Last Thursday evening I went to a debate at the Barbican hosted by IKEA and my invite gave me entry to the
Surreal House art exhibition taking place there.
Firstly it was nice to wander round later in the evening than I usually would at a gallery but when it comes to surrealism Salvador Dali is my main point of reference. I used to visit Spain a lot and I've been to the
Dali museum there and his wife's home too. There was a lot more than Dali in the exhibition of course which opened my eyes to other sorts of surreal art including film, photography and performance.
The space has been transformed into a maze of a house with rooms and roof-like slopes and then upstairs, balconies that overlook the floors below.There are pieces which inspire and intrigue and others which didn't really hold my attention.
I was transfixed however by the gentleman doing a reading of a
Geoff Cox book to accompanying music, it was quite haunting. The various films being shown varied in quality in my opinion, although the
Buster Keaton ones were quite fun to watch.One of my favourite pieces though was Concert for Anarchy by Rebecca Horn, the skill and patience required in putting it together were obvious.
I wandered round the exhibition with another delegate of the IKEA debate and we did have quite similar ideas on art - although she'd clearly studied it to a higher level than I had. Art is such a personal thing, especially in surrealism where it's not always so clear cut.
I like art that does any of 3 things:
- Makes me wonder how on earth it was done or feel in awe of the skill or thought that has gone into a piece.
- Is so figuratively accomplished that eyes on a person appear to be real or you could imagine reaching out and touching an object from within a painting.
- Within sculpture, if something has a texture that calls out to be touched I tend to love it.
But art tends not to be displayed without commentary, certainly not modern art. The artist increasingly provides an explanation for the art and this is where I get fussy. I want the explanation to be about the thought process, the personal journey or feelings of the artist. What I don't want to read is some high brow concept with no relation to the actual art. Metaphors are fine if they can be tied in some way to what I'm looking at. Abstract is fine, but for me I want to know about the person who created the art just something that makes me understand or at least feel as if I understand it.
We are all different though and different things appeal to us. For me, surreal art is fascinating but I wouldn't want to hang much of it on my wall.