|
|
|
||||||||
Shahin AfrassiabiProject Gallery, Dublin, January 28th - March 6th 2004If Outsider Art was supposed to be about the value of raw, unmediated
expression – the art of insane or self-taught, visionary individuals –
it was only ever the vehicle for the discontent of artistic radicals,
for whom it functioned as a challenge to the conformist trammels of what
Jean Dubuffet would term bourgeois society’s ‘asphyxiating culture’. No
one bothers too much about Outsider Art anymore but, if its star has fallen,
this is more a sign of the dispersed success of its project, not its failure.
Everyone is an outsider now. Insider artists everywhere adopt outsider
personae as declarations of their allegiance to an authentic subjectivity,
grounded in those cultures supposedly excluded from art: in the age of
cultural inclusion no boundary can go unchallenged, even if the profession
of challenging boundaries has the perverse effect of perpetually reasserting
them. So bringing the historical artefacts of Outsider Art into the context
of contemporary art is no innocent gesture, even if Shahin Afrassiabi’s
ambitious installation at Project handles such a charged move with an
insouciant lightness of touch. Afrassiabi has selected five works from
the Musgrave Kinley collection of Outsider Art, housed at the Irish Museum
of Modern Art, and combined them with his own assemblages of prosaic materials
and objects. A list details the works, but gives no clue as to which objects
are which. Two works, Michel Nedjar’s Untitled (doll multiple faces) Triple Head (all works undated), a
tortured bundle of sewn eyes and mouths, and Angelus’s Mountain, an attempt to make modern representation, a psychedelic
landscape of incandescent geometry in coloured pencil, are obvious enough. With Madge Gill’s cubistic line drawing Untitled (dedicated to Conan Doyle), these
works immediately conform to the stereotype of Outsider Art; obsessively
overwrought, expressionist and burdened with some implied psychological
suffering. More difficult to locate are the two Untitled attributed to ‘JB Murray’, nondescript little folded cloths
covered in cryptic marks. In this instance, the rhetorical bombast of
Outsider Art – its notional subjective excess and intensity – is lost
and, rather than a model for liberated subjectivity, one is left with
the psychological symptoms of alienated existence. Undermining the identity of things as carriers of artistic discourse
becomes the critical axis of the show. Afrassiabi’s interventions – timber,
shelving track, sheet ply, plate-glass, paint tins, rolls of wallpaper,
retro curtain fabric – are so unassuming in their happenstance accumulation
that they barely register as the product of any intentional act, artistic
or otherwise. If Afrassiabi’s previous arrangements of ordinary stuff
in the Whitechapel Art Gallery’s ‘Early One Morning’ could invoke ghosts
of Constructivism, 60s formalism or Minimalism, it was because these precedents
suggested what Afrassiabi’s structures so clearly abstained from, and
what art now finds so difficult to assert: a bygone artistic confidence,
dynamically engaged in the establishment of common criteria for cultural
and artistic significance. Afrassiabi’s purposefully weak, sleepy aesthetic mischievously works
to resist the nostalgic desire for modernist certainties, just as it refuses
any sentimentalising idealisation of the unmediated authenticity of outsider
art. In contrast to his evasive forms, the outsider work looks not only
like much contemporary art that looks like (old) modern art, but also
as much like the outcome of cultured, historical traditions of art-making
as the high art of which it is supposedly innocent. But Outsider Art could
only ever be a discourse internal to art, whatever its advocates pretended
otherwise, because the types of subject it privileges are, by definition,
those who cannot actively contest an equal claim to cultural status. So
Afrassiabi’s gambit suggests that, whilst art may now wish to be no more
valid than other forms of culture, it still cannot undo the relative self-consciousness
its position implies. Art’s obsessive embrace of the outsider is less
a challenge to a proscriptive bourgeois culture, than it is an expression
of anxiety about exerting any kind of special status, for fear of reintroducing
division and conflict into the conciliatory cultural facade of liberal
democracy. ‘Tyia … tieh … tiouh …’ In the gallery we can hear nonsense words spoken
with deliberation. Discovering that we’re listening to a Chinese pronunciation
exercise, we no longer recognise the outsider’s irreconcilable difference,
but the potentially translatable identity of the foreigner. By seeing
Outsider Art as the object of a discourse to which it isn’t party, while
simultaneously removing sculpture from the purely specialist preoccupation
of an insider sensibility, Afrassiabi cuts across the stale divisions
of both and returns the question of cultural separation and community
to the conditions and subjects of the present. Conflict and cross-purpose
may produce differences between outsiders
and insiders, but it is only from this process that the possibility of
new, actively achieved cultural identities can ever emerge.
all material copyright JJ Charlesworth 2007 and original publishers where indicated |
|||||||||