return to worldwidereview.com,
the home of critical reviews
From: Chris Guillochon Category: Art Date: 07 April 2009 Time: 12:23 PM Review: I am at Parasol Unit to see an exhibition of work by American minimalist artist, Robert Mangold. I time my visit to coincide with a talk by art critic Matthew Collings who will discuss the exhibition and the artist's work in a wider context. I've read Matthew's book This is Modern Art and I like the straightforward manner in which he talks about art; coming into art from a banking background, I sometimes struggle to understand and get frustrated by over-elaborate art language and literature. This is my first visit to Parasol Unit which is a not for profit gallery. It is vast, with huge white spaces on different floors. Robert Mangold's art is on display throughout the gallery; there are three groups of his work, the X, + and Frame Paintings series, all from the 1980s. My instant impression is positive – I particularly like how the work seems to float from the wall. I make my way up to the second level where the talk is taking place; there are already about 50 people in attendance. In this part of the gallery are Mangold's + series of works; they are made up of square and rectangular canvases of varying dimensions, both in length and width, finished with forceful colour combinations. Each work has a hand drawn pencil line which the press release says 'forms the figure that moves the eyes from the centre to the edges of the work'. Matthew Collings begins the talk by raising several points as a topic of conversation: he questions, for example, the basis of the work; is it the pencil marks, the form or the colour? What is the context that the work was created in; what was New York like in the 1980s? What is the relationship between the work and the wall that it hangs from? He then proceeds to discuss these issues with fellow speaker, David Batchelor, artist and senior tutor in Critical Theory at the RCA; he then invites the audience to participate. Matthew doesn't disappoint. Like his writing, he tackles the subject at hand in a straightforward way that I clearly understand. To put this in perspective, there is a lady in the audience who participates actively but tries to make the conversation increasingly flowery, which is exactly what irritates me; she describes Mangold's work using phrases like 'utopian'. It delights me when Matthew disagrees with her as to the 'utopian' aspect of the work. This is my first time at a talk of this nature and I enjoy it immensely. I think the exhibition is great, although, the similarity of the work on display does saturate you after a while.