| The Print Center's mission to
expand the parameters of printmaking is furthered by this show,
which collects various unconventional examples of printing and
photography on fabric, glass, wood, and plastic and also in the
associated category of book arts. Including 25 artists, it is
a healthy mix of well-known and home grown talent.
Although many pieces in the show begin to reach
out from the walls, there are only a couple of full floor-standing
sculptures like Bill Metcalf's photo piece. A few more of these
might have added visual impact and pushed things over the top.
Also, this might have added some kind of subtext or secondary
motif to enliven the more literal intent. Interestingly, Philadelphia's
Fabric Workshop and Museum has a similar mission to showcase diverse
contemporary art in the context of both both fabric and printing,
as in their recent Wallpaper exhibition which, although
a very strong show, made the point too keenly. Do we need convincing
that wallpaper can be utilized as art by artists?
Sculptural Prints sets about to expand
a similar notion. Why are shows of this type problematic? Perhaps
they try too hard and become restrained by the very notion of
the traditional versus the cutting edge, which they intend to
redefine. The inclusion of much diversity (some works are made
by well known artists like Richard Tuttle) might have been made
a secondary rather than the primary concern. This would set up
a reversed effort expanding the genre by default, an indirect
approach. Oddly enough, the one type of work that might have added
to the show would be a standard sort of print, but one with a
new twist on content or delivery for comparison's sake. As it
is, the direct approach seems mildly counterproductive, like so
many overtly political artists who are overly eager to propagandize.
Within the show are several semi-activist works,
such as Nancy Spero's interesting print on parachute silk, which
may be intentional and possibly functions as that secondary theme
I was looking for. Activism, by its very nature, is a vocal medium,
a medium of words and argument, and these arguments, when within
an art form, tend to work better when embedded subtly. This is
not easily done, but printmaking has always been an ideal medium
for provoking political thought. For instance, although Nick Cassway's
piece illustrating "anthrax" victims is essentially
a political statement, it works on a deeper level with its lightly
cast shadows made using translucent ink on glass. It ends up underscoring
the ephemeral quality of existence. It is not "cutting edge"
minimal art but carefully borrows from 60's minimalism, making
a hybrid, and is a excellent choice for this show.
Some of the other works in the show unfortunately
have a flea market feel which adds to a high/low art contradiction
-- plus, my bias keeps telling me the term sculpture means "big"
so these numerous smaller works are disappointing even though
they may well address the curatorial thesis. Brant Shuller's bird
pieces work well, but the blue foam material the prints are attached
to was a bit too casual and low tech. As attractive as Daniel
Sadler's little light lamps are, they are ever so slight, too
small, and they don't rise above their deliberate decorative cuteness.
(The inclusion of a list of his celebrity collectors in his cv
is a clue to who his work is aimed at. This is a new twist, brand-name-dropping!)
Also surprising was the ineffectualness of Jenny Holzer's mugs.
As clever as her work is, this doesn't mean her text pieces work
at any time, on any surface, in any context. She also had a piece
in the Wallpaper show that was out of original context
and a possible stretch for inclusion. Perhaps these text-mugs
needed to be in the Print Center's kitchen instead of in a glass
case? This part of the show has hallmarks of art passing too easily
into domestic product. This issue is a minefield and can be seen
in any high end museum shop. Artists are notoriously bad at making
souvenir versions of their work. That is a designer's job. Perhaps
this thin line between art and product could also have been utilized
as a sub-theme and made more overt or contentious.
The tie in of Sculptural Prints
with the Red Grooms exhibition is fitting since he has been utilizing
similar methods for ages with his 3D pop art, and the two shows
augment each other well. Apart from the obvious print-as-sculpture
purview, the show does suggest that the ouvre is truly diverse,
very much alive and in flux. With the advent of high quality digital
printouts and internet hi-jinx, this may well become another avant
garde area. Undoubtedly, the Print Center will keep close tabs
on this.
-James
Rosenthal, November, 2003
See
The Print Center's InLiquid gallery
page |
