Heide Hatry, Not a Rose @Stux

JTF (just the facts): A total of 35 color works, framed in dark brown wood and unmatted, and hung in the entry area, the main gallery space (separated by a dividing wall) and the upper viewing area in the back of the gallery. All of the works are silver halide prints, made between 2007 and 2011. Physical sizes range from to 15×17 to 35×70 (or reverse), with many intermediate sizes; editions are either 5+3AP, 7+3AP, or 9+3AP, with the smallest prints in the largest editions. The show also includes a video of Hatry at work, with interviews with various artists and writers discussing the project. A monograph of this body of work was recently published by Charta (here) and is available from the gallery for $35. (Installation shots at right.)
Comments/Context: At first glance, Heide Hatry’s floral photographs look like standard, botanical garden images – exotic blossoms and rare specimens singled out for up close attention, with a backdrop of leafy greenery or jungle undergrowth for context. But after a few would be orchids and possible roses, it starts to become clear that something else is going on here. These lovely flowers are surprisingly rich and fleshy, almost too thick and juicy to believe. And then the moment of horror comes – these aren’t real flowers, they are dissected animal parts sculpted to look like flowers. Easy going attraction is turned into shocked revulsion in an instant.

Part of the reason Hatry’s inversion is so successful is that her constructions are so believably perfect. Her “flowers” bloom in a bold spectrum of colors, from luscious pink and red to delicate white and yellow, their petals spun into intricate geometries of patterns and folds. Some are soft and velvety, others spiky and hairy, but they all seem like something plausibly natural, designed to attract pollinators or enable reproduction through the dissemination of seeds. That she has created these fictions out of animal waste, offal, and discarded sex organs sets up her artful betrayal. The image checklist is a stomach turning list of component parts: duck tongues, fish eyes, pig ears, deer eyelids, starfish arms, chicken combs, crab claws, lobster gills, sheep intestines, bull stomach, deer esophagus, cow vagina, sheep penis, with a little coagulated blood thrown in for decoration. Reading such a catalog creates in almost instant reflex reaction of disgust, which is just exactly what she wants to have happen.

Hatry is by no means the first artist/photographer to explore the artificiality of flowers. Joan Fontcuberta has made brilliantly impossible hybrid constructions of nonexistent plants in the New Objectivity style of Karl Blossfeldt, while Vik Muniz has taken carefully posed images of hand made silk flowers. But Hatry has taken this idea of upended floral reality several steps further with these works. Her “flowers” lead off in a multitude of conceptual directions. There is the “flower as sex organ” constructed with meaty sex organs idea, where a kind of carnal eroticism is mixed with taboos and phobias about bodies. There is a more primal two sided coin of confused beauty and ugliness, where something seductive becomes something repulsive in the blink of an eye. And there is the underlying theme of exploitation of the natural world and the thorny issues of large scale production of meat and flowers for human consumption that these pictures open up.

In many ways, it’s hard to imagine that flower images could be full of so much tension and contradiction. Hatry has cleverly deconstructed the genre and rebuilt it with more suggestive and sensational parts, bringing dark questions to a normally liltingly uncontroversial subject.

Collector’s POV: The works in this show are priced based on size, starting at $1800 and continuing up through $2000, $3500, $6000, and $8000, eventually reaching $15000 for the largest work on view. Hatry’s photographs have very little secondary market history, so at this point, gallery retail remains the best/only option for those collectors interested in following up.

Auction Results: Photography and Contemporary Art, May 24, 2013 @Lempertz

The results from the Photography and Contemporary Art sales on May 24th at Kunsthaus Lempertz in Cologne were solidly on the mark. While the overall Buy-In rate was over 35%, there were enough positive surprises to keep the Total Sale Proceeds near the estimate target. Lempertz does not provide an estimate range in most cases, just a single estimate number, so this figure is used as the High estimate in the calculations.

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 227
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: €556200
Total Lots Sold: 143
Total Lots Bought In: 84
Buy In %: 37.00%
Total Sale Proceeds: €471590

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 214
Low Sold: 136
Low Bought In: 78
Buy In %: 36.45%
Total Low Estimate: €389200
Total Low Sold: €336170

Mid Total Lots: 13
Mid Sold: 7
Mid Bought In: 6
Buy In %: 46.15%
Total Mid Estimate: €167000
Total Mid Sold: €135420

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: €0
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate was tied between two lots: lot 22, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, Portrait Ellen Frank, 1929, (image at right, top, via Lempertz), and lot 560, Thomas Ruff, Ohne Titel (B. Junger), 1985, both estimated at €20000-25000; the Moholy-Nagy was the top outcome of the sale at €52460, while the Ruff did not sell.

86.01% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate. There were a total of 18 surprises in the sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 1, Wilhelm Schneider, Spiegel und Konsole Eines Salons, 1860, estimated at €1200, sold at €5120
Lot 8, Eugene Atget, Marche au Timbres, 1898, estimated at €1800, sold at €3660
Lot 19, Josef Tokayer, Ohne Titel (Treppenhaus des Bauhausgebaudes in Dessau), 1928-1931, estimated at €1800-2000, sold at €4880
Lot 22, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, Portrait Ellen Frank, 1929, estimated at €20000-25000, sold at €52460
Lot 25, Albert Renger-Patzsch, Ohne Titel (Maschinendetail), 1920, estimated at €1500, sold at €3660
Lot 59, Anonyme, Hochseilartisten am Heumarkt, Koln, 1946, estimated at €1200, sold at €4800
Lot 61, Edmund Kesting, Kameramann Konstantin Kesting, 1948, estimated at €1200, sold at €2440 (image at right, bottom, via Lempertz)
Lot 69, Otto Steinert, Junge Schauspielerin, 1949, estimated at €1200-1500, sold at €4640
Lot 78, Rene Burri, Rio de Janeiro, 1960/1998, estimated at €1000, sold at €2560
Lot 86, Erwin Blumenfeld, Decolete, 1952/later, estimated at €1600, sold at €3900
Lot 111, Heinz Hajek-Halke, Verbrannte Barmherzigkeit, 1969, estimated at €600, sold at €1460
Lot 120, Robert Lebeck, Joseph Beuys und familie auf der Documenta in Kassel, 1968/later, estimated at €800, sold at €3900
Lot 133, Gundula Schulze Eldowy, Tamerlan, Berlin, 1984, estimated at €1500, sold at €3170
Lot 137, Klaus Frahm, Judisches Museum, Berlin, 1998, estimated at €1000-1200, sold at €2810
Lot 168, Joint Army Task Force One Photo, The Test Baker Column, 1946, estimated at €1000, sold at €6340
Lot 169, Joint Army Task Force One Photo, Close-up View of Wall of Water after the Explosion of the Atomic Bomb, 1946, estimated at €1000, sold at €7080 (image at right, middle, via Lempertz)
Lot 175, Bernd und Hilla Becher, Anonyme Skulpturen, 1970, estimated at €1000, sold at €2810
Lot 187, Bernd und Hilla Becher, Siegener Strasse, Gosenbach, 1960, estimated at €700, sold at €1590

Complete lot by lot results can be found here (Photography) and here (Contemporary Art).

Kunsthaus Lempertz
Neumarkt 3
D-50667 Köln

Dennis Hopper: The Lost Album @Gagosian

JTF (just the facts): A total of 445 black and white photographs, generally mounted and unframed, and hung against white walls in a large divided gallery and the adjacent entry area on the 5th floor. Aside from the 12 unique gelatin silver prints on view near the reception desk (each framed in blond wood and matted and sized 3.5×5 or reverse), the show is comprised of clusters of vintage photographs hung together in groups, mostly in mixed subject matter sets of 25, with one single subject matter set of 8 from Mexico. No detailed information on these prints was provided on the checklist, although the individual prints look to be sized roughly 5×8 (or reverse); there is some repetition of images from cluster to cluster, so the prints are likely not unique. The images were taken between 1961 and 1967. A monograph of this body of work was recently published by Prestel (here). (Installation shots at right courtesy Gagosian Gallery. Photography by Robert McKeever. Artworks © Dennis Hopper, courtesy of The Dennis Hopper Art Trust.)

Comments/Context: Back in the days before the instantly disposable digital print, people seemed to have a hard time throwing photographs away. Rather than heedlessly pitching them in the bin, we tended to squirrel them away in boxes, pushed to the backs of closets and the recesses of attics, waiting for some later generation to unearth them once again. There was something mildly heretical about trashing history, and so for the most part we didn’t; it was easier to let them gather dust than make the active decision to get rid of them. As a result, the recent history of photography is full of fantastic and improbable rediscovery stories: Vivian Maier, Mike Disfarmer, Charles Jones, Robert Capa’s mexican suitcase, the list goes on and on. The story of this exhibit follows this same pattern: boxes of prints tucked away after Dennis Hopper’s 1970 exhibit at the Fort Worth Art Center Museum, generally thought to be forever lost, but miraculously found once again.

If we play a word association game with the name “Dennis Hopper”, most of us will blurt out actor, director, or maybe Hollywood cool guy, but few of us will start with photographer or artist. But as this time capsule of photographs clearly shows, Hopper was busy shooting pictures long before his prime years as an actor. Looking at the literally hundreds of images in this show, it’s easy to see Hopper at the center of a starburst diagram, with dozens of connections splashing outward to all kinds of cultural communities. He took portraits of actors, rock stars, artists, gallery owners, politicians, Hell’s Angels, and hippies. He hung out at rallies and riots, went to bullfights in Mexico, and documented the civil rights marches in Selma. He watched TV, noticed commercial signage, and thought about abstraction. In short, he had amazing access to the cultural melting pot of the 1960s and he took advantage of that position to make a wide range of pictures that reflect the conflicted spirit of that time.

The way these photographs are installed discourages focusing in on single images; your eye darts from picture to picture in these clusters, flitting from one to another like a hummingbird looking for nectar. Jane Fonda’s wedding, the Kennedy funeral on pixelated TV, Martin Luther King Jr. giving a speech, a matador flashing his cape, an abstraction of torn posters, a hippie chick, a Rauchenberg and Cunningham performance, the groups return again and again to common visual themes, like refrains and choruses of a song. By the time you reach the fifth or sixth grouping, the patterns have settled into recognizable rhythms, a little of this, a little of that, all wrapped up in one long stream of consciousness memory.

Photographically, Hopper was a bit of shape shifter, moving from documentary seriousness to Siskind-like Abstract Expressionist studies in found line and form. His celebrity portraits are his best works, if only for their careful looseness; Hopper had an eye for in situ composition, but didn’t seem to let his photography break the sense of easy casualness that pervades these pictures. He was an insider, and his subjects are comfortable and open in ways others couldn’t possibly replicate. Regardless of whether it was Claes Oldenburg or Ed Kienholz, Paul Newman or Timothy Leary, Hopper caught his friends unguarded, generally opting for playful rather than posed.

By the early 1970s, Hopper had left photography behind for other pursuits, and while he did return to making pictures at various times later in his career, none of those images really match the verve and immediacy of these 1960s works. Looking back at them as an interwoven group, they have an undeniable right place right time vitality, even if Hopper’s photographic voice hadn’t entirely emerged. Seen together, they are a transporting, swaggering frieze of curious, idealistic, cultural signifiers.

Collector’s POV: The photographs in this show are priced as follows. The clusters of 25 prints are priced at $250000 each (prints not sold individually) and the smaller single prints near the reception desk are $15000 each. Hopper’s photographs have been intermittently available in the secondary markets in recent years, with prices ranging between roughly $5000 and $48000.

Richard Learoyd: Still/Life @McKee

JTF (just the facts): A total of 13 large scale color images, framed in white and mounted with no mat, and hung in the entry and the main gallery space broken up by two smaller dividing walls. The works are unique Ilfochrome prints, ranging in size from 48×48 to 48×88 (or reverse). The images were taken between 2011 and 2013. A thin catalog of the show is available from the gallery. (Installation shots at right.)

Comments/Context: As the summer is now upon us, our local movie theaters are starting to fill up with usual crop of big budget blockbusters, those warm weather benchmarks of broad based American culture. If this year’s calendar is any guide, it looks to be another season of massive explosions, car chases, smashes and crashes, a continuous assault on our senses with ever increasing pace and intensity. From the perspective of these offerings, it seems we all long to be 13 year old boys, caught in a video game populated by superheroes and obvious bad guys.

With this kind of contemporary story telling as a backdrop, Richard Learoyd’s camera obscura portraits feel like outright rebellion, a blatant, unrepentant reversal of priorities. They are consciously slow, our frenetic lives paused for a moment, that pause stretched and extended until our blunted awareness becomes sharp again. His portraits and still lifes are hurricanes of stillness, where the enveloping silence allows us to quiet ourselves down and really look. The pictures reveal themselves in delicate increments, where the luminosity of skin, the texture of hair, and the purity of curvature add up to personal uniqueness, and where tiny imperfections are the emblems of personality.

In many of Learoyd’s previous portraits, his subjects typically stood alone in a cone of light, posed in a kind of dead-eyed numbness, lost in a reverie of mute introspective solitude. In these most recent works, the sitters offer a little more subtle expression and a little more uneasy tension. Agnes sits draped in a luxurious dark brown fur, her tangle of hair swirled into loose elegance, her lips a hint of dark red; but her expression isn’t blank like before – it mixes a hint of weary glamour with an undercurrent of hard resolve, making her all the more mysterious.

Learoyd’s nudes are more intricately posed this time as well. Vanessa hangs gracefully with one arm in the air, her right arm gently crossed over, resting near a bruise on her left leg. Tiny Phie stands in stockings, leaning against the edge of a table, her thin frame pulled tight in a slight twist, her ribs unsettlingly revealed under her skin. And Vanessa lies on the same table, covered in diaphanous black cotton and turned away, her right arm crossed back over her chest. In each case, Learoyd has gone further than simple standing bodies, giving us more to hold onto.

While Learoyd’s earlier still lifes generally left me cold, I think this newest group is much stronger. Strung up and trussed like Araki bondage nudes, his flamingos and rabbits hang with limp tragedy, the spread of a wing or the line of a drooping neck becoming a kind of lifeless dance. His severed horse’s head goes further, mixing the perfection of the tight depth of field with the revulsion of the dripping blood, finding a balance that is grotesquely engaging.

I think Learoyd has often run the very real danger of falling into the “stone faced girl looking over her shoulder” cliché which is all too prevalent in contemporary photography; some of his earlier portraits were too haltingly deadpan for me. Luckily, his technique is undeniably innovative and it has consistently produced glorious light and staggering detail. But on their own, even these aren’t enough to make durable photographs. This show is evidence that his mastery of his process has begun to open up new creative avenues. An evolving sense of composition and a willingness to explore nuances of emotion and expression are both on view here, making both the nudes and the still lifes more fresh and compelling. Learoyd is continually paring the portrait form down to its essences, and when he gets it just right, his pictures suck us into their astonishing private world, focusing our easily distracted attention and centering us on the overlooked subtleties of individuals. They offer a look at unadorned quiet beauty that we have often forgotten could actually be real.

Collector’s POV: The works in this show are priced between $65000 and $80000, based on size. This represents a steady step up from his last show at the gallery in the fall of 2011. Learoyd’s prints have very little secondary market history at this point, so gallery retail is likely the best/only option for those collectors interested in following up.

Auction Results: Photographs from the Teutloff Collection, May 24, 2013 @Lempertz

The results of the recent sale of photographs from the Teutloff Collection at Kunsthaus Lempertz in Cologne were decidedly flat. The overall Buy-In rate was nearly 50% and the Total Sale Proceeds came in well below the estimate target. Lempertz does not provide an estimate range in most cases, just a single estimate number, so this figure is used as the High estimate in the calculations.

The summary statistics are below (all results include the buyer’s premium):

Total Lots: 99
Pre Sale High Total Estimate: €436500
Total Lots Sold: 52
Total Lots Bought In: 47
Buy In %: 47.47%
Total Sale Proceeds: €297520

Here is the breakdown (using the Low, Mid, and High definitions from the preview post, here):

Low Total Lots: 82
Low Sold: 44
Low Bought In: 38
Buy In %: 46.34%
Total Low Estimate: €232500
Total Low Sold: €178570

Mid Total Lots: 17
Mid Sold: 8
Mid Bought In: 9
Buy In %: 52.94%
Total Mid Estimate: €204000
Total Mid Sold: €118950

High Total Lots: 0
High Sold: NA
High Bought In: NA
Buy In %: NA
Total High Estimate: €0
Total High Sold: NA

The top lot by High estimate was lot 313, Hendrik Kerstens, Bag, 2007, estimated at €15000-20000; it sold for €19520. The top outcome of the sale was lot 343, Jürgen Klauke, Toter Photograph, estimated at €14000-18000, sold at €29280.

100.00% of the lots that sold had proceeds in or above the estimate. There were a total of 9 surprises in the sale (defined as having proceeds of at least double the high estimate):

Lot 341, Dieter Appelt, Image de la Vie et de la Mort, 1979, estimated at €5000, sold at €10980 (image at right, middle, via Lempertz)
Lot 346, Stefan Moses, Jospeh Beuys, Munchen, 1968/later, estimated at €800, sold at €2070
Lot 348, Cindy Sherman, Ancestor, 1985, estimated at €1500-2000, sold at €4880
Lot 349, Joel-Peter Witkin, La Giovanissima, 2007, estimated at €2000, sold at €13420 (image at right, top, via Lempertz)
Lot 357, Mario Cravo Neto, O Deus da Cabeca, 1988, estimated at €1500, sold at €3900
Lot 358, Mario Cravo Neto, Voodoo Figure, 1988, estimate at €1500, sold at €3900
Lot 359, Adam Nadel, Ohne Titel, 2004, estimated at €2500, sold at €5120
Lot 361, Steve McCurry, India, Kerala, Hundus During Trichur Pooram, 1996, estimated at €1800, sold at €3900
Lot 392, Rudolf Schwarzkogler, Aktion mit Seinem Eigenen Korper, 1966, estimated at €6000, sold at €12200 (image at right, bottom, via Lempertz)

Complete lot by lot results can be found here.

Kunsthaus Lempertz
Neumarkt 3
D-50667 Köln

Miles Aldridge: I Only Want You to Love Me @Steven Kasher

JTF (just the facts): A total of 20 large scale color photographs, framed in white and unmatted, and hung against white walls in the North and South gallery spaces and the side alcove. All of the works are c-prints, made between 2005 and 2012. Print sizes range from 14×14 to 56×75 (or reverse), in editions of 6 or 10. A monograph of this body of work was recently published by Rizzoli (here) and is available from the gallery for $75. (Installation shots at right.)

Comments/Context: Miles Aldridge’s complex sense for brash stylized color sets his work apart from other contemporary fashion photographers. As seen in this retrospective show of work from roughly the past decade, his precisely staged images are over-the-top exercises in color theory, where every detail and prop is carefully orchestrated for maximum intensity. When added to satirical scenes of blanked eyed women in oddly glamorized domestic situations, his distinctive eye for color makes the photographs even more dynamic and vital.

In Aldridge’s hands, female stereotypes are pushed beyond the edge of exaggeration into a surreal world of dark social commentary. A desperate red lipped homemaker stabs an imperfect birthday cake with a huge kitchen knife, a woman in plastic lingerie breaks down over a sliced half grapefruit, a deadpan woman in a tight green dress and red heels is stuffed into the under sink area normally reserved for rubber gloves and toilet cleaner, and a robotic mother in thigh high boots and a perfect black ensemble strides through a gaggle of soccer playing boys (a weird futuristic “soccer mom”). In nearly every situation, the subject has been pushed to an emotional extreme: either anesthetized like a mannequin or on the verge of losing control.

A scene of a smashed dinner tray, an overstuffed Cadillac full of shopping bags and packing trunks, or an overdone dinner party dripping in glamorous boredom all have their own sense of cliché, but Aldridge takes them somewhere new with his use of color. In nearly every image (even the most muted ones), it’s as if he has consciously taken out the color wheel to target complementary pairs. A zoned out woman dries her hair in a bathroom full of acidic greens and orange pinks: green tile, red towel, green slip, pink slip, green curtains, orange hair dryer, plastic rings in both colors – it’s a symphony in hot, matchy matchy contradiction. These kinds of opposites are everywhere in this show: a bright yellow and red checkerboard floor, blue water behind an orange bikini clad woman, orange soccer uniforms against electric green turf, a dramatic red dress against a green floral carpet; they all add visual tension to the already inflated scenes.

While at first glance it might be easy to mistake these fashion images for fun-loving visual camp, I like the way they grow darker and more depressing with more sustained looking. Everything is just so but blown to the point of parody, like scenes of zombies in overdone gilded prisons.

Collector’s POV: The works in this show are priced between $5150 and $15500 (with many intermediate prices), generally based on size. Aldridge’s work is not widely available in the secondary markets, although a handful of lots have come up for auction in recent years; prices for those lots ranged between roughly $6000 and $12000.

 

Robert Mapplethorpe, Self Portraits @Skarstedt

JTF (just the facts): A total of 11 black and white photographs, framed in black and matted, and hung against grey walls in the two second floor gallery spaces. All of the works are gelatin silver prints, made between 1980 and 1988. Physical dimensions range from roughly 15×15 to 24×20 and edition sizes are either 3, 10, or 15. (Installation shots at right.)

Comments/Context: This small show of Robert Mapplethorpe’s self portraits is a focused subset of the work he made in the last decade of the his life. It gathers together many of the self portraits he took in the 1980s, leaving out the early Polaroids and the bullwhip in the ass aggressively sexual pictures of the 1970s. What this edit gives up in inclusiveness and comprehensiveness, it gains in tight attention, as it allows us to see the small, evolving changes in his artistic approach, played out in a handful of important images.

In Mapplethorpe’s early 1980s self portraits, he still has his swagger on, but his eye has turned to the nuances of gender roles. He casts himself as the effortlessly cool rebel with a cigarette dangling out of his mouth, as an androgynous bare chested male in eye makeup, and as a diva in drag wrapped in a lush fur collar. The pared down classicism of his staging allows him to shift from persona or persona like a chameleon without losing a sense of control, trying on identities and challenging conventional attitudes within the confines of quiet formal elegance.

Just a year or two later finds Mapplethorpe exploring background geometries and more overt iconography. He stands in front of layered squares (the graphic design looking a bit dated now) and uses the triangulating lines of the back of his hair and the trim of his leather jacket to precisely echo a sharply angled striped backdrop. In another work, he tackles religion with a bold pentagram wall hanging, posing as an outlaw armed with a tommy gun. His self portrait with horns follows this thread, spookily lighting himself from below and casting himself as either a satyr or a devil.

The last self portraits, made in the years before he died, find him turning inward and looking at himself with more vulnerability. His many roles collapse into a blurred, shape shifting image of his face in motion, and a portrait in a tuxedo is somehow haunting rather than debonair, the last disguise in which we might expect to find him. By 1988, he stares at the camera with unvarnished openness, his face drawn and gaunt with disease, armed with a cane topped by an ebony skull. He seems to float out of the darkness, looking death straight in the eye, confronting himself as much as the camera.

Even in the span of the dozen pictures on view here, it is possible to see both continuity and change in Mapplethorpe’s work. Even as the content of his self portraits began to evolve, his eye for classical harmony never faltered, his forms always clean and refined, regardless of his emotional intentions. There’s underlying power in every one of these photographs, and together they pack a durably surprising wallop.

Collector’s POV: The works in this show are for the most part on loan and therefore not for sale, although a few were apparently available at prices between $150000 and $200000. Mapplethorpe’s prints are routinely available in the secondary markets, with dozens of images up for sale every year. Prices have generally ranged between a few thousand dollars for his lesser known works to more than $300000 for his most iconic images.

Carey Denniston @KANSAS

JTF (just the facts): A total of 8 photographic works, framed in white in custom built wood frames, and hung against white walls in the entry, front main gallery space, and hallway. All of the works are c-prints in two part frames from the series To what degree a stone is a stranger/To what degree it is withdrawing, made in 2012 and 2013. Sizes range from 19×26 to 60×30 (or reverse); no edition information was provided on the checklist. (Installation shots at right.)

Comments/Context: Carey Denniston’s works upend our typical notion of how multi-panel photographs are supposed to function. Instead of shifting our attention from one panel to another, drawing out a narrative into a wider arc, or creating associations and juxtapositions between nearby images, she subverts those premises and uses one panel to obscure the other. It’s an inversion that not only undermines our expectations, but interrupts the photographs in such a way that their ability to deliver a legible narrative is undermined.

Each work is made up of a single photograph in white frame partially obscured by a blank white panel, like an opaque Japanese screen or a sliding door. These sculptural panels frustrate our ability to draw out a story, reducing the works to mysterious formal exercises. An image of a round plastic ball is cut in half, while another is narrowed down to the slats of an outdoor table and the boards of a wooden deck. In other works, the fragments of visual textures are more mysteriously edited, leaving behind small snippets of geometric tile flooring, a lumpy blue tarp, a rock wall with flecks of straw, and a woven white fabric. I was ever so tempted to push the white panel back to see more of what was going on, or to peek on the back side to see if there was any image hiding there; the eclipsed images give little clue to a larger purpose. But this dissonant set-up is what gives the works their friction – it’s disciplined, rational, and rigidly controlled, all in direct convention of what we’re used to.

Denniston’s works point to a heightened sense of the duality of photography, of a picture’s ability to be both a recognizable story and a set of abstract lines and forms at the same time. Her panels break up this effect, reducing a functioning photograph to a hint of its former self, stripping away our ability to easily interpret a narrative or context and leaving us with more questions than answers. Her works are like puzzles that can’t be figured out, momentarily annoying but seductively challenging. Unlike many contemporary photographs which shout from the walls to get our attention, these works actively hold back, in quiet, defiant resistance.

Collector’s POV: The works in this show are priced between $2200 and $4500 based on size. Denniston got her MFA from Hunter College in 2012, so it isn’t particularly surprising that her work has no secondary market history at this point. As such, gallery retail is likely the only option for those collectors interested in following up.

 

 

Sign up for our weekly email newsletter

This field is required.