- Venue
- Nottingham Trent University
- Location
- East Midlands
NTU Fine Art 2013 – ‘CONTINUED’ – Review written by Alexander Nicholas on the work of Lauren Halford – ‘I Can Speak For Both of Us’
This work was intelligently situated amongst other work that dominated a space, where as the installation produced had a charming aesthetic, different to anything else in the surrounding space. For a large space to be dominated by so many different works, and to have a singular piece of work that isn’t overwhelmed or undermined by any other pieces is an incredibly difficult task. This video/installation was the most interesting and engaging piece in this part of the exhibition. The way in which the monitors are placed on top of one another, and the surrounding objects, placed an importance on what it is that was being depicted. Frequently in my experience of video art is that it can have either a element of predictability or mundanity. However, this piece represented a clear strength in the artists practice and an appreciation of voice and visuals.
There is an carefully engineered placement of objects and relationship between the placement of each of the monitors. The focus that is placed upon the mouth in this collection of videos are not accompanied by the sound, instead the sound is situated in the adjoining corridor where there is a clear separation of dialect and visuals. Something that can be a difficult process to achieve and not resulting in loosing the importance of the piece. Focusing upon something that is most probably disregarded on a day to day basis, putting such an emphasis on the lower part of the face and the gesticulation that accompanies, a mesmerising distinctness emerges.
Upon entering the corridor in which the sound from the videos is contained, the narration creates a structure taking form in a vertical scale where each of the accounts being retold are experienced. Whilst it is possible that the space will be hastily passed through and neglected, this is not to say that this is something unconsidered in the post production. It becomes left to the viewers level of prudence whether they choose to engross themselves in the art work. The story telling becomes something of a familiar recital with humorous undertones of a past experience. Again, it is possible that not all of the members of the audience will connect with the charming mundanety of storytelling, but if the time is spent reflecting on the piece as a whole, connecting the visuals with the sound, the piece begins to manifest itself in a humble collective of speech.
If criticism were to be passed on this piece, it was the separation of visuals and sound, this worked in some ways but didn’t in others. It was difficult to engage with each piece as they were separated, most often is the case that either the sound or visual keeps the viewer engaged, but when they are separated it becomes far more difficult to engage with either aspects. It is an creative look at how video works are traditionally shown and displays a high consideration of what it means to display video and sound works. I feel that if the pieces were to still use the separation of visuals and sound but displayed in different locations, it could be a far more successful piece and really exploit the power of the spoken word as well as the intimate focus upon lips and gesticulation.
