Keifer seeks to explore “what holds the world together at its core” (Goethe) within the context of mythology, astronomy and history. He explores the connection of everything – here using string theory, the Norns and the Gordian knot, bringing “together theories of seemingly extraneous principles from different cultures and histories”.

In the gallery leaflet, string theory is articulated as “a mathematical model that attempts to articulate the known fundamental interactions of the universe and forms of matter”.

The exhibition features devastated, bleak landscapes that incorporate paint and charred vegetation. The natural matte in the paint “suggest an uncontrollable natural force at work. A vision perhaps, of a paradoxical circularity: of both a beginning and an end, form and ‘unform’, decay and rebirth, mysterious cycles beyond earthbound limits”. There is an exploration of the spiritual and scientific.

There were parallels with Mark Bradfords work in terms of physicality, scale, materiality, surface. Here, organic material is preferred over cultural debris. There are traces of wheat, scarring and blobs of paint. There is a physical presence of interaction and interference.

Close up, the works seem abstract but they are clear representations of landscape when standing back. The size of the canvases are huge, physically dominating, almost like monuments. You have to look up, revere. For me, the size is part of their success, a landscape that is all consuming, when close, you feel enveloped, intrigued by the material detail, the surface interaction. When further away the landscape is no longer pixelated but a clearer representation. I enjoy being forced to interact with the work from different perspectives, each observation feels almost relative.

I liked the visual of the netting scratched into the surface of some of the paintings. They added a momentum, a feeling of the wind/elements from afar and perhaps felt more threatening, trapping up close.

I wasn’t convinced by the axes stuck onto some of the paintings. They symbolised “Alexander the Great’s simple solution to unravelling the Gordian knot by a single, deft cut” but to me they felt a little clunky. In the midst of complex painting was an awkward object that for me didn’t clarify image or concept.

I loved the curation and space. The hallway lined with an installation felt like a passage into another world. Some rooms had natural light and others didn’t and this affected the atmosphere of the room. Those without natural light were less comfortable but perhaps more intriguing. In one room for example, the pillars and lighting felt a little like a car park however with the landscape paintings, this space became almost like a concrete wood (pillars as trees, lighting as clearing). The colour of the floor mirrored Keifer’s colour palette.

For me, Kara Walker’s work was the stand out artist from the day. I have seen her work before, about 10 years ago and hadn’t remembered her name but remembered the visual and message clearly. In some ways I think a strong memory of a piece is a marker of success, it denotes a level of engagement, of definite impact.

She creates another world. There is something attractive in the seemingly simple notion of paper cut out puppets that becomes increasingly complex as you engage with her work.

The contrast of black, grey and white is an impactful image before you’ve delved into her work’s narrative.

Her use of silhouette on the surface seems of the fairytale, historical, almost childlike, drawing the viewer in to engage with deeply complex narratives about race, gender, sexuality, power dynamics.

There is something both surreal and deeply real about her works that are, on the surface initially pleasant to observe and then deeply unsettling and fascinating. At times, her own silhouette comes into the frame of her cinematic pieces, reminding the viewer that it is both a puppet show and performative but also deeply real and human.

“Kara’s work was a new reality, a turning point in the history of art, because her art was about society without being social realism.”

https://frieze.com/article/hilton-als-films-kara-walker?amp

I thought her work was totally incredible and has a lasting impact.

The almost domestic, elegant setting of the gallery, with its smaller rooms worked well and felt like a comfortable space to engage with an uncomfortable observation.

Had I seen the Jockum Nordstrom exhibition in isolation I might have felt differently, however seeing it immediately after Kara Walker, I felt it lacked the sophistication of message and execution that Kara Walker had achieved.

For me his installation room was more successful than the collage and drawings as it evoked a sensation. It was surreal, repetitive, slightly haunting.

The use of veils, fluid and transparent papers appealed to me as materials I am drawn to and have used in previous projects. They add a level of complexity in that they partially obscure a visual, forcing the viewer to employ imagination by thinking about what the complete image might be/how it is produced.

I found the analogue-ness appealing, the use of immediate space, physically being able to observe how it worked. A particular atmosphere was curated. I think it was important to see the screen side first however I actually preferred seeing behind the screen, observing the different contraptions that had created the 2D visual. It was interesting to see behind the illusion, and provoked questions about perception.

Valie Export’s use of line mirrored the body language in the photograph. A sense of containment and isolation, it was intriguing and indicative of how shapes and line can evoke/highlight a mood.

The following works I liked because of the space around the piece where light was reflected or absent (shadows). It denoted the work in a space and context, the work acting within a context rather than isolation.

In the sprit of Mark Bradford, I decided to explore the materiality of paper. I took a magazine, soaked it and allowed it to deteriorate in order to reconfigure. I wanted to explore cultural debris as a material.

I tried reconfiguring the paper in different ways, shaping the paste into sheets, applying the paste to paper, to tissue and onto fabric.

I’d like to explore paper on cloth further. For me it was more interesting than the paper since the elements of paper on fabric was more unexpected. The fabric gathered the traces and debris in particular areas providing different textures. The thicker fabric was the least successful as it had less variation in texture. I preferred the transparent cloths because they felt more ethereal. The juxtaposition of the paper debris on luxury of the organza provoked an interested conversation to me about the value that is attributed to different objects and why. I would like to work into these fabrics further, perhaps pulling threads and exploring the capacity of the material and object.

Of the paper sheets I thought there was something interesting in curating them into a meat pile. There was a juxtaposition between the notion of debris and a sense of the collected.

I attended a life drawing that consisted of creating an image with paper. I enjoyed drawing with paper, playing with collage. Although the visuals and process were nothing like Mark Bradford’s, I was interested to explore the medium since he prioritises paper as a material.

For the last exercise I decided to use shreds from a magazine. I specifically chose images of women in order to capture the form of the model. I thought the method could be interesting as a way of commenting on the role of women or the way women are portrayed in society, expectations of appearance. Taking something that had been perfected and airbrushed, ripping it and reconfiguring.

Up close I prefer the flatter areas. The materiality is subtle and not as distracting as the more textured surfaces which look like debris. I can enjoy the aesthetic of the subtle surfaces without being distracted by identifying elements that comprise the surface (e.g. rope). I like to see the artists hand in more subtle undulations because it looks more sophisticated, it looks less literally like debris. It feels further removed from debris and therefore feels more evolved. It requires a higher engagement to think about where the material started. There is more problem solving involved. There is an abstraction from the original material. It feels more like a painting to me – do I look for something relatively “evolved”, a certain level of removal from the original form?

I prefer the use of rope when it is heavily layered in different colours as it looks more visually complex and feels removed from the notion of debris.

When I see remnants of rope, the fact that it is so recognisable makes me think of it’s origins, of dirt. this is not necessarily a bad thing but to me the “trace” of the rope is more interesting than the rope itself. It provokes more questions. Do I want a piece to provoke questions about the materiality?

Areas where the materials are abstracted from their original meaning are more successful to me as they provoke more questions. In this situation I want to see an element of cooking, of the artists thought process rather than the literal material, the raw. Do I want to see the material in an unrecognisable state?

Where paper has been pulled back there is a level of agency that I find intriguing. Was it intentionally ripped there, why? Was it applied in that way or removed? There is a marker of a person or time. I like the imperfection of the creases, the rawness of them.

The scale of the pieces feels integral to their success. It invites the viewer to interact, stand back. From afar the materials are abstracted and so the viewer is engaged in a puzzle, stepping back, coming forward, questioning the materiality. The distance facilitates a removal from knowing exactly what the material is, the rope is no longer rope but part of the visual fabric, the puzzle.

The size creates a sense of grandeur. It glamorises the debris. It suggests the material is worthy of the space but also contributes to the complexity of the image when you stand back as there is more information to take in.

The more I stay with the paintings. The more I like them, each corner inviting the eye,no uniformity.

The balls of paper under layers look like balls of paper that have just been stuck on, they remind me of craft and for me, up close they distract from the sophistication of the piece.

Within his work I look for a level of the cooked and uncooked.

The colours are beautiful and feel integral in the removal from the notion of debris. The colours facilitate an evolution. The pink feels unexpected and is more enjoyable as a result of the surprise.

There is dust in the pieces.

I love the look of the feathered dripping. From far away it looks like ripping and close up it makes me think about how that mark could be made. Is it ink leakage? Would a kind of acid or ethanol produce that mark?

The physical context of the pieces, the way they are lit also adds a sense of grandeur, they are almost glowing. They hold a presence.

Hiro – Shinjuku Station

Seems to be an exploration of our interaction with the urban environment or the impact of the urban environment. It feels observational, animalistic, the herded human.

A daily yet seemingly unnatural setting that evokes a sense of claustrophobia. Perhaps a comment on the impact of the urban environment on our psyche.

The aluminium frames mirror the material of the tube doors, the functionality to the point of inhumanity, a coldness.

The length of the composition feels like you could be looking at a tube but the proximity of the windows provides a shift and contributes to the feeling of claustrophobia.

Mark Bradford – Los Moscos

His use of layers and materiality interest me as a record of the human trace. He seemingly collects a materiality of culture, layering and reconfiguring to create a new dialogue. The fragments of paper “act as a memory of things pasted and things past. You can peel away the layers of paper and it’s like reading the streets through the signs”. The fragments of colour glow amongst the black, creating a map like, constellation-esquire visual.

John Stezaker – Masks

Seemingly layers symbols of culture i.e. old film star portraits and postcards to alter and create a new narrative. The covering and building of layers ironically creates a window like depth. The staged nature of the photographs contrasts the natural setting of the postcards.

The visual is intriguing however for me the concept is unclear.

I love the idea of the layers and I like the execution but it perhaps feels too simplified. I would like to see more agency from the artist since both are borrowed images. If I were to explore this layering of imagery, I would perhaps experiment further with the reconfiguration of the images or interaction with the surface or materiality.

His works were attractive and had elements of humour. His choice of materials in “dance” i.e. egg, coffee, mustard and graphite fitted into his concept of exploring American pop culture well, however I found the paintings that combined text with imagery stronger because they were visually richer, I wanted to look at them for longer.

The visuals feel familiar, accessible however his works avoid being cliched because of the juxtaposition of the overlaying words. He creates a sort of visual puzzle that is enticing and rewarding and his works leaves me with a sense of the enjoyable.

The words are products of culture, overheard phrases, observed signs etc.

In the last project, I found that absence had the potential to be more powerful than the depicted. Sometimes what is not said is louder than what is. Ruscha embodies this in some of his prints. The intrigue/power of absence works well in print perhaps because of the uniformity in texture. I wonder how this could be translated into painting, would absence have the same affect on a textured surface. Would it be as powerful if there was more textural noice around the absence.

It looks as though Ruscha scratches into the negatives of a photograph. I am interested in combining a unique, hand made mark with print/photographs. Having explored this with Riso print and read about photogravure in the manifesto project, I would like to explore what visual narrative can be created by combining photography/print with paint.

I tried curating the cloth in different ways in my area. I decided to hang it from different peaks as this felt more veil like. It twisted and contorted the drawn images in some areas and not others, referencing the tangible and intangible qualities of memory. Walking around it leads to different images being exposed from different perspectives. The window means that the images are at times very faint and so walking to see them against the wall clarifies them.

The images I drew from my grandfather’s photo album reference histories I know and don’t know. The blue represents the early cyanotype photography and the biro alludes to the quotidian elements of memory. The moving cloth and changing image is a metaphor for the subjectivity of memory. The change in the cloth’s dynamic brought about by the viewer denotes the way that the agency of the individual changes a memory. The transparency of the cloth references how memories are affected by context.

I created the first one with a combination of blue and black. I wanted it to reference the blue of early cenotype photography. The blue also references the biro I used to draw on the veils.

For the second image I attempted to recreate the autumnal colours I had seen in the setting and so used yellow and pink. The affect of this one was perhaps less sophisticated than the blue but had a really pleasing affect which I think successfully referenced the pleasure of the autumnal colours in the park. I don’t usually use such bold colours. I really enjoyed it and would like to use more in future.

I tried painting the feeling of the place or fabric in select colours. This worked best with minimal marks and when I closed my eyes to recall the place before I made the mark. Otherwise the marks tended to be more mechanical as opposed to a mark in response to a memory. I wanted to imbue feeling and something clearly subjective into something often perceived to be objective.

I tried with a palette knife and large and small brush. The first two felt more successful as I could get more movement into the mark.

Displayed as a triptych it represents how the same image can trigger a different response.