Jeff Wall, Summer Afternoons, 2013, detail |
Jeff Wall has to be one of the most interesting and
important photographers working today. His photography always features in
scholarly attempts to theorize photography, to articulate its ontology, to
remind us of why it matters. Given this importance, I was disappointed by this
exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. The works were hung, loosely
chronologically, with no attempt to contextualize through the presentation.
There was next to no text to give insight into what is happening in the images.
So I kept wondering, well, what is Wall doing now that he wasn’t doing when I
saw the retrospective at the Tate in 2005? Where is his work going, how is he
using the medium in new and exciting ways? Maybe he isn’t, maybe that’s the
point, that he hasn’t moved forward in his thinking about photography over the
past ten years. But instinctively, I want to blame the museum, not the artist
for lacking creativity in this exhibition.
Jeff Wall, Summer Afternoons, 2013, detail |
One recurring theme that is never mentioned in the
presentation by the Stedelijk Museum is the references to the history of
painting, references that underline so much of his best work. In one of two new
works on display here, I saw Edward Hopper everywhere. In Summer Afternoons (2013), we are struck by the isolation of the
naked woman on a divan, the sun shining on the wall and the end of the divan,
the seemingly vast yellow wall, her blond hair, perfectly pink cushions. Is the
woman in reflection, is she bored? Is she waiting for her next customer or
anticipating her last? When we see her next to the photograph of the man, on
the floor, possibly masturbating, across the diptych, the narrative changes.
Perhaps she did not satisfy him? But then again, maybe they have nothing to do
with each other. She has, after all, left the sofa by the time the left hand
side of the diptych is arranged. Or perhaps the woman arrives afterwards. The
man, his back turned to us, complicates the image of the woman who was, for me,
the focus of the diptych. The colours of the room make it uncomfortable. As do
the poses: his pose is the classical female nude with his back turned to us,
removed from our gaze. The woman is content, reflective, perhaps following
sexual intercourse, perhaps awaiting it. We don’t know, and our ignorance is
what makes this and other of Wall’s photographs resemble Hopper’s paintings.
Jeff Wall, In Front of a Nightclub, 2006 |
Jeff Wall, Siphoning Fuel, 2008 |
In another image that is unsettling because of its ambiguity, Siphoning Fuel, 2008 the
cars are old, the man looks poor, though he might also just be dressed in old
and casual clothes. The little girl isn’t dirty – but then again, maybe she’s
not with him? Her stance is suspiciously like a gypsy girl, she may just happen
to be sharing the space in front of the cars. Is the man siphoning fuel from
his own car? Stealing it? In typical Wall style, these questions are never
answered.
Jeff Wall, Men Waiting, 2006 |
Monologue, 2013 is
another very odd photograph, at first glance because of its setting – a dark
forest, that might also be a suburban backyard, in the night side of dusk or
perhaps the sky is obscured by the trees? One man sits on a period chair in
this forest space? Who is giving the monologue? Is it the man standing up? Is
it the one talking? And what is the monologue about? Who are they? What are
they doing here? They could be practicing their lines in rehearsal for a
performance, or just as easily, they could be gangsters hatching a plan.
Often the titles are very prosaic and almost obvious. Yet
the images are so ambiguous that the titles become unclear, destabilized. Men Waiting, 2006 represents what it claims to: men waiting. The image is black and white so
the world represented is cold and dark and clouded. One review I read claims that the men are waiting for Godot, but to my eye the men are more like zombies in a
science fiction world, standing still against their will, having been hit by some inexplicable, inter-galactic visitation.
Jeff Wall, Ivan Sayers, Costume Historian Lectures at the University Women's Club. Virginia Newton-Moss wears a British Ensemble c. 1910 from Sayers' collection, 7 December 2009 |
Ivan Sayers, Costume
Historian 2009. must be giving a lecture on the woman accompanying him. I
thought at first glance they were in a museum and the man was delivering the
lecture to the woman, describing an exhibit. This is an image in which the
placement of the spectator becomes the subject matter. An audience within the
image who we do not identify with – they are listening to the man lecture,
while we are looking at Jeff Wall’s (re)staging of the event. Plus, the
audience in the image are mirrored in the door panels. Usually an audience
within the image are placed for the identification of the audience of the
image. There is a line, a separation between audiences in and of the image: the
one is only a reflection, the other watches the reflection, from afar. This
line is fascinating, because it is always there, made more or less obvious, in
all of his photographs. Something separates us from the photographs, the
figures represented from each other, from the worlds they happen to find
themselves in, the photographs from each other.
The dividing line in Wall’s photographs might be seen to
underline their most powerful thematic element: they are all about isolation.
The isolation of the figures in the images is returned to the photograph
itself: there is no relationship between each photograph across his oeuvre. His
work is not about continuity and yet the Stedelijk museum establishes
continuity by arranging the works chronologically, if only roughly. So much
more could have been done to elaborate on the forms and themes of Wall’s
photographs. Then again, this may be just the point, further alienating us from
the photographs so we experience their discontinutity and impossibilities at an
even deeper level.
All images courtesy the artist
2 comments:
Thank you for the post, I'm curious about what others think about this exhibition. There is indeed almost no reference to painting (except in the text called "Tableau" in the left hall, where Wall says that his works are also tableaux, not only photographs or pictures (from where the name of the exhibition). For me the arrangement was quite disarmonious, in each room and per total.. the first room is just made to impress, as it is the old honour room. the texts in each room do not match the photos inside. More people complained about lack of information..But it is mostly Wall's wish, as he said that he wants people look at photos not text (But you can't understand some images without text - explaining art history/books/technical things..The curator just did what Wall wanted mostly, as Stedelijk prouds themselves to be an artist museum and not a curator one..
oh, and it was also Wall who didn't want any sort of narrative between his photographs, even if you could draw on similar themes or techniques. he wanted (except for the first room) to have a photo in each technique. anyway, as he always contradicts himself, he talked about two photos side by side, connected by the same theme:gravity (boy falling from a tree and a man lying in the grass)so he created a small narrative...
Post a Comment