Walking In My Mind 23rd June – 6th September 2009
When visiting the Hayward’s current show, I hardly felt blameless in being reminded of the exhibition here last summer, Psycho Buildings. Does a group of internationally dispersed artists presenting an assortment of large-scale, site-oriented works sound familiar at all? The two shows are most certainly cut from the same cloth. But in the end, this proves to be no bad thing; Walking In My Mind (tediously populist name aside) has just as much appeal and ambition as its predecessor. Its point of departure is the curatorial premise – an ‘expedition into the mysterious mental processes of creativity; about what goes on inside the artist’s head.’
Up a level, and there are two definite highlights. One is Thomas Hirschorn’s Cavemanman, a labyrinthine series of spaces, the walls glistening, wet like some unspecified intestinal canal, until closer inspection reveals they are covered with hundreds of metres of parcel tape. In each little grotto stands a group of cardboard cutout people, all connected to one another by long ropes of tin foil. Books on shelves are rigged with wires, seemingly ready to explode, didactic and dangerous. Photocopied clocks are pasted on the walls, the names of cities are spray-painted around them, Toronto, Minsk, Liverpool. Laddish posters cover the ceilings – in Hirschorn’s tunnelled world, Abi Titmuss sits side by side with Noam Chomsky. With far less of an overt political content than I have seen before, his piece is immersive in every sense of the word, highlighting an inherent global symbiosis without identifying or assessing it. |
|---|
Then we find Jason Rhoades’ The Creation Myth, an unmitigated delight. His sprawling work, - all buckets, chutes, workbenches, wires and monitors - has the appearance of a hastily assembled workshop, its main product being a series of timber logs covered in printouts of porno stills: a new kind of 21st-century totem for the Silicone Valley. The piece is shot through with the kind of puerile dick-and-pussy humour so redolent of Rhoades and his West Coast peers (he was tutored by Paul McCarthy); holes cut in sheet wood with jigsaws take on all kinds of bodily connotations. This is a chaotic piece whose parameters are hard to define: rather than working as a specific metaphor of psychological activity, it feels far more of a springboard off which we can examine our own metaphoric structures. I found this artwork to be the most interrogative in the show. ‘Careful, kids,’ one can practically hear the wonderfully vulgar Rhoades whisper, ‘look too close and you may not like what you find.’ Positioned between this and Hirschorn, Charles Avery’s framed drawings and vitrine-bound sculptures are precious and underwhelming, trapped in their own objecthood.
|
|---|
Of course, art should, and will, spark any number of conversations; this isn’t really the issue. The problem is when the presence of an artwork is either arbitrary and uninspiring, or tenuous and unconvincing: it serves to undermine the show-as-concept. And I can’t quite buy the Hayward’s premise, of investigating ‘what goes on inside the artist’s head … the mysterious mental processes of creativity.’ It is a frustratingly broad proposition and, I feel, impossible to adequately map out with any selection of practitioners, however eclectic, however focused. It was the same, if a little more permissible, with Psycho Buildings.
|
|---|