The installation of this show is just such a fantastic, seamless background that really shows off the work of Kevin Bourgeois to great effect. I loved it the second I walked in. Here, however, is the rub: the works viewed on their own were something else.
I found it hard to distance my reaction to the (rather horrible) subject matter from the way it was depicted, too distracted by repulsion to judge it as a work of art. Does that mean it failed as a work of art, or conversely that it was successful?
How is one meant to appreciate work that tackles difficult, uncomfortable subjects or, in this case, rather wallows in dark tropes? It’s up at Causey Contemporary in Williamsburg through November 14 in case you want to judge for yourself.
“..wallows in dark tropes?” I’ve always found it very challenging to deal in meaningful ways with emotionally charged ideas. Looks like a very interesting installation.
Hah, well you caught me slipping that in there…there’s a very trite noose piece in the exhibition that spawned that phrase. Plus gas masks…eh
But I think it is challenging, and I guess I was trying to say whether art expressing ugly things could make its point by being brutish and direct…or if then it fails as being art…
Yes, it is interesting if you have the chance.
I have questions along the same lines you do. It’s…wondering if the artists is piggybacking(on whatever the event is)? I do think it would have something to do with political or didactic art being in a gallery though, I appreciate in graphic/poster form, because then it is concept only. I may sound comepletely muddy here.
There’s also something about the artist being some big rebel against society…see under Banksy’s story.