Custom Search

New Whitney Biennial Tour (4/29) and Chelsea Gallery Tour (5/5)

Join art critic, college teacher and tour guide, Merrily Kerr on a small group tour of the biggest museum show of the season, the Whitney Biennial.  Find out why critics are calling ‘the show everyone loves to hate,’ one of the best ever.

In early May, Merrily will guide you to the best Chelsea gallery shows of the moment, including a jungle gym-like installation composed of crocheted netting and plastic balls by Brazilian artist Ernesto Neto and the late Richard Avedon’s monumental photo murals.

‘Best of the Whitney Biennial,’ Sunday, April 29, 2012, 11:30am – 1pm

“Artists are taking matters into their own hands,” says New York magazine critic Jerry Saltz, “…resetting the agenda, and fighting back against an art world that had been focused on selling, buzz and bigness.”  Join Merrily to find out what the buzz is about on a small group tour focusing on the visual art in a show dense with performance and film.

SPACE IS LIMITED to the first six participants to register with Merrily by email at:  merrilykerr@nyc.rr.com.  Meet in the lobby of the Whitney Museum, (945 Madison Ave at 75th Street). Please purchase tickets prior to the day of our tour at whitney.org or arrive at least 20 minutes in advance to purchase a ticket to this extremely popular show.  The museum opens at 11am and the tour departs at 11:30am. $40 pp in cash or check on the day.  Does not include museum admission ($18 general admission, $12 seniors 62+).

‘Best Contemporary Art in Chelsea,’ Saturday, May 5, 2012, 11am – 1pm
Our itinerary will showcase eight of the most important and talked about exhibitions of the moment, including an energizing mix of artwork in different media by emerging talents and internationally acclaimed artists.

With space limited to ten or fewer participants, Merrily’s small group tours are an intimate exploration of New York’s best art.  At each venue, Merrily gives information on the galleries themselves and the artwork on display – questions and conversation are encouraged!

This tour will last two hours and take place regardless of the weather.

SPACE IS LIMITED to the first ten participants to register with Merrily at merrilykerr@nyc.rr.com.  Meet at 508 West 26th Street. Tour departs at 11am. $40 pp in cash or check on the day.

Francesca Woodman retrospective at the Guggenheim

Francesca Woodman, Space2, Providence, Rhode Island, 1976, Gelatin silver print, 13.7 x 13.3 cm, Courtesy George and Betty Woodman , © George and Betty Woodman.

Francesca Woodman, Space2, Providence, Rhode Island, 1976, Gelatin silver print, 13.7 x 13.3 cm, Courtesy George and Betty Woodman , © George and Betty Woodman.

Francesca Woodman changes from girl to woman within seconds in the first two pictures displayed in her retrospective exhibition at the Guggenheim:  first we meet a fresh-faced kid wearing a billowy flower-patterned tunic and her signature Mary Janes, making a motion as if she’s holding a clapper board and about to shout ‘action.’  Next, we see her nude lower body coming from a cupboard, the tilting camera catching her as if in a fugitive act.  Taken in her freshman year at the Rhode Island School of Design in 1975-6, the precocious Woodman already explores the signature themes of her short career – non-narrative scenarios in which her young, perfect body interacts with the crumbling architecture of a Providence house or an old warehouse-like space in Rome (during her Junior year abroad).

Whether she’s lying curled up on old floorboards under a heavy wooden door propped precariously against the wall or straddling an old fireplace mantle leaning against the wall, Woodman attempts impossible hiding acts that ironically expose her to both prying eyes and the danger of falling props (in later pictures, we see a snake slithering across her outstretched arm and threat arrives again in the form of a wasp on her neck).

Her interaction with the space of the dilapidated room she’s in (in one, a view out the window shows a presentable house next door) resonates with Gordon Matta Clark’s radical interventions in abandoned or otherwise neglected spaces.  But Woodman’s nude or partly clothed body (looking very unlikely to have ripped a door from its hinges or detached a mantel) forces unlikely connections with domestic space rather than destroying it.   In one image, she covers herself modestly at breast and pubic area with two jagged sections of ripped wallpaper that cover her face and create a flattening of space that merges her body with the wall.

Francesca Woodman, House #4, Providence, Rhode Island, 1976, Gelatin silver print, 14.6 x 14.6 cm, Courtesy George and Betty Woodman , © 2012 George and Betty Woodman.

Francesca Woodman, House #4, Providence, Rhode Island, 1976, Gelatin silver print, 14.6 x 14.6 cm, Courtesy George and Betty Woodman , © 2012 George and Betty Woodman.

Using her body and physical surroundings as materials, Woodman aligns with late 70s conceptual art and body art contexts in the show’s most surprising images, such as one alarmingly masochistic image showing her at close range with clothespins attached to her nipples and abdomen.  Whether this is a larger comment on womens’ bodies or sexual behavior, references to sexuality are rare, despite her frequent nudity.  So much so, in fact, that when a’79-‘80 image cropped to exclude her head shows her clutching three sizeable zucchini, the allusion is so out of place that it’s more funny than it might be in another context.  Later, she poses in a jeweled belt or dons multiple garter belts like an overdecorated Bellocq model, but the photos feature her curves more as formal compositions than critiques or self-exploration.

In three pictures, Woodmans lets a man into her mostly solitary, female world.  All titled, ‘Charlie the Model’ they feature a heavyset man clothed, crouching nude while peering in a mirror, and smiling through a circular glass while a nude Woodman moves in a blur behind him.  Perhaps because of his size or his smiles, he dominates, which put viewers in mind of his personality rather than Woodman’s retiring character and emphasizes how her more characteristic images don’t really aim to explore identity.  The closest to narrative or role-play she comes is in an early photo series (exhibited in an easy-to-overlook passageway between galleries) titled, ‘Portrait of a Reputation,’ a five-image artist book from 1976 in which Woodman poses with hand over her heart, with or without clothing and with the outline of her hand eventually degenerating into two handprints suggesting an assault.

Francesca Woodman, Untitled, Providence, Rhode Island, 1976, Gelatin silver print, 14 x 14.1 cm, Courtesy George and Betty Woodman , © George and Betty Woodman.

Francesca Woodman, Untitled, Providence, Rhode Island, 1976, Gelatin silver print, 14 x 14.1 cm, Courtesy George and Betty Woodman , © George and Betty Woodman.

It’s a Woodman moment in New York now, with a show of the artist’s late work at Marian Goodman Gallery and the monumental ‘Blueprint for a Temple’ at the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s contemporary photo galleries.  Woodman appeared to be in a transitional stage when she took her own life in 1981 at the age of 22, making larger images and experimenting with blueprinting processes and collaged images.  In ‘Zig Zag’ from 1980, she creates a zigging and zagging line by linking photos of bent arms, v-shaped dress backs, scissoring legs, and more expanding her subject matter to include other people while still exploring the body and pursing formal relationships in her art.  Cruelly, seeing so much of her work whets the appetite for more, but true to the Guggenheim’s purpose, offers opportunity to reconsider the context for photography in late 70s America.

Armory Show Preview (open March 8 – 11)

 

'Scandanavian Pain' over the Armory Show bar by Ragnar Kjartansson

'Scandanavian Pain' over the Armory Show bar by Ragnar Kjartansson

My first stop at this year’s Armory Show (New York’s 4 day art fair extravaganza on Hudson River Piers 92 and 94) was the new WSJ Media Lounge – a spacious theater offering respite from the milling crowds and endless white cubicles.  Inside, Danish artist group ‘Osloo’ offered up possibilities for what they call “public spiritualism” through music and lectures, as they did last summer for their national pavilion at the 2011 Venice Biennial aboard their floating platform.  It wasn’t clear where the spiritualism lay, but the vibe was definitely not commercialism – a palpable contrast to what lay beyond the lounge.

Performance  – both on and off the official program – was in evidence here and there, notably in Marina Abramovic’s ‘Bed for Human Use,’ in which a woman in a lab-coat lay prone on an uncomfortable looking bed face-to-face with a chunk of quartz crystal at Sao Paulo’s Luciana Brito Galeria.

'Bed for Human Use,' Marina Abramovic, 2012

'Bed for Human Use,' Marina Abramovic, 2012

Over in Armory Focus:  The Nordic Countries, curious onlookers watched as a young woman sitting on a fur rug in front of a mini-teepee stapled canvas to a stretcher in the light of pentagram at Stockholm’s Fruit and Flower Deli. Meanwhile, front and center in Italy/China/France–based Galleria Continua was a vast mirror by Michelangelo Pistoletto which seemed like a tempting invitation for narcissistic visitors to put on a show of their own.

Fruit and Flower Deli

Fruit and Flower Deli

Armory Show Commissioned Artist Theaster Gates wasn’t manning his Pier 94 Café installation of school chairs and desks rescued from a Chicago school, designed to be a place for him to ‘hold court.’ But in nearby Chicago/Berlin gallery Kavi Gupta’s space, Gates’ white concrete rectangular columns, glass and wood cubes and section of framed chalkboard also evoked missing kids and teachers, leaving the history and future of the school where he sourced his materials an open and worrying question.

 

Theaster Gates at Kavi Gupta

Theaster Gates at Kavi Gupta

And speaking of missing, Michael Riedel’s installation at New York’s David Zwirner’s booth was easy to miss, but worth checking out.  Wallpapering one end wall was an image that appeared to be a reflection of the rest of the booth – three simple, large silkscreens – making for a daringly ephemeral installation in one of the Show’s prime spots.

 

Michael Riedel at David Zwirner

Michael Riedel at David Zwirner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nordic Lounge Poster Give-away

Nordic Lounge Poster Give-away

 

 

Cindy Sherman at MoMA – The Critics Speak

Cindy Sherman. Untitled Film Still #56. 1980. Gelatin silver print, 6 3/8 x 9 7/16? (16.2 x 24 cm). The Museum of Modern Art, New York. Acquired through the generosity of Jo Carole and Ronald S. Lauder in memory of Mrs. John D. Rockefeller 3rd © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Cindy Sherman. Untitled Film Still #56. 1980. Gelatin silver print, 6 3/8 x 9 7/16? (16.2 x 24 cm). The Museum of Modern Art, New York. Acquired through the generosity of Jo Carole and Ronald S. Lauder in memory of Mrs. John D. Rockefeller 3rd © 2012 Cindy Sherman

 

As the reviews come out, Cindy Sherman’s retrospective at MoMA (open Feb 26 – June 11) seems set to break ‘best-loved show’ records.  Universal critical adoration usually arouses suspicion of cliquish agreeability.  But Sherman takes the very notion of conformity to fashion and self-presentation -negotiated through society’s expectations – as her subject matter.  Absurdity and grotesquery appear at every turn in this show, making Sherman an uber-critic whose acuity forces the following homages from New York’s major cultural commentators:

Roberta Smith, New York Times:

Though Smith takes umbrage with the show’s selection and non-chronological arrangement, calling it “magnificent if somewhat flawed,” Sherman herself is “…an increasingly vehement avenging angel waging a kind of war with the camera, using it to expose what might be called both the tyranny and the inner lives of images, especially the images of women that bombard and shape all of us at every turn.”

Cindy Sherman. Untitled #463. 2007-08. Chromogenic color print, 68 5/8 x 6? (174.2 x 182.9 cm). Courtesy the artist and Metro Pictures, New York © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Cindy Sherman. Untitled #463. 2007-08. Chromogenic color print, 68 5/8 x 6? (174.2 x 182.9 cm). Courtesy the artist and Metro Pictures, New York © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Jerry Saltz, New York Magazine:

Saltz also gives Sherman fighting cred, calling her “…a warrior artist – one who has won her battles so decisively that I can’t imagine anyone ever again embarking on a lifetime of self-portraiture without coming up against her.”  He adds, “I think of Cindy Sherman as an artist who only gets better.”

Cindy Sherman. Untitled #131. 1983. Chromogenic color print, 7? 10 3/4? x 45 1/4? (240.7 x 114.9 cm). Courtesy the artist and Metro Pictures, New York © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Cindy Sherman. Untitled #131. 1983. Chromogenic color print, 7? 10 3/4? x 45 1/4? (240.7 x 114.9 cm). Courtesy the artist and Metro Pictures, New York © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Peter Schjeldahl, The New Yorker:

Schjeldahl affords Sherman the highest praise, saying, “The mysteries are irreducible…they qualify Sherman, to my mind, as the strongest and finest American artist of her time.”  Pointing out that delusion allows a disconnect between “inner feeling” and “outer attributes” he adds that, “…Sherman makes hard, scary truths sustainable as only great artists can.”

Cindy Sherman. Untitled #183. 1988. Chromogenic color print, 38 x 22 3/4? (96.5 x 57.8 cm). Courtesy the artist and Metro Pictures, New York © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Cindy Sherman. Untitled #183. 1988. Chromogenic color print, 38 x 22 3/4? (96.5 x 57.8 cm). Courtesy the artist and Metro Pictures, New York © 2012 Cindy Sherman

Howard Halle, Time Out:

Halle calls the MoMA retrospective “…the best show I’ve seen there since the Gerhard Richter survey [in 2002], and probably the best exhibit I’ve seen anywhere in a while…The way I’d put it is that Sherman uses glamour and horror to send up and celebrate the feminine mystique, including her own. She quantifies and categorizes the notion of one’s appearance, which fashion also does. But unlike Anna Wintour, Sherman isn’t in the business of marketing the cultural; she’s in the business of laying it bare.”

Cindy Sherman at the Museum of Modern Art

Cindy Sherman, Untitled #466, 2008.

Cindy Sherman, Untitled #466, 2008.

The biggest surprise in Cindy Sherman’s major career retrospective, opening to previews today (and officially on Feb 26th) at the Museum of Modern Art, is that there are few surprises.  It testifies to Sherman’s stature and influence that so much of the work in the show – 171 photos from the 1977-80 Untitled Film stills to the most recent send-ups of society matrons – is so familiar that it’s hard to even find the critical distance to reconsider it.

What does emerge is Sherman’s consistent and merciless pillorying of character types from the fashion victim to the aging coquette in galleries arranged by series – history portraits, centerfolds, etc – or by theme – fashion, carnival, abjection.  By comparison, the Untitled Film Stills (appearing in their entirety) appear kind by virtue of their hidden fakery and purposefully glamorized subjects.

Grotesquery – not limited to the fairy tale or sex series – is a heavy component of most of the work, whether in the repellent muscles of a prosthetic cleavage or the big hair and garish makeup of a woman trying desperately to hang on to her looks.  Sherman’s caricatures let most of us off the hook – at least until we start wearing caftans to lounge around our loggias – by representing ‘other people’ who’ve lost their style compass.

Sherman’s early work – seen at the beginning and end of the show – belies such distancing, specifically a stop motion animated short film depicting Sherman as a paper doll who selects her own outfit only to be returned to her case by a giant hand.  The artist’s ‘hand of God’ is now aided by Photoshop, as she alters facial details like those on an 18 foot high mural at the gallery entrance.  But though technology lends Sherman the potential for serious distortion, she holds back, continuing to tweek the conventions of dress and representation to which we adhere to a greater or lesser degree.

‘The Ungovernables’ at The New Museum

Can a museum exhibition claiming to “embrace the energy of this generation’s (international artists in their 20s and 30s) urgencies” compete with still fresh images and reports of Arab Spring or Occupy Wall Street protests?  While socially aware, The New Museum’s second Triennial, ‘The Ungovernables’ demonstrates less of a radical edge than a persistent questioning of the status quo and power structures in artists’ home countries around the world.  More of a chipping away than an uprising, for better or worse the show largely dispenses with aesthetic pleasure or craftsmanship in favor of often personal engagements with broader cultural or national identities.

The standouts include:

Hassan Khan, b. ’75, lives Cairo.  Jewel, ’10 – This mesmerizing video choreographing a two-man dance-off in traditional Cairo style is the show-stopper.

Hassan Khan, Jewel, ’10.

Hassan Khan, Jewel, ’10. Photo courtesy Galerie Chantal Crousel, Paris.

Cinthia Marcelle, b. 74, Brazil. The Century, ’11 – Barrels, hardhats and more objects are hurled down a street in a video orchestrated by Marcelle, offering some of that talked about urgency and exciting the senses but without reference to any particular conflict.

The Propeller Group, founded 2006, Ho Chi Minh City. TVC Communism, ’11 – On a circle of five monitors, five ad execs from an international agency hired by the Group hash out the intricacies of rebranding Communism, a fascinating conjuncture between competing ideologies.

The Propeller Group, 'TVC Communism', ’11

The Propeller Group, 'TVC Communism', ’11

Pilvi Takala, b. 81, lives Amsterdam and Istanbul. The Trainee, ’08 – For a month, Takala posed as an intern at an accounting firm raising the ire of fellow workers as she sat motionless at a desk or rode the elevator.  Their irritation seems to be the point, and while this illumination of social and workplace expectations yields results that are hardly surprising, it’s an amusing scenario for us, especially when Takala tells chagrined employees that she’s ‘working in her head.’

Jose Antonio Vega Macotela, b. ’80, lives Amsterdam, Mexico City.  Time Divisa ’10 -  Over a four-year period, Vega Macotela exchanged labor with Mexico City prison inmates, completing agreed upon assignments simultaneous that included smuggling in items in return for a map showing the route that 100,000 pesos took inside the prison.

Slavs and Tatars, Prayway, ‘12.

Slavs and Tatars, Prayway, ‘12.

Slavs and Tatars, founded 2006, Eurasia.  Prayway, ‘12 – A communal, ‘riverbed’ seat by the collective Slavs and Tatars appears to be an enormous folded sheet of metal resembling an open (prayer) book with a Persian rug arranged on top and a blue neon glow beneath – a Star-Trek channeling exercise in incongruity that should get conversation started.

‘Spies in the House of Art’ at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Francesca Woodman, Blueprint for a Temple, 1980.

Francesca Woodman, Blueprint for a Temple, 1980.

Contrary to its title, there’s nothing particularly subversive about ‘Spies in the House of Art,’ the Metropolitan Museum’s enticingly titled exhibition of its contemporary photography collection, which opened yesterday.  Photos, films and videos take museum display and visitor responses as subject matter, but the mood of the best pieces is more fond criticism than biting institutional critique.  Still, by bringing the myriad ways we navigate the museum experience to our conscious mind, the show counteracts purely passive viewing pleasure.

A standout is Francesca Woodman’s 1980 ‘Blueprint for a Temple.’ Completed a year before her untimely death and marking a major shift from her small scale photos, this 15 foot high photo collage of a Greek temple supported by her friends dressed as caryatids and printed on blue architectural blueprint paper playfully remakes ancient culture while forces a connection between past and present that resonates with the Met’s newly crafted Moroccan court.

The show’s second major highlight, Rosalind Nashashibi’s and Lucy Skaer’s 16mm film ‘Flash in the Metropolitan Museum’ from 2006 was shot at night with a flash strobe as the artists moved through the museum, momentarily illuminating Greek ceramics one minute, African or Medieval European sculpture the next.  Unclear images, seen for a moment in varying scales and unflattering angles turn usual museum display on its head while creating an alluringly mysterious anthropological study that is equal parts ‘Blair Witch Project’ and ‘Mixed Up File of Mrs Basil E. Frankweiler.’

Less familiar work comes across as amusing and fresh, like Laura Larson’s photograph of a display in the Telfair Museum in Savannah, Georgia which delights in pointing out the tasteless clash of style in a Regency settee, a wallpapered landscape and patterned marble floor.  Sophie Calle’s text and image of a gender-ambiguous blind person describing the ‘terrific ass’ of a sculpture in Paris’ Rodin museum invites reflection on our own ideas about beauty.

By comparison, a photo of a shelf of stored artworks by Louise Lawler, an image of a painting by Tim Davis with his flash blotting out the subject’s face and a video by Lutz Bacher following a young adolescent through the Picasso Museum in Paris look at art stored, reproduced or visited in unexpected if not particularly compelling ways.   In a sense, the Met itself undermines the less nuanced work in the show – the stunning artwork and displays encountered on the way to the 2nd floor photo galleries are a tough act to follow.

Doug Wheeler at David Zwirner Gallery

Doug Wheeler, SA MI 75 DZ NY 12, 2012, photo courtesy of David Zwirner Gallery.

Doug Wheeler, SA MI 75 DZ NY 12, 2012, photo courtesy of David Zwirner Gallery.

Relational aesthetics took a beating last fall as critics decried participatory artworks like Carsten Holler’s three story slide at the New Museum and MoMA’s installation of Rirkrit Tiravanija’s free lunch.  The visitor’s physical experience is also key to Doug Wheeler’s installation which opened today at David Zwirner Gallery and recreates a 1975 piece made in Milan by the influential So Cal ‘Light and Space’ artist.  But the hushed environment, limited to ten people at a time and entered after donning white booties so as to keep the floor pristine, is all about aesthetics, and less about interrelating with your fellow gallery goers.

The lighting in the installation changes in intensity and color as it simulates the transitions from dawn to day to dusk, slowly revealing where the boundaries of the flat floored, egg-shaped room are.  But even in the strongest light, it’s a strain to make out where gallery wall ends and floor begins; only the toes can tell as you feel the floor’s upward slope.  The impulse is to find the spot where your senses are most confused.

Visitors who stayed in the gallery the longest this morning inched their way to the front and center of the installation and stood looking into an optical illusion – a space that appeared to extend to infinity.  The sensation was like peering into a deep fog or a snowstorm (under comfortable conditions) as my perception of space kept shifting to make sense of what I was seeing.

Wheeler’s installation recalls James Turrell’s installations, in which visitors approach a shape on the wall only to realize that it’s a rectangle of recessed light.  Here, the experience is more intimate – like entering into the space occupied by light rather than gazing in from the outside.  Uta Barth’s photographs of light come to mind, as do Yayoi Kusama’s Infinity Nets but both treat light and infinity as more concrete subjects than Wheeler does with what he calls his ‘molecular mist.’  The scale and ambition of Wheeler’s project won’t be matched again soon in New York; catch it while you can and arrive early to avoid lines.

For more background, read Randy Kennedy’s Jan 15th NYT article.

 

Uta Barth, “…and to draw a bright, white line with light,” Tanya Bonakdar Gallery

Uta Barth, ...and to draw a bright white line with light (Untitled 11.2), inkjet print, 2011.  Courtesy of the artist and Tanya Bonakdar Gallery, New York.

Uta Barth, ...and to draw a bright white line with light (Untitled 11.2), inkjet print, 2011. Courtesy of the artist and Tanya Bonakdar Gallery, New York.

The centerpiece of Uta Barth’s latest solo show is a photo series depicting a continually morphing strip of light beneath her living-room curtains, a preposterously simple conceit which nevertheless yields complex optical illusions. As this diaphanous sliver shifts course over an afternoon, it variously resembles a snake, a line on an EKG or a trail of cigarette smoke, all the while transforming the space between the camera, the curtain and the window into an ambiguous territory where volumes flatten or swell, and light can pass for white paint.

Two glimpses of Barth’s hand arranging the curtain folds remind us of her agency, but it’s nature’s hand that propels the work’s attractively simple narrative as the sun’s changing position gradually increases the width of the band. At this time of year, as the onset of winter makes Barth’s invitation to contemplate sunlight especially attractive, the work entices us into the pleasures of solitary idleness that are at odds with the pace of everyday urban life.

In the back room, by comparison, a second group of photographs depicting built-in closets and drawers in the artist’s bedroom seems coldly architectural. Each image is emblazoned by squares or rectangles of light cast from an opposite window: One features a particularly bright patch that suggests celestial or alien visitation; another, a band of shadow over a door latch, creates the illusion that the surface of the print is scratched. But otherwise, the real drama of transformation takes place in the front gallery.

Originally published in Time Out New York, issue 839, Dec 1-7, 2001.

Sarah Braman, “Yours” at Mitchell-Innes and Nash

Sarah Braman, 'Good Morning (November),' camper chunk, plexiglas, steel and paint, 2011.

Sarah Braman, 'Good Morning (November),' camper chunk, plexiglas, steel and paint, 2011.

Sarah Braman’s trademark combinations of disparate materials in precarious arrangements achieve a new level of gravity with the incorporation of components from a cut-up camper. In her debut at Mitchell-Innes & Nash, hefty chunks of the vehicle act as both painting surface and gritty foil to the clean-cut cubes of gorgeous blue and purple Plexiglas to which they are sometimes conjoined. The resulting juxtapositions defy expectations as the funky, roughed-up trailer becomes impersonal, and the slick geometric elements charm with their transparent beauty.

In a sculpture near the gallery entrance, the back of the RV creates an archway with two Plexi boxes forming an L. Tinted the color of limousine windows, the latter are doodled with spray paint, recalling Sterling Ruby’s defaced pedestal pieces, but without the air of menace. If this treatment somewhat softens these cold, corporate forms, a lack of any trace of habitation within the camper does the opposite, making it makes seem less like a repository of past adventures, à la Mike Nelson’s airstream installation at 303 Gallery last spring, and more like one of Gordon Matta-Clark’s deconstructions of an abandoned place.

In a piece titled 8pm, a smaller fragment of the camper is sandwiched between two aquarium-like shapes, while a larger nearby structure in blue, pink and purple Plexi recalls an empty Damien Hirst shark tank crossed with an Anne Truitt. But it is in Braman’s misleadingly titled and exceedingly lively Coffin that viewers are finally offered the delayed gratification of imagining past lives. Here the Plexiglas takes something of a backseat to a segment of camper laid with a mirrored floor, creating a boudoir-like stage for memories.

Originally published in Time Out New York, issue 837, November 17-23, 2011.

Technorati Profile