This is another show that I managed to catch at the last minute. I took
a keen interest in this particular show because of its collaborative efforts.
Six artists were asked to choose their collaborators, the idea being that they
would co-habit their artistic fields and come to some visual conclusion. This
hopefully engaging them in a discussion of how, why and (most importantly I
feel) where this can lead. Being part of some collaborative work myself has
helped me understand its qualities. The conversations that it ignites are by
far its most interesting aspect, engaging the viewer in these is the most
difficult part. All you can really give them is documentation of a process. I
personally want to be involved in that collaboration.

I didn’t feel that this show suffered from this problem, the observer is
situated in an extremely difficult position because they are the viewer of the
space not the participant. The only problem that I really had with the show was
the fact that they didn’t really seem to want to engage with a fine art
dialogue, which intrigued me. I’m not trying to say that the attempts of the
show weren’t gratifying they were just trying to dress themselves up as other
consumables. For example Michael Pybus and Dazed & Confused magazine produced fashion photographs inside the artists studio. Neither really stretched
themselves or pushed the boat out. Also inside the gallery space you are
confronted by ‘Modern Molluscs’ a collaborative project between artist Karen
Tang and architect Daniel Sanderson. They have constructed a wooden
tree-house-like sculpture with giant lurid green and purple insects crawling
all over it. It reminds me of a prop from a B movie, it has all the qualities
of something that Paul McCarthy would dream up but none of the content.
Apparently it was developed out of a mutual interest in Le Corbusier’s
modernist Architecture and their nautical experiences. I can just imagine the
conversation in Starbucks “Your and architect so you must like buildings, do
you like modernist buildings? Coz I really like them. Oh yeah and do you want
to see my photographs from my holiday where I went scuba diving. Lets do some
collaboration about that!” Maybe I’m just jealous, and I have to admit some of
my collaboration did step along those lines but it seems somehow halfhearted.

In the far room was ‘On Second thoughts Eddie!’ which unfortunately I
didn’t get to finish watching. The whole piece was melodramatic to say the
least but was enjoyable to watch. I had just the right amount of sex to keep me
interested, coupled with bizarre flashes of conversations with old ladies,
women hiding under shelter from the rain, operations and long still shots of a
hat. This was all chopped together with Paul Richards (the film maker)
narrating a whimsical tale of ‘piss’ and ‘shit’. What a mind bender, however it
definitely kept me guessing what was next. Well I kind of hoped that the
molluscs would appear at some point! This piece knew that it was trying to be a
feature film, which means that it is a successful film. But movies use a lot of
collaborative parties as a part of their process already. So why is this in a
gallery space?

My favorite bit was the catalogue for the show, which you had to make
yourself. A fantastic idea, which got me involved with the functioning of the
show, and it gave some insight into the culture of the show. Overall I found
that the problem with collaborative work is not the product but the
conversation that we have around it, actually how we express ourselves. It
takes time for a flow of communication to develop, the fact is that we
communicate about objects that we know and understand. It is easier and more
effective to do it that way. This leads to problems when trying to break
boundaries or create collaborative shows.