Group shows are rarely just about the
artwork. They’re mostly about some overarching idea that the work helps to
illustrate. Of course, the work itself plays a role as viewers decide what they
like or what they don’t like.
         There
is also the matter of how objects work together as a cohesive whole. Is there a
flow from object to object, concept to concept? Do the works have the ability
to hold their individual voices and simultaneously “speak” as a group? If you
put a group of people in a room, not only will there be some kind of overall,
polyphonic “voice” but also a number of more intimate dialogues running
concurrently.
         The
question here is whether or not the work that comprises Maternal Metaphors: Artists/Mothers/Artwork is really that diverse.
Diversity depends on the people in the gathering, but even more so, on the
circumstances that bring them together. Rarely is there a gathering of people
where some common language is not spoken. Take, for example, a child’s birthday
party, an art opening, or even the Democratic National Convention: All three
entertain multiple voices, but does that make these voices diverse?
         “Maternal Metaphors is an exhibit of
diverse and provocative work,” according to the introductory text panel to the
exhibition. Furthermore, the exhibition title tells us that it’s about the
maternal and its metaphors, and the relationship between artists, motherhood,
and art-making. But the exhibition is also about art as work — the work of the artist and the work of the mother. In a sense, both
title and text panel provide us with a promise of what is to come — literally
just around the corner — when we enter the exhibition space. The introduction
provokes us, directs us into an interaction with the artworks that will,
hopefully, incite and excite.
         So,
what degrees of emotional awakening does the work provide? Does it stimulate or
arouse immediate and brief sensations or rouse and stir deeper and stronger
responses? Then again, any kind of response really depends on the viewer’s
willingness to spend time with the objects and ideas presented. In this sense,
most anything can provoke. We can see some kind of deep structure expressed in all objects and texts, either as
intentional or just running parallel to our culture and society.
         What
does it mean when we’re told that we are to be provoked? Are we to be stirred
to anger and resentment or to deep feelings by the work or by the provocation
of being led by the provoking instructions? What action do we take? And what
exactly is diverse? Is it that the works themselves are representative of
varied media? Are the artists distinct and/or unlike one another?
         Maternal Metaphors consists of
paintings, photographs, sculptures, installations, and videos. There is indeed
a diversity of medium, at least in the sense that all these mediums are part of
the status quo of contemporary art. Diversity is present here through the kind of exhibition. Just like when we
consider what kind of party to host
— how many “different,” but not too different, people should be invited —
there is as much about exclusion as there is inclusion. Social decorum must
remain intact! Some dissent is good and provocative, but too much, after all,
is no party.
         Are
the artists diverse? The show consists of a group of women who are artists
participating in the institutional discourse of “art making”. Of course they
are different women, coming from different cities and backgrounds. But they’re
also all educated, upper-middle-class artists working within the framework of
Western culture and its definition of art and its purpose.
         The
maternal is definitely a diverse and provocative concept as it relates to the idea of the mother, motherhood, or the
motherly. Mostly, though, the maternal is attached somewhat analogously to
gender or to the biological female. But it also brings forth concepts of
origin, creative sources, and capabilities to love — i.e., to mother, as well
as to watch over, nourish, and to protect. Although the latter characteristics
of the maternal can be gendered as well, they do not have to be. It is thus in
the metaphor that motherhood takes on where both the diversity and the ability
to provoke reveal themselves.
         Although
a good show with good works by well-known (Mary Kelly and Renee Cox) and
lesser-known artists, the metaphors in the exhibition play more on the surface
as explicit issues that can be easily, if wrongly, reduced to issues of “soccer
moms” or the concerns of upper middle-class parents trying to fit their
children into the schedule of corporate America. In other words, it seems as if
the work in the exhibition just scratches the surface of some of these more
complex issues. (Fortunately, some of this is directly addressed in the
catalog.)
         In
a world of Chucky Cheese-ified museums and special parking for patrons with
children at supermarkets that somehow handicaps and then privileges the choice
of having children, we need more diversity and more provoking.
         So,
good for Maternal Metaphors for a
good try with a difficult and complex issue. But at the same time, the issues addressed
are still too much on the surface. Indeed, they are hiding on the literal
surfaces of the objects themselves — the glossy or matte photographs,
glistening oil paint, shiny sterling silver, patined bronze, and the pages of
authoritative text.
         Of
course, this review is likewise part of that same kind of surface seduction:
It’s not that diverse and only attempts to provoke.
Maternal Metaphors:
Artists/Mother/Artwork is on display at the Rochester
Contemporary, 137 East Avenue, through May 23. Hours:
Wednesday through Friday 12 to 6 p.m., Saturday and Sunday 1 to 5 p.m.
461-2222, www.rochestercontemporary.org.
A
journey to black
If
you’ve been worrying about the fate of Rochester Contemporary since the
elimination of its executive director position, take heart.
           Although it is true that RoCo lost
money from NYSCA for general operating support, the gallery will likely receive
funds under another program within NYSCA for installations and exhibitions. Tom
Burke, a member of RoCo’s board of directors, reiterated that the decision to
cut the position formerly held by Elizabeth McDade was made because RoCo simply
could not afford it.
           Citing his role “to keep RoCo on an
even keel and manage… finances,” Burke stated that, by June 15, RoCo will be
debt-free for the first time in a long time, and that “in the long run,” the
actions of the board have “preserved an important institution.”
           RoCo had been reaching out quite
actively for funds, but its budget was drained by the renovation. Now, the
budget in place is built upon conservative revenue sources. A problem for RoCo
is that although revenue is good, corporate giving is weak. This is something
the Board is looking to pursue. Perhaps an indication that the tide is turning
is the support Maternal Metaphors received from local realtor Rome Celli.
           As for upcoming exhibition plans,
Allen Topolski, a local artist and educator, is now leading the programming
committee. According to Burke, Topolski is putting in a lot of hours trying to
establish a high-quality exhibition schedule for the next two years.
           We spoke with Topolski, and although
much is still tentative, what he could tell us sounds promising, including the
possibility of connecting with both the Memorial Art Gallery and the George
Eastman House on an upcoming exhibition. In addition, Topolski also said that
they hoped to better utilize the space, such as incorporating more videos or
work that has a time-based component.
           The
schedule also has three slots for invited or “guest” curators over the next two
years — the idea being that it’s another way of exposing the community to
alternate ways of thinking and seeing. And although things may seem a little
bumpy right now, Topolski says he “honestly think[s] this is going to work.”
This article appears in May 19-25, 2004.
