Copperas Hill - Biennial

Visit: 14th November 2012

The Copperas Hill Biennial exhibition included a lot of film - that was the thing that stood out to me when I first entered. There was sound coming from everywhere and huge screens wherever you looked. I was really thrilled about this, because I really love film and I think art films are better than ever before but I was a bit disappointed to hear that some people on my course thought there was too much film and that they didn't like this and were a bit sick of film. But by the end of the exhibition I felt I agreed with them a little bit (which was possibly worse!). I think its really exciting to see good art films, but I think it seems a bit like everyone's doing it at the moment just because it's an "in" medium, but I don't think the medium necessarily suits the meaning or purpose of every artwork - it's like they've shoe horned it into their work and it doesn't work some times. For example, the below film, "Sassuma Arnoa" seemed a bit surplus to requirements to me. It was a woman kneeling in the sea and then shots of a naked women manipulating her skin. To be honest, I wasn't really sure of the meaning because the captions didn't provide much help and I felt a bit dim because I didn't understand it. But there were other films, such as a Marina Abramovic style one of a woman beating herself, and a film showing dog fighting on one projection simultaneously to interviews with people who partake in dog fighting on the adjacent projection. This last example I thought didn't work effectively because it depicted something that is disgusting and cruel (or I think so anyway) and it was filmed from a distance in such a kind of indifferent way, with little camera movement, that it didn't seem disgusting or cruel. Perhaps this was the artists intention, but I presume not as the other film showed people making outrageous comments about how dog fighting is natural and it was clearly meant to provoke a reaction from an audience member.  Perhaps it was a statement about how numb we've become to viewing violence and violent acts on screens or projections - a similar sentiment to Warhol's "Electric Chair" maybe.

In addition, there was another film about Polish immigrants and I went in there with a few classmates who said it was too long to watch. I thought this was a shame that the overpowering use of film throughout the exhibition meant that some works which required prolonged attention weren't being given a chance like the other works. I didn't think the Biennial section of the Copperas Hill building had enough strong films there to justify having the medium so prolific throughout. In fact, for the rest of the day I went around many other of the Biennial sites and the films that were shown there weren't really amazing either - I think the proliferation and lack of quality that film in art seems to be condoning at the moment is going to help the focus shift to another medium - and probably soon.

Jessie Kleemann, Iben Mondrup, Nimis Lyngap - Sassuma Arnoa

Some people have said that the fascinating and somewhat beautiful features that still remain in the old Post Office building are distracting from the work and it is at times hard to tell which is art and which is a mere feature of the building. However, I don't think this is a negative. Having anything in an art space, or calling anywhere an art space makes you view it with completely different eyes - it's like Duchamp's idea of "when is art" as opposed to "what is art". So putting this building in an art context makes you automatically be visually aware of its beauty - which I think is incredibly interesting in terms of changeable perceptions and how we approach things in different contexts. In this way, we get to assess our own criteria of what or when we think art is - if you think some left signage is beautiful or interesting or charismatic enough to be art, who's to tell you you're wrong - no caption required. I also disagree that this detracts from the artwork. I thought the whole venue worked really well. I also thought that when looking from art to interesting features, like the marks on this chute shown below that I thought were amazing and very beautiful and delicate, like a mark making technique perhaps, I then looked at the art with fresh eyes. There was a lot of art works in the space, so to be given a rest and look at something for pure aesthetic value rather than meaning or context was refreshing.

Close up of marks on chute

Chute with marks on

I also really liked the below work by Sckpinicka. (There were more collages in the series by the artist.) Most of the works in the exhibition were quite big and intimidating and bold, so I thought this image was a refreshing change as it was so small and delicate and intimate. Personally, this is a kind of art I really like anyway. I love the arrangements and placing of things, and I love it when people collage old photos and magazine images together. I love how the meanings of images change when they are taken out of context and again with each new piece of paper, colour, line or image that they are put together with. I thought these collages were really beautiful and I liked the opportunity to get really close to something quiet in the space. I thought the inclusion of these works with all of the huge works was a bit of really successful curatorial work.

Kama Sckpinicka - Collage on Vintage Paper

Despite some of the negatives pointed out, I thought that the general, overall quality of the work in the Copperas Hill building was really impressive and invigorating. I think it's probably my favourite venue that I have seen so far in the Biennial and I left feeling quite inspired and refreshed!