Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Critics' Forum Article - 9.28.09

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Critics' Forum Article - 9.28.09

    Critics' Forum
    Visual Arts
    Reflections in the Aftermath of an Exhibition
    By Ramela Grigorian Abbamontian


    Earlier this year, I was asked by the sub-committee of the City of
    Glendale's officials and community artists to be the Guest Curator for
    the city's Annual Commemorative Events exhibition. Three intensive
    months later, the exhibition, ultimately titled "Man's Inhumanity to
    Man: Journey Out of Darkness . . ." opened at the Brand Library Art
    Galleries on April 4, 2009 and was on view until May 8, 2009. Over
    seventy works, including paintings, sculptures, installations, and
    photographs by forty-four artists were represented in the show. The
    list of artists included familiar Armenian artists such as Ara
    Oshagan, Kaloust Guedel, Alina Mnatsakanian, Sophia Gasparian, and
    Zareh as well as well-known non-Armenian artists such as Ruth
    Weisberg, Mark Vallen, Poli Marichal, Lark (Larisa Pilisky), Beth
    Bachenheimer, Hessam Abrishami, and Sheila Pinkel.

    The exhibition was organized into three thematic sections to
    illustrate the unfolding of various stages of a journey. The first
    segment, Faces of Inhumanity, included works representing various
    forms of atrocity throughout human history, including war, genocide,
    forced labor, and homelessness. The physical, mental, and spiritual
    aftershocks of inhumanity were explored in Scars of Inhumanity, which
    portrayed survivors telling their stories, fragmented bodies and
    identities, and the use of prayer as a means for transcending
    grief. The final segment of the exhibition, Humanity's Triumph,
    offered works that conveyed hope, survival, rebirth, and even
    forgiveness - an alternative, or perhaps even a remedy, to inhumanity.

    For an art historian, such an opportunity was a dream project: to have
    at her disposal the provocative works of a number of artists and
    construct the narrative that would be told about them. As an Armenian
    familiar with the historical and visual repercussions of the Armenian
    Genocide, I was also curious to see how non-Armenian artists
    represented instances of historical or contemporary injustice. But my
    interest was also tempered with caution: considering myself
    comfortably versed in the work of Armenian artists in Los Angeles, I
    wondered how their works would interact and dialogue with those of
    non-Armenian artists and how this interaction could best be presented.

    Multiple viewings of the over 300 submissions uncovered significant
    themes, and I was able to identify an unfolding narrative, one that
    the sub-committee and I eventually titled a "journey out of darkness."
    My training has taught me to examine artworks critically and interpret
    them contextually. In other words, I rely on the visual strategies in
    artworks to unveil their stories and perceive my role as the
    decipherer and interpreter of these narratives. Yet I am also aware
    that undoubtedly - though often unconsciously - I bring my own biases,
    expectations, and even hopes to such an exhibition. Hence, I was
    often plagued with the question of whether I was constructing a
    certain desired narrative and had an agenda of my own, or whether the
    works did indeed expose some underlying themes. I realized that I
    was, after all, constructing a narrative as well as letting it emerge
    from the pieces.

    I also considered other, related questions: Were the works in this
    exhibition, and similar visual representations of historical
    realities, sufficient representations of their respective atrocities?
    Can the magnitude of such things as war and genocide be appropriately
    related in visual form? And, finally, are the representations
    effective conduits for remembrance? I came to realize that artworks
    did not necessarily function as historical documents, presenting for
    the audience a truthful account of historical realities. Instead, they
    were sites of memory, spaces through which the artists endeavored to
    understand the events, their aftermath, and ultimately their own roles
    and identities.

    But we might also ask how, or whether, artists can visually articulate
    a calamity, especially one they have not directly experienced, as was
    the case for a number of artists in the show. In Memory Effects: The
    Holocaust and the Art of Secondary Witnessing (2002), Dora Apel
    suggests that postwar generation artists are "ultimately in the
    position of unwilling post facto bystanders" and can, theoretically,
    choose their specific position of identification: victim, bystander,
    and even perpetrator (p. 4), positions assumed by several of the
    exhibition's artists. In this way, the artists become "witnesses" to
    these events, because even though they have not directly experienced
    the inhumanities, they have nonetheless been privy to their
    repercussions. Perhaps one of the exhibition's most potent ironies
    turned out to be that, by assuming their roles, the artists made a
    choice for the benefit of those to whom history did not offer that
    choice.

    The process of visual representation, then, becomes a means through
    which the artists confront and construct historical memory. It
    provides the instrument through which the artists, and through them
    the audience, take on the responsibility of drawing on and preserving
    historical memory. As one visitor to the exhibition aptly noted, the
    pieces constituted "art that gives me eyes to see." From this
    perspective, the artworks are conduits to remembrance and, as Lorne
    Shirinian puts it in Survivor Memoirs of the Armenian Genocide (1999)
    regarding the use of photographs, "through remembering, the past is
    retrieved and identity is recreated and affirmed"(p. 67).

    But what impact, finally, did the display of works about the Armenian
    Genocide placed alongside other catastrophic historical events have on
    the viewing public, both Armenian and non? And what impact did such a
    presentation have on the artists represented? A memorable moment
    during the exhibition shed new light on these questions and helped
    reactivate my own commitment to collaboration. It took place rather
    unexpectedly, during the Artists' Question and Answer Session, one of
    several events organized in conjunction with the show.

    Originally intended as a forum where the audience could ask the
    panelists questions about their artistic influences, motivations, and
    meanings, the panel simultaneously served as an impromptu opportunity
    for the artists to interact. Throughout the question-answer session
    and especially at the end of the session, the artists - Sophia
    Gasparian, Lark (Larisa Pilinsky), Poli Marichal, Hessam Abrishami,
    Arpine Shakhbandaryan and Mark Vallen - began to engage each other as
    much as the audience. They often eagerly turned to one another and
    inquired about intent, purpose, and process. Each seemed to recognize
    the same sense of artistic responsibility in engaging historical
    atrocities that pervaded the work of the others. The artists' lively
    interactions created an unexpected and contagious energy that spurred
    the audience to ask even more spirited questions.

    When the artists exchanged business cards at the end of the session,
    the scene epitomized to me the critical need for Armenian artists to
    engage non-Armenian artists in direct dialogue. Because many
    contemporary Armenian artists emphasize the universal element in their
    creative work, they often reject categorizations of their art as
    exclusively or even primarily "Armenian" or "ethnic." Consequently,
    many Armenian artists place their efforts into appealing to a broader
    audience, often at the expense of collaborating with other, similarly
    "ethnic" artists. As the interactions among the artists participating
    in the panel suggested, such collaborations are not only productive,
    they are a natural extension and confirmation of the representational
    issues the works themselves address.


    This exhibition and accompanying programs were organized by the City
    of Glendale Arts & Culture Commission, in collaboration with City of
    Glendale's Cultural Affairs, a division of Parks, Recreation &
    Community Services Department, Glendale Public Library/Brand Library,
    and by a generous contribution from Advanced Development & Investment,
    Inc.


    All Rights Reserved: Critics' Forum, 2009.

    Ramela Grigorian Abbamontian received her PhD in Art History from
    UCLA. She is currently an Assistant Professor of Art History at Pierce
    College.

    You can reach her or any of the other contributors to Critics' Forum
    at [email protected]. This and all other articles published
    in this series are available online at www.criticsforum.org. To sign
    up for a weekly electronic version of new articles, go to
    www.criticsforum.org/join. Critics' Forum is a group created to
    discuss issues relating to Armenian art and culture in the Diaspora.
Working...
X