Portland art blog + news + exhibition reviews + galleries + contemporary northwest art

recent entries

Odds & Ends
Traces of Ourselves
Use and Space. An Interview with Brad Cloepfil, Part II
This Week at PSU
Monday Links
Fritz Haeg Interview at Reed College
TBA:08 On Sight
Primer and welcoming committee for Reversed Reality
FIrst Friday Picks October 2008
Coming up at PAM
First Thursday Picks October 2008
First Wednesday?

recent comments

categories

 

Calls for Artists
Design Review
Essays
Interviews
News
Openings & Events
Photoblogs
Reviews
Video
Links
About PORT

regular contributors

 

Amy Bernstein
Katherine Bovee
Arcy Douglass
Megan Driscoll
Sarah Henderson
Jeff Jahn
Jenene Nagy
Ryan Pierce

archives

 

Guest Contributors
Past Contributors
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005

contact us

 

Contact us

search

 


syndicate

 

Atom
RSS

powered by

 

Movable Type 3.16

This site is licensed under a

 

Creative Commons License

Monday 09.12.05

« TBA Kickoff | Main | Stefanie Schneider at Alysia Duckler Gallery »

Bruce McClure's Crib and Sift at tba:05

In an article published in artforum last summer, artist Anthony McCall recalled a question he was often asked in regards to his work: "Are you making sculpture or are you making films?" Last Saturday, Bruce McClure's performance of his four part series, Crib and Sift, elicited just this question. Using four projectors, modified for each 14 minute section of the performance by using a combination of plates and focal points, McClure layered four identical, simultaneously projected films to create densely textured fields of light and shadow. The imagery itself was not created with a camera, but, as McClure describes, by using "an original ink sneeze printed four times on a technological substrate (16 mm. film) and developed into an importune register of film events." All but one film were accompanied by droning soundtracks created with similar regard for nonlinear composition.

McClure's work had more to do with transcendental installations like LaMonte Young and Marion Zazeela's light and sound environment, Dreamhouse, than with most experimental films I've seen, which tend to rely on heavy editing and obscure imagery to create filmic density. McClure's films, like the Dreamhouse, act more as a meditative environment (perhaps with a nod to the psychedelic) defying the linearity of film. His second film used each projector to create one of four light filled borders, leaving a rectangular black void with softly defined edges, using the two dimensional to imply the infinite, recalling the use of the seemingly infinite voids in Anish Kapoor's sculptures.

It is important to note that McClure approached this subject within the theater and that the conventions of ritual and physical proximity between film and audience remained the same, even though the presentation bore little resemblance to conventions of film. McClure remained in the projection booth throughout the duration of the film, reconfiguring the orientation of the projectors and making modifications in the short breaks between each film.

When McCall broached the subject of ambiguity between film and scepter, he chose to work within the rarified environment of the gallery. His seminal piece, Line Describing a Cone (1973), consists of a projector displayed openly within a gallery. Over the course of thirty minutes, a white point slowly moves clockwise to create a circle. The gallery is filled with particles generated by a smoke machine, picking up the light between the projector and the surface onto which the film is projected, forming an arc that turns into a full cone of light at the culmination of the film.

Influenced by the prevalence of conceptual art, McCall's work has the kind of intellectual thoroughness and immediate transparency so characteristic of the time, sublimely demonstrating the interplay between two and three dimensions by using the projector as a means to sculpt light. McClure isn't interested in this type of rigidity, instead using predefined circumstances to create scenarios for unpredictability and randomness. However, he shares with McCall an interest in using projection not to create imaginary worlds, but instead as a physical force that can be used to alter light in a very essential way. McCall, describing his early impetus for creating Line Describing a Cone, explains that he "became engaged by the possibility of a film that could exist only in the moment of projection with an audience, without reference to an 'elsewhere.'" If one could argue for the presence of "elsewhere" in McClure's work, it is purely on the plane of an individualistic, psychic elsewhere.


Posted by Katherine Bovee on September 12, 2005 at 9:07 | Comments (0)


Comments

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?


s p o n s o r s
Site Design: Jennifer Armbrust   •   Site Development: Philippe Blanc & Katherine Bovee