Due to my work at The Shield, I think it’s safe to say that I’ve been to more shows at the New Harmony Gallery of Contemporary Art than most USI students.
While I’ve frequently been impressed with the quality of work that has been on display, I’ve often wished that there was more written material accompanying it.
For the most part, I felt like “Look Both Ways: 50 Years at the New Harmony Gallery of Contemporary Art” addressed this complaint.
All in all, I probably spent over two hours reading everything there was to read, and while I don’t expect the majority of attendees to stay and read everything, I felt the need to because I plan on running my mouth.
When I complain about the lack of written material that a show has, what I’m referring to is information that provides insight into the artwork on display. Why was it selected? What does it mean? That sort of thing. I’ll settle for themes in the artist’s body of work, because it at least can point you towards understanding an artwork.
Since I barely have room to store my own art, and am on a student’s budget, I’m not interested in the price of a work. Just to be clear, I’m not advocating that placards don’t contain information about the artist’s background or the cost of a piece. I think this information is incredibly important for collectors and people who want to keep up with the artist’s work. It just isn’t the information that I’m looking for when I’m writing a review, and it tends to be the minimum level of information that museums have (well, excluding the price tag).
For the most part, the placards at “Look Both Ways: 50 Years at the New Harmony Gallery of Contemporary Art” provided biographical information on the artists, which went in one ear and out the other because of the sheer quantity of information. Their website lists 58 artists who are featured in the exhibition, and from what I saw, it seemed like each had at least a paragraph written about them.
There was more information about the artworks in the “Participation” portion, probably because their artists might still be alive. So overall, it seems like the gallery did what they could given the circumstances.
But, at the end of the day, the placards really aren’t worth reading unless you’re specifically interested in an artist or artwork. They’re still worth having on display, I just recommend visitors pick and choose which they read.
I also appreciated the number of artworks that were on display. It’s a 30-minute drive from campus to the gallery, and while I don’t mind a drive, because I’ve been commuting 20-45 minutes (one way) since I was in high school, I know that a lot of people do. Especially if they don’t have access to a car while they’re here.
It’s a small gallery, so it isn’t fair to expect them to keep visitors entertained for as long as big museums can, but many students can’t justify the drive if an exhibit will only take 15-30 minutes to view.
So from this perspective, “Look Both Ways” is the show to see.
I think this exhibition does a good job of quenching people’s FOMO, because it features a wide range of artwork from past shows.
Despite some artworks being incredibly new, new enough for me to remember when they were first on display, the exhibition overall is fairly cohesive. There seemed to be a lot of abstract textures and patterns, bold colors and strong silhouettes. Even the artworks that were older didn’t seem dated. Where it was less cohesive was in the newer works, some of which were clearly student-made, but not enough to be detrimental to the exhibition.
I’m not sure if this is my favorite show that this gallery has put on, but it is definitely a top contender.
Apologies if this is nitpicky, but some of the artworks could have used a dusting.
