diagonal titled 'diagonal of May 25th, 1963'. Ian has replaced the one light with two cardboard tubes. However these tubes are made to look like lightsabres from the film Star Wars. The work therefore instantly reminds us of the recently released film 'The Phantom Menace,' and all the advertising and other hype that accompanied it. In todays media saturated culture the work acts as a 'homage to hype.' The fact that this single item from a film is enough to invoke memories of not just one, but four films, is testament to some truly creative marketing. But the work goes beyond even that. A lightsabre is in many ways similar to a fluorescent light, and so Ian is simultaneously referring back to the original item from art history, and thus reinforcing the intellectual side of art.
His work is very lighthearted, and this is why it is so appealing. People can come along and having viewed the work, have a good laugh, and if that's all they get from the work, then fair enough. However most people these days, whether directly connected with the fine art world or not have started to become interested in contemporary fine art to a greater or lesser extent. They demand more of the work, they want to feel they have been intellectually stimulated, this is what fine art is supposed to do after all, isn't it? They don't however want to go away from an exhibition unable to grasp the ideas behind the work. Some people will find that Ian's work is too intellectual for them, these are the sort of people who are still trying to catch up following the rise in interest over the past ten years. Generally though people will find that Ian's work offers something for all. It is based in the reality that is today. It doesn't offer lofty aspirations to the future, or look back to a 'better time.' It is sufficiently basic for the untrained person, the 'weekend art lover' whilst offering the possibility of a deeper insight for those who demand more from their fine art. And for those who insist that Ian's work lacks sufficient substance to be viewed alongside the 'big names,' well there's always conceptual art!
|
