- Venue
- University of Edinburgh - ECA
- Location
- Scotland
The thing that bugs me about the ECA degree show, even now, is the subdivision of the exhibition into separate disciplines. It’s not so much that this division occurred, more the fact that it was completely redundant. Anyone who has visited a degree show at one of the larger London institutions (most relevantly Goldsmiths) recently would immediately recognise the inter-disciplinary approach adopted by the students here, and these students should be commended for experimentation with materials and approaches free from the confines of a single discipline. My confusion then, is why the institution that presumably encouraged this free-thinking attitude, have tried to restrict this and assign students to finite fields upon its presentation?
That said there was still a great deal to like about the ECA degree show, and a large amount of innovative and experimental work on display. Horatio T. Lawson’s sound installation was one such piece, a sculptural synthenasia almost, with an arrangement of sub-woofers stimulating movement in a pool of polystyrene balls. This piece, like the drawings on display were attempts by the artist, who has congenital neural deafness, to express sound as he experiences it. The work was both affecting and thought provoking; a wonderful insight into the ways different people experience reality, and it didn’t look too bad either.
Continuing around the ‘sculpture’ section one couldn’t help but notice the work of Alexander Allan, Leith’s answer to Richard Long. This monumental sculpture, like all his work, was created using objects (mostly bricks and twigs) found whilst traversing the river. If nothing else it was impressive that the roof high structure didn’t actually collapse, the torrent of twigs arranged like flowing water seemingly set to engulf the gallery at any moment. At this point I must also mention my satisfaction at seeing so many sculptors on display here drawing, indeed the prevalence of accompanying material like sketches on paper and artist books is to be commended, not to mention their generally highly professional appearance.
It was good too just to see some more light-hearted work like Chris Mackie’s video installation ‘Running through a forest wearing a blindfold,’ which was a video of the artist doing just that, with highly comical consequences. I was also amazed by the technical intricacy of works such as Michael Hanna’s ‘Sound Booth,’ quite how the artist managed to afford this monstrous apparatus, let alone construct it, was beyond me.
Ben H. Fielding, by contrast, took the opposite approach with most of his sculptural pieces seeming to be an amalgam of household furniture and tools. My favourite was the table with a series of piano hammers attached to the top, which when triggered by audience interaction stuck the table created a surprisingly creepy noise for such an innocent looking contraption.
Veering into the photography department I found it to be the only section truly deserving of its title, with a reasonably diverse range of work on display. I found Claire Fraser’s thermochromatic photographs the most stimulating, images appearing as if by magic by the heat of someone touching the work. This body of work was a wonderful contradiction, juxtaposing not only the generally non-tactile nature of photography shows, but also emphasising the limited viewpoint of the photograph. By restricting the image so it can only appear under heat Fraser limits our understanding of the piece purely to what we can touch, a stark reminder that with photographs, as with our own vision, we never see everything. I must also commend Ruth Abigail Oliver’s beautifully delicate and intimate images.
Venturing finally to the ‘Painting’ section of the show, it was great to see a wide range of experimental and non-figurative work, although ironically the first work of note was Lottie Lindsay’s series of photographs ‘To Hope.’ These vague images of what was seemingly a half-naked woman running through a field enveloped in extremely thick fog resisted any sinister over-tones and remained fun and amusing. Lindsay’s ‘Double Wings,’ a series of small representations of doves attached to balloons drifting around the ceiling, was quite beautiful. Presented in the same studio space I also stumbled upon Catherine Dayton’s ‘Untitled (idle),’ a singing pair of shoes which was without a doubt the most fun work on display.
On to some actual painting and Gaynor Boggon’s subtly painted geometric environments are worthy of mention, as are Amelia Pace’s, dark, subtle atmospheric pieces, the works of both artist demanding closer inspection. On the subject of atmosphere I must also mention the work of Alison Dick, which truly draws the viewer in to her fabricated fantasy environment. While Sarah Muirhead’s fragmented, realistic portraits drag us back to earth, their gritty subject matter and excellent execution already seeming to have struck a chord with many important institutions.
At the other end of the spectrum the highly abstract works of Toby Cooke were particularly fascinating, with a wonderful textural quality adding real depth to the canvases. The messy, gestural paintings of Magdalena Blasinska were also a feast for the eye. Despite their seemingly callous implementation these works were vivid, colourful and exciting, presenting a sense of urgency, immediacy, the paintings exuding a sense that the artist just could not keep their form, their energy, their emotion, contained within her.
In conclusion, my main criticism of this show is still the one I started with: there really was no point separating this group of artists into separate disciplines. This show acts as a stark reminder at how important effective curation is, especially in a show of this size. Let us hope that the college can manage to catch up with its students next year.
