I went to Mandy Barker‘s new show opening at Impressions Gallery yesterday.
Mandy gave a talk about her work in the show and there was a Q&A with the audience as well. She used a microphone plus PA system and, which enabled her to move around the space, and she opted for printed images rather than a projector/screen set up.
I’m a big fan of Mandy’s work and went to her talk at Chinese Centre for Contemporary Art last year. It was great to hear what she’s been working on since then and also how she talks about her work with similar stories and anecdotes but in a new context and for a new audience. Giving a talk to a new audience, you have to begin from the beginning as some people may have absolutely no previous knowledge of your work. The Q&A was also interesting as I think questions, in terms of content and how they are posed, are fascinating at revealing a lot about the questioner, their base knowledge and opinions
For example, someone asked a question about why Mandy chooses to make her work aesthetically pleasing. Mandy replied [paraphrasing] that she likes to entice people in to enable a deeper consideration of the work than shock tactics and inevitable denial / switching off when presented with the shocking images of reality. The way the question was asked suggested to me that the questioner was certainly intrigued by this beautifying of rubbish but also possibly a bit perplexed why someone would want to do that – as if glossing of something so horrific. Having taken for granted my understanding of this tactic, it was great to be reminded this might not be a common understanding. Perhaps this a particular area of interest to the questioner and it was a faux-naivety and/or simply wanting to hear more about Mandy’s thought processes on this, I don’t know. But questions like this are a great opportunity to expand upon important points that are sometimes less obvious initially and, from an artist and curator perspective, can crucially help inform the way work is presented.
This made me think about recent and recurrent conversations I’ve had with artist-friends who are or have been in the role of visitor assistant or invigilator at art galleries/institutions. A commonly cited frustation is the hierarchy of the curatorial/management team not engaging with the knowledge that VA/inviglators glean from their everyday interactions with visitors. The public facing roles in arts institutions are really important but undervalued as deemed ‘unskilled’. Having had a stint co-directing Temporary Art Space at the Piece Hall back in 2009 as well as other curatorial projects, I think it’s very insightful talking to gallery visitors and artists and curators can learn a lot from it.
Back to Mandy’s show, the exhibition has a Plastic Pledge section which invites visitors to pledge their actions to tackle the plastic crisis.
These audience participation cards are a common way to engage visitors in a dialogue with the exhibition and other visitors. It does negate the human aspect of talking to someone in the real/realtime but it is, I think, in the realm of Dialogue. They have the potential to prompt dialogue like anything else in the exhibition space but it is an explicit invite to participate. I’ve been thinking a lot about this invitation to dialogue and particular modes and strategies we employ.
