Occupying all three exhibition floors of the New Museum, “Urs Fischer: Marguerite de Ponty” uses larger than life objects, both abstract and recognizable, in an attempt to transport the viewer to a trippy, surreal space. Upon exiting the elevator onto the fourth floor (for it is suggested by museum staff that visitors begin there and work their way down) the viewer is faced with massive freeform metal objects, one hanging from the ceiling and the others resting on the floor. These sculptures would seem infinitely heavy if it were not for the knowledge that they are cast out of aluminum. Also on the fourth floor are three unrelated pieces—a not-to-scale skeleton entering or escaping a cardboard box, a pink melting light post, and a cake floating below a bag above part of a subway seat. Moving down, the third floor is largely empty space, its focus being the walls. Fischer photographed every inch of wall and ceiling to create a wallpaper of the entire space which he attached just off center. In other words, ever object on the wall and ceiling, from the fire alarm to the light fixtures, is being followed by a shadow of itself. The effect, which could easily be assumed to be intentional, is like visual tracers. The center piece of this level is a green melting baby grand piano. Continuing to the second floor, the viewer enters a room filled with a host of familiar objects, from food and clothing to lighters and even a red British phone booth. These objects are actually photographs silkscreened onto highly reflective metal boxes. The viewer therefore can look at all four sides of the recognizable object while also seeing reflections of other objects and him or herself. Then, in the corner and seemingly out of place, is a pair of melting crutches.
There is a serious lack of continuity within this show as a whole, which Fischer possibly tried to address by dispersing his melted Dalí-esque pieces among all three floors. The entire exhibition seems rather drug-induced right down to the arbitrary titles on the ill-placed placards. Overall, it is good for a few laughs and maybe more than a few perplexed looks, but visitors should not expect much else.
This review provides a clear, concise overview of what a visitor can expect to experience while viewing the Urs Fischer exhibition according to the suggested itinerary. However, the writer devotes too many words to descriptions of the works’ formal qualities and of the exhibition layout, and not enough to an analysis of the effects that those formal and curatorial decisions might have on viewers. An investigation of the artist’s conceptual intentions would have also enhanced this review - Why is the exhibition titled after a pseudonym used by a male writer in 19th century France? Is there a valid reason to start the visit on the fourth floor and work your way down? In short, I would have liked to read less about what the works look like and more about their possible meaning and the writer’s impressions.
ReplyDeleteReading this review I do appreciate the amount of detail given to the experience of viewing the work. A large show like this one can easily become disjointed and this is always an issue when dealing with such a large space. The review seems to state that lack in continuity, drug-induced, and arbitrary work is a negative aspect of both the show and the artist. But if it was the artist's intention for us to feel those emotions then isn't the work succeeding? I felt especially disjointed walking among the giant mirror boxes and felt that most of the work was successfully connected in this manner.
ReplyDelete