| |
Stuart
Brisley
Ecto
plasmic Rouge
Misreading the signs again.
On the way to the local culture centre, the international stroke local stroke
locale of the visual arts down in Whitechapel I passed by the eighteenth century
houses, heritagised film sets, slot machines, cash boxes, the shit of the street,
a filthy greased up pavement on the corner, bearing huge waste containers for
the food eating shops, leaking ghee and oil spread
over the slabbed pavements.
From the perspective on Commercial street the tops of some womens` stockings
compete with the lower visible part of their knickers as they slyly masquerade
sometimes hidden at other times indelicately visible, gyrating occasionally
to the silent music intheir heads at the junctures of the side streets on the
paved edges of the aptly named Commercial St, The idea of a Cultural Centre,
a Gallery of the Visual Arts, is unlikely to impinge on this street life. The
extant culture is the exercise of rip off, and tear away, within and without
the massive glass towers of international corporate finance, giving off lethal
whiffs of power, seen nocturnally as puffs of white steam escape from the roof
tops. It is where the dealers and brokers engage in weekly bulimic competitions
in nearby Banglatown. This street could be an art work where life as art as
life casually challenges cultural emporia, the delicately illuminated sancti-fied-monious
monied spaces, the white cubes stinking of surplus money/shit". This acrid
sentence sums it up, just about.
You pass by the Health Centre and under the Triumphal Arch, and on to the junction
with the main street. On the north Aldgate side next to the local library is
a fussy turn of the century white stone doorway, the invitation to a cooler
scene not so far removed from the sanctified darker spaces of churches mosques
and synagogues, placed in historical chronological order. Is this where the
art is or could be. The facade cuts out the street like a knife. What is art
for? rhetorical question, which goes forever unanswered. I did walk in, through
the inner door and stepped into the huge ground floor and took time out for
orientation. A cursory glance was enough to see that whatever subversive tricks
were being proffered in the name of art, they couldnt stand competition
with the power of the institution. It was disappointing. As I went up the stairs
I was beginning to suffer from creativelessness. (can that be a word? ) boredom?
It was reminiscent of the still dusty airlessness of museums, At the top of
the stairs I came into another much smaller passage like space entry to the
other large white hall. Sometimes an artwork activates the atmosphere bringing
it to life, and at others it stays resolutely sterile. An office was installed
there? Had the insatiable demands of bureaucracy broken bounds and `appropriated`
the space to use `art speak`. Was it merely the representation of an office,
or a simulacrum of office bureaucracy in action? Was it an artwork, or an artwork,
which also functioned as an office? Were these two separate conditions compatible?
Where were the office staff? `I moved on. There was in this a semblance of an
officially sanctioned subversion. The institution consciously parodies itself
and kills the (presumed) critical intentions of the art it hosts. Is it a useful
function for institutions to invite the simulation of actions against their
interests while holding the cards? As if to say, really, it is just an allusive
game, nothing to frighten the horses with. I ask myself. Just like going to
the zoo. But things are never that simple. Maybe.
I was leaning against the wall contemplating a large curtained cube, which had
taken the centre space of the long hall. It was a Szuper Gallery production,
guest of the Gallery, walls within walls, mirrors within mirrors. There is forever
the question of who is who and what is what in these circumstances where curatorial
bureaucracy plays to perceptions of what the gallery is conceived to be and
what curation can be, given the circumstances. It also presumes to be in the
presence of audiences. I was one. This manifestation of curation if not beyond
the pale, was happily teetering on the edge of institutional heresy. It was
still airless but possible. Some sort of refreshment would come in handy. At
this moment one of the curtains ruffled as in a breeze and a woman stepped out
from behind the side curtain. The curtains then drew open. A few minutes later
they closed and I took her place. I leant against the corner at the back. In
front was a large screen. The screen revealed
the image of the internal spaces of another unknown but familiar looking institution
the functions of which were not exactly evident. It would be difficult to know
whether it was closed or open. When it is in operation does it look closed as
when it is closed? Or does it look closed but is in operation 24 hours a day?
Was it day or night? These mysterious institutional structures referring to
corporate finance (I considered this could be one) appear to be permanently
occupied by maintenance and security staff, loyal retainers to the system who
can sometimes be seen from the outside seated behind large reception desks,
as if mostly submerged by the voluptuous spread of the reception furniture,
and quasi tropical flora. No parrots. Or padding silently from door to door
to passage, never visible for long as though in a perpetual but casual search
for something, the end of the shift perhaps They are sometimes in uniform, or
in a recognisable uniform of casual clothing, shoes and haircut. As the images
on the screen progressed, one or two other figures appeared. Their behaviour
was subtly different, enough to intimate the possibility that there might be
some dysfunction in the system. They were more casually dressed not exactly
conventional in their demeanour. There was a subtle distinction. They did not
appear to be in the family. What sort of system was in operation facilitated
by the characteristics of the architecture where its very blandness was redolent
with the trappings of power. The two groups, maintenance security figures and
the others appeared to be collaborating in dealing with a large section of red
satin or chiffon like material which was continually present on the screen as
changing sequences monitored its passage through the building without beginning
or end, moving through a series of horizontal and vertical spaces, revealed
through the vistas of huge glass walls and massive girders elevators and stairs.
It might have been compiled from security video footage. Was it something to
pass the time with or was it too hot to handle? Was it a chimera with no internal
structure, floating diaphanously in space, its weave the form, texture and colour,
influenced by the implied malevolence in the environment reminiscent of the
visual projections of a scientific fictive authoritarian future, which is in
fact the present? Were these technicians contemporary slaves human fodder of
the job markets? It was a visible sign, red ectoplasm, signifying to an immediate
and now utterly unacceptable past ideological red utopia. Red is the code. It
emerged and re-emerged suggestive that somewhere else in the collective memory
for example were the recipients of the coded message , references to an enormous
weight of knowledge and experience which had been suddenly forced `out of the
frame` contradicting the floating diaphanous red coded game in light, space
and air. It was a collective ectoplasm not the emanation of a bodily appearance
believed to come from a human medium. It was a flag without a pole. This delicate
floating substanceless substance was a kind of untouchable unbreakable thing,
not least because what it signified to is almost if not invisible. It represents
what is not thought about, not seen, not considered as though it has been vanquished
conquered, destroyed and overcome by a newer rash unfettered release of market
economics. It had disappeared beneath the waves a decade ago. These others,
unsettlingly familiar and sinister could be wolves in sheepþs
clothing . What is made visible is a dark underbelly: the antithesis of what
we are coming to despise. In the meanwhile suffering shopaholics crowd the pavements
in search of a fix.
The employees were trailing its progress as technicians and will do what they
are required to do without considering the import of their efforts. The price
to be paid for the illusion of security is the assumption of stupidity. The
others were more direct, it being in their interest to aid and abet the chiffon
as it floated from one level to another voluptuously displaying itself before
the camera, as though this dreamlike gavotte would continually defer what could
be called moments of G reality or truth, eg when the red flag flew over St Pancras
Town Hall on Mayday. Was that a similar moment, the sign of deferred action
and of implied future action?. I thought I caught the glimpse of something hard
and uncompromising lightly inscribed over the surface of the screen, which could
easily frighten horses. I left the sanitised halls and had come back to Commercial
Street. Standing on the kerb looking down at fast food packaging, used condoms,
and other unidentifiable bits of dirt which offers such rich experiences for
tourists in search of the morbid reclamation of the old ripper murders, a voice
said "Want business darling?" I had been alerted again by the visit
in the curtained cube to the world of free trade and bulimia nervosa. The prevailing
myth declares that there is a price to everything.
Stuart Brisley
|
|