Comments on: Go Figure at Spruill Gallery http://burnaway.org/2009/02/go-figure-at-spruill-gallery/ Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:48:04 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Susannah Darrow http://burnaway.org/2009/02/go-figure-at-spruill-gallery/comment-page-1/#comment-3103 Susannah Darrow Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:43:00 +0000 http://burnaway.org/?p=4755#comment-3103 I must say I was kind of surprised to see the word unease used to describe the sense in the gallery. I think that the closeness in which some of the figures are depicted is definitely a kind of heightened intimacy that may make some viewers uncomfortable, but unease is generally not something I have felt seeing any of these pieces. Perhaps to the reason that I fail to understand where the unease comes from is in how I have seen the works. I feel no more unsettled looking at these pieces than I do looking at the works that I feel have been some sort of influence on them. Mazza's paintings for instance do not look to me as if done from a photgraph that conveys a close proximity to the model to me so much as they seem like faces and expressions that she is so familiar with that a close study was unnecessary. In a similar vein, I think Christopher Parrott's work (not mentioned above) does this as well although differently. If anything, the voyeuristic remove from the models he depicts is more uncomfortable to me as the viewer. I did think it was unfortunate that you did not touch on the art historical interest in a show like this. It seems like each artist offers an interesting comparison to past examples of figurative art and its origins. I must say I was kind of surprised to see the word unease used to describe the sense in the gallery. I think that the closeness in which some of the figures are depicted is definitely a kind of heightened intimacy that may make some viewers uncomfortable, but unease is generally not something I have felt seeing any of these pieces. Perhaps to the reason that I fail to understand where the unease comes from is in how I have seen the works. I feel no more unsettled looking at these pieces than I do looking at the works that I feel have been some sort of influence on them.

Mazza’s paintings for instance do not look to me as if done from a photgraph that conveys a close proximity to the model to me so much as they seem like faces and expressions that she is so familiar with that a close study was unnecessary.

In a similar vein, I think Christopher Parrott’s work (not mentioned above) does this as well although differently. If anything, the voyeuristic remove from the models he depicts is more uncomfortable to me as the viewer.

I did think it was unfortunate that you did not touch on the art historical interest in a show like this. It seems like each artist offers an interesting comparison to past examples of figurative art and its origins.

]]>