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

recent entries

Giving Thanks Readings
Meet RACC's new leader Madison Cario
November Reviews
Early November Links
Spooky reviews
Countdown to Portlandageddon?
Mid October Links including PNCA/OCAC merger talks
Paul Allen, philanthropist and arts champion dead at 65
Midwest Art Initiative Tour
Haunting October Picks
End of September News
September review cluster

recent comments

Double J
mike walsh



Book Review
Calls for Artists
Design Review
Openings & Events
About PORT

regular contributors


Tori Abernathy
Amy Bernstein
Katherine Bovee
Emily Cappa
Patrick Collier
Arcy Douglass
Megan Driscoll
Jesse Hayward
Sarah Henderson
Jeff Jahn
Kelly Kutchko
Drew Lenihan
Victor Maldonado
Christopher Moon
Jascha Owens
Alex Rauch
Gary Wiseman



Guest Contributors
Past Contributors
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
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






powered by


Movable Type 3.16

This site is licensed under a


Creative Commons License

Thursday 05.13.10

« Face Facade & Bookwerks | Main | alberta arts »

Disquieted at PAM

Untitled 2002, Lari Pittman

The most recent, long running show at the Portland Art Museum, Disquieted, is an exhibition rife with contradiction and conundrum. Opalescent and beefy with the reputation of its artists, Disquieted boasts an exhibition to impress and seduce. Its mission statement claims to bring together works that challenge and question social convention and social practice, works that imply a perturbed, dissatisfied state of apprehension somehow caused by the experience of a contemporary existence. While this goal is lofty and seemingly relevant, its bar is high, and its reality is an atmosphere that is raw and piercingly specific; to create the ambiance of a public unnerve, a state so tangible and so pervasive and which runs through the thread of everyday existence is ambitious, gripping. This is not an academic goal; it is an existential one, and while Disquieted touches upon this jumpy nerve occasionally, as a whole it seems more to want to sit right next to it. When perusing the roster of artists in the show, it seems a more apropos, accomplished bunch could not have been gathered to create such an aura, which is why the show is puzzling in its sporadic success. To understand this phenomena calls for a gentle yet thorough dissection.


"In the Midst of Dreams" 2009, Jaume Plensa

The first piece encountered is the installation in the foyer, "In the Midst of Dreams", by the artist Jaume Plensa. Three enormous female heads sleep facing one another, emanating an ethereal glow. White stones surround these monoliths and act as their shared, unifying body. Upon closer examination, it becomes clear that each girl represents a different ethnicity. Random words denoting suffering, pain, and ill will ornament their sleeping faces and define the piece as some sort of colorless oracle. As they sleep, they seem ready to be asked a question, ready to perform, as the subjects of their dreams stream around their young faces. The choices of the words seem somewhat haphazard and pandemic?, and are reminiscent of sinus medication commercials. The experience of this piece is somewhat hampered by the limited space of the museum foyer, yet coincidentally draws attention to the eloquence of its design (particularly the ceiling, which appears as an illusory asymmetrical angle yet is not). It is a dichotomous flux of emotions that perhaps is meant to produce anxiety, which it does, yet not in the way it might intend. The transmission falls short as the intentions of the artist do not seem to mingle with the experience of the viewer. This ambiguity can lead to groping for specifics granted by the piece's visual cues: Should we assume the presence of bodies beneath the stones? Should the viewer assume each head's words are directed at the other head at the viewer? Is this a piece about racial tension? Everyday life tension plus racial tension? A proverbial reference about throwing stones? In this way, the artist condescends his audience somewhat in combining occasionally shallow ingredients in what could have been a rather surreal piece. The words are unnecessary.

Disquieted continues its first half (divided unfortunately, but necessarily by the architecture of the museum and thus coincidentally visually, mentally) behind Jaume Plensa's introductory piece. Entering into that first room, the body politic immediately becomes the issue at hand as catalytic platform. Barbara Kruger's piece, "Your Body is a Battleground" (1989) is wonderful to see, but somewhat gimmicky in this context. The body becomes an "issue" section of the general mission of the state of our general societal unrest. This is a condescension to the viewer, expecting that dispersed throughout the show, this would not be, could not be understood. The room does not need Kruger's text to introduce its content. Her piece marks the declaration of some of the most recent topics of social unrest, yet placed here, the piece is pigeonholed. This is the problem with much of this exhibition; the constructed context of viewing these pieces leads to the halting of their inherent potential.

Charles Ray's pieces are screaming gendered totems, multi layered and weary under the weight of their roles, under the weight of our assumptions. They embody this politic wordlessly while asking questions at the same time. An eight foot woman in a fuchsia powersuit with her hands on her hips will greet you at the forefront with her giant smile between her mannequin ambition and our stereotype, unapologetic in her unadulterated power lusty stance, unapologetic of her existence, despite its reaction. What do we think about her? Do we know her? Do we think we know her? Is she the totemic foil in body (and spirit) to the naked male form behind her, whose lithe, gentle stance almost suggests expression? Or do we make assumptions from their physicality about these mannequins, and thus the world? The male form behind her counters her existential aggression. His submissive countenance is marked by the realistic rendering of his flaccid, yet visually prominent sex, swarthy against such genteel, fabricated beauty, historically counter to the visual ideals of masculinity. Ray presents us with our own assumptions to face and understand.

Su-En Wong's piece here is a strange addition. Seen usually on continuous display in the contemporary wing of the museum, it has been placed as a part of this show somewhat randomly, yet is also quite indicative of much of the show; while Wong's work is perfect for the exhibition, this particular painting is not the most effective example of her work. The logistical ease of including this piece is understandable, yet including it weakens both the painting and show. This is an undercurrent running through the holes in Disquieted; many of the artists' works are poor representations of what they do. The inclusion of Wong's painting feels as if either there wasn't enough work, or that the Portland Art Museum felt the need to include a piece from its own collection.

"Baby Pink Painting with Three Girls" 2000, Su-en Wong

Doug Aitken's piece, "FREE" 2009 looms lavishly in the center of the room, cinematic and grandiose in its depiction of a decaying casino. What is free? , we ask him. Destruction? Chaos? Freedom? Because it isn't, he seems to also say. This piece is lovely and poignant, yet juts up against the body politic to dissect the room. Moving through the space of the museum, John Baldessari and Daniel Richter's pieces sit next to one another in a bizarre juxtaposition. While both visually riveting, Baldessari's metaphysical, humorous compositions placed next to Richter's anarchy in fluorescent relief is a radical and perhaps somewhat awkward jump. While both artists' sensibilities and constitutions advocate conversation, both visually and ideologically, due to their context, they seem an island of something that could be interesting but becomes chopped up in the arrangement of the other pieces. In many ways, a creepier show would be all of Richter's work, or the disquieted of Richter. These sentiments are difficult to pinpoint, because these works, considered alone, do fit the definition of the exhibition's mission statement. Murakami's paintings are sexy, cartooned renditions of the underlying forces, beautiful, menacing, and chaotic. Yet Sue Williams', Wangechi Mutu's, and Paul McCarthy's pieces bring back the ideas of the body. At this point in the exhibit, the genitalia theme begins to become sort of hackneyed. The choice of the McCarthy piece, "Brancusi Tree (Gold)" is particularly baffling, as it seems perhaps the tamest McCarthy piece that may exist. The corner its placed in further undercuts its possible emphasis; one would think such a piece of McCarthy's would want to be in the center of a room somewhere, resplendent and horrific in all it's golden anal glory. The Crewdson and Emin pieces around it fortunately undercut some of its shrewd but crass satire.

"Brancusi Tree Gold" 2009, Paul McCarthy<

Moving onto the second floor of the exhibition, one feels an ideological shift mimicked in the architecture. The soundtrack of Shirin Neshat's film, "Posessed" pervades the atmosphere and adds an eerie ambience to the air around these pieces. Ellen Gallagher, Glenn Ligon, and Sanford Bigger's pieces are grouped together in a racial political spectrum that mimicks the body politic below them, once again visually undermining the possibility of the pieces and the intelligence of the viewer. These are some of the most powerful, most interesting works in the show, and I cannot help but wish they were interspersed with their peers for a more powerful visual impact, as opposed to grouping together the artists whose work concentrates on race here, the artists who discuss gender there, the anarchists over there, and the ones who operate under their own personal mythology here.

One of the most actually disquieting pieces in the show is Jan Tichy's piece, "1391". On every level, it operates as a silent and eerie aspect of something in our current culture that is very real. It is as visually stunning as it is subtle: an open political nerve in white. It is as effective as a bullet. The viewer leaves this tiny piece with chills. Carrol Dunham's painting on the wall behind it mimicks 1391's political reality in a more personal anecdote, and Ron Mueck's figures illustrate anxiety in a skin that is as tangible as our own. Shirin Neshat's film is beautifully shot yet a bit too constructed, as the lead actress does not seem to be a part of the surrounding community, once again, not one of this very brilliant artist's strongest pieces.

1391, 2007, Jan Tichy

Disquieted is an exhibition of lofty ambition and meaty work whose vision is fractured by the lack of its editing. Seduced by big names, it forgets to be critical enough of what one can actually see. While absolutely luxurious to see these incredible artists of such varied practice and geography in Portland, their respective representations within this show are not as accurate as they could be. It is an exhibition of hits and misses, of crescendos and plateaus.

Posted by Amy Bernstein on May 13, 2010 at 7:03 | Comments (2)


This was by far the best contemporary exhibition at PAM since "Let's Entertain" a few years ago. It is great to see new work by the likes of Robert Longo and others!

Posted by: mike walsh [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 13, 2010 03:47 PM

Mike, I agree... the best group show at PAM since Let's Entertain. In many ways a group show invites "uneveness" and I thought the Suen Wong fit perfectly where it was. I agree the Baldessari's placemment made very little sense.

Overall I would have limited the choices to the past decade... the inclusion of all the early 90's identity politics though completely relevant made the show a little more diffuse (because its inherently nostalgic).

I believe Including pieces from the collection deepens visitor's engagement with the museum and gives a little insight into Bruce's selections for the collection over the past few years. That alone is valuable.

All that said I hunger for an in depth solo show of a major artist and couldn't be happier that PAM is finally adressing Rothko with a show in 2012. There's some local business there to be done since Rothko is Portland's most famous son.

See this show...

Posted by: Double J [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 14, 2010 09:34 AM

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