PlusArts

Surprising Mediocrity from the Phillips Collection

A promising show suffers from lousy art and sloppy thinking.

Share this story

Irene Rice Pereira, Transversion, 1946, ceramic fluid and porcelain cement on two planes of corrugated glass over a bottom panel of oil on hard board, approx. 13 x 15 in.

The Phillips Collection, acquired 1949

Pour, Tear, Carve: Material Possibilities is the new exhibition at the Phillips Collection in Washington, D.C. Using about 65 works from the permanent collection, it looks at how artists use unorthodox materials such as plastic, wood, scraps of paper, bones, dirt, glass, cloth, and sand to convey meaning. Art’s sometimes more than paint-on-canvas or ink-on-paper. “The medium’s the message” is Marshall McLuhan’s old saw. It means that the materials an artist uses aren’t neutral. They are part of the story, sometimes a nuance, sometimes a punch in the gut. Pour, Tear, Carve seemed promising to me, but it works in a haphazard way at best.

It’s what I call a shoehorn show. Some objects have a remote, even inscrutable link to the main theme of the exhibition. They’ve come from a recent donor, for instance, and they’ve got to be seen — or worn — whether or not they fit. Others are indeed poured, torn, or carved, but, as works of art, they’re not in the show because of quality or because they’re poured, torn, or carved with distinction. Rather, they’re on the walls because de rigueur PC thinking requires it, which means the subject’s hot but the art’s tepid.

Brian T. Allen

About the Author

Brian T. Allen

Brian T. Allen is National Review’s art critic.

Featured Tags

Manage following

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement