I just recently sold “Here and There Nora” through my Istanbul Gallery. The duo lends inspiration from Ibsen`s “A Doll House”. In the play Nora realizes that she no longer wants to continue her false fasade, and she walks.
This duo is a “soft piece”.
By this I am referring to a somewhat sentimental base idea, as well as the formal aesthetic qualities of the duo. The shapes and lines of the sculpture are just barely convex…although lovingly sculpted, they are of a soft feminine, easily assimilated quality.
This is what I felt was needed to convey the base idea of the piece…the undecided Nora; will she stay or will she go….but still, gets me thinking.
Often in the world of art, this sort of piece is considered “Soft”, too feminine.
Feminine qualities are seldom appreciated as cutting edge.
And now for two other pieces…exhibited at F15 in Norway
They have a clean conceptual idea: “In a future society gone bad, personal protection is paramount for mundane daily acts like shopping and playing.”
Aesthetically, the pieces are a mesh of clearly convex shapes with horizontal lines lending rhythm and structure…the grazed and cracked surfaces; which are on a conceptual level meant to symbolize the fragile state of being of their occupants, bind the pieces visually together….quite unlike the “Here and there Nora” duo, which is largely a soft continuous form.
The bomb suits are rougher, more direct, and I find myself more at ease defending them on an artistic level, than the softer “Here and there Nora” pieces.
It’s a mystery why I feel this way though….every idea cannot be executed in the same fashion and style if one wants to move and connect with the viewer.
But it has always been this way in the world of art….harder is better than softer…but they are actually just different, in fact.
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar