It has been difficult to dig up information on Ms. Vieira da Silva, born in France in 1908. But this quote was so profound to me because it is exactly how I describe my own paintings. Vieira da Silva’s fragmented, abstract forms have been likened to surrealism, abstract expressionism, textile design and tachisme (Which is basically the European style of abstract expressionism) and compared too, with some of the greatest painters of our time. She has been called one of the most important Post-War abstract artists, though her work cannot be categorized into any of the above movements. Like Tachisme itself her paintings are intuitive and fluid and informal while at the same time fragmented, cubist and puzzling to the eye. I wanted to post some of her work here because it is this ability to touch upon so many movements yet belong to none of them that interests me most. To me, there is great success in a painting that can allude to art history in so many ways yet still be it’s own unique addition, ene without a name and with out a category. There is nothing more truthful and real to me than this and for that I celebrate Maria Elena Vieira da Silva’s paintings…

Susan and Ildefanso’s story got me thinking about symbols and language in art. The signifier and the signified. Is there any possibility to have ideas without a signifier? In the case of Ildefanso, I wonder what his thoughts were before language? or how he perceived anything without knowing what it was. I can only imagine the world to be terrifying. If he were given a piece of paper and a pencil what would he do with them? Would he know to use them? To draw his world? Without language the whole concept of objects and things is completely different. With words we can describe a couch, a table, a bed and with those descriptions comes a formation of concept about the object.

Similarly, in Plato’s Republic, Socrates speaks to Plato’s brother Glaucon of ‘The Allegory of the Cave’ in which he describes men who have lived the whole of life as prisoners chained up in a cave. In front of the men is a wall, behind them a walkway in front of a large fire. People walking to and fro carrying various objects pass the fire and their shadows cast on the wall. The prisoners, who have never seen or experienced the world or language have only the shadows for their reality. From these shadows and the sounds from the walkway they associate forms but the shadows are their truest sense of reality. Socrates then asks Glaucon, what if the prisoners were to be freed? Upon seeing the things that cast the shadows on their wall they would not recognize them in real life. They would be nameless, startling, and because the prisoners only know the shadows, those would be more real to them then the actual objects. The story is an example upon which to explain Plato’s theory of Ideas which argues that forms not the sensation of the material world is what equals true reality. Knowledge equals knowledge.

Without the idea of a flower, soil, plants and what the reality of their forms and origination are, a painter could not paint an abstraction of a garden. This goes back to the whole concept that without knowing the true materiality of an object, like for instance a table, a painter can only merely represent the idea of a table. However, I am curious now more than ever about the effect of language on art. With out it one has only the darkest, simplest corners of the mind. Without the general and most basic forms of communication and language there is little opportunity for imagination. Language and words, constitute symbols which lead to ideas which creates pictures and scenarios, narratives and imagination. There is something about knowing what the sun rise and sun set is that ascribes the concept of beauty.

Going back to Ildefanso, eventually Susan goes on to work with other deaf people and she and Ildefanso part ways. About four or so years later she comes back to visit him and to talk with him about his experience of living without language for a book she is writing. He tells her that living with out language was a dark time for him and learning it was like a light turning on, opening up the world. Ildefanso takes her to meet some of his friends. They walk into this apartment and there are 5 Mexican men doing this sort of mime charade. each one of them had been born deaf and did not know they were deaf. The first man stands up and mimes a bull then he acts as the madator and then adds another detail like a hat. The second man stands up, acts out the first man’s routine about the bull, the matador and the hat and then adds his own detail like a pair of glasses, then the third man acts out the bull, the matador, the hat, the glasses and add his own bit. Each man re-enacting the story and then adding his own portion of it. This was their form of conversation. In other words, as Susan explains, it would take these men an hour to say something like; do you remember the time we went to a bull fight and there was a lady wearing a hat who’s glasses fell of and…Upon this Ildefanso tells Susan that he really is no longer friends with these men. Communication with them is so difficult now because he can’t remember how to think in this tedious manner. Language now connects him to his environment.

What is art without words? What is art without an artist statement to describe a given mission or process? What is art without idea, concept, and  reference to the past? We need our words to liken ourselves and our experience to art. Without the word thought what is thought? Paleolithic cave paintings like the famous ‘Hall of Bulls’ in South Western France depict marvelously detailed drawings on cave walls of animals, people and signs that appear to be constellations. Were these drawings a form of communication? Were they hallucinatory? Were they dreams? Though pictures often describe things they cannot replace language? The saying ‘a picture is worth a thousand words’ now sounds ridiculous to me. A poetic fallacy. The pictures and the words are synonymous. We know that pictures, art, theater, a poem interpretive. Based on what is real these gloriously transform ideas creatively and we have a language language to liken it all further.

Susan Schaller’s book about Ildefanso is called A Man Without Words. And you can hear more about her story on RadioLab

Words have the power to shape the way we think and feel. In this stunning video, filmmakers Will Hoffman and Daniel Mercadante bandy visual wordplay into a moving exploration of language set to an original score by Keith Kenniff. Previously posted on the radiolabd wesite as part of their segment on Words.

By Tanya Davis & Andrea Dorfman

Amanda’s photographs were recently featured on NYTimes photojournalism blog, Lens see her work here

In 2009 Amanda relocated to Washington DC upon being awarded a merit scholarship to study at Georgetown University. She is a recent recipient of a Young Explorers Grant from the National Geographic Society. Her work has appeared in Newsweek, The New York TImes, Agence France Press, Courrier Japon, Le Monde and many more. Amanda speaks fluent English, Spanish, Portuguese and Polish and is a graduate of Sarah Lawrence College and Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. To see more work by Amanda Rivkin please visit her website.

Thursday August 5th – Saturday September 11th, 2010

For No One but Us, curated by Justin Schmitz

Artists include Terry Evans, Jeremy Bolen, Martha Williams, Justin Schmitz, Stephen Eichhorn, Julia Stotz, Makaya Larson, Jason Lazarus, Matt Austin, Mary Scherer, Aiden Fitzpatrick, Brian Sorg, April Wilkins, Kyle Obriot, Zach Goheen, Paul Rizzuto, Daniel Shea and more.

For No One but Us, is a collection of work by artists using photography as a way to engage in their creative process. Images that would only exist on a hard-drive, in a bedroom, or on a studio wall are on display at LivingRoom. The photographs in this presentation are images that inspire these artists to make more art work. This is a collection of self generated inspiration curated by Justin Schmitz.

LivingRoom Gallery, 1530 W. Superior St. In Chicago

As artist’s we spend a great deal of our time chasing after concept, meaning, idea that will imbue our work with some agency. Maybe for some of us we think a lot about getting into a gallery or museum. This faculty is in hopes some sort of mode to traverse substantial success by means of our own expression. The moment art achieves this independence it is slated toward it’s own dissolution. Whether within the studio or the public sphere, the theory of praxis would seem to grant totality in understanding based on the true nature of the creation of  a work of art. However the dissemination of practice against theory is an artificial representation of society and history. Simply and purely representational of the idea of objects and time. A fashionable fallacy of creation.  In other words, art’s own self destruction is it’s awareness of itself and it’s placement in time. Lack of truth and moral in art is broken down when it sees behind its own history and loses it’s own functionality within that same society. It’s short lived (of course). It’s objectivity becomes subjective.

The dazzle of current uniqueness in art, it’s modality, is borne out of the dissolvement of previous histories. A work of art’s shining moment of independence that is rooted in the return of time not it’s passage. Governed by the rights of passage into an accepting art world, it’s autonomy is at the mercy of the scrutiny of culture. Something being ahead of it’s time or reminiscent of the past. For example, Cecily Brown’s histrionic paintings are reminiscent of Willem de Kooning. Brown resurrects abstract expressionism combined with figuration.

Cecily Brown

Willem de Kooning Untitled IV, 1978

Art’s communication becomes part of a mode of time. Do I believe this? Well yes and no. Yes in that I do believe wholly that art is short lived and that it is a representation of things that exist in nature. A painting of a table is not a table it is a representation of a table. That said, do I believe that it breaks down history and sees behind itself to negate it’s future? Hopefully no. I believe art adheres to ideas past but forms new ways of seeing and thinking within the parameters of history. History reinvents itself all the time. The returning of time reformed. This applies not only to art but to fashion, theater, fiction, values, morals, traditions, handicrafts etc.  We borrow from the great masters, icons of yore, inventors of design and craft. Picking, choosing, eliminating from era’s past, re-developing vintage ideas to proliferate them into new ideas and products of today. This isn’t bad it’s simply recycling, and art has done this for centuries. I would like to think that when I am in my studio painting, I am a pioneer of something never before done, I am my own government, my own independent-free-thinking-individual. But, it is only part true. For I am an abstract painter, my landscapes are reminiscent of Joan Mitchell. My practice is rooted in art history and the constant evaluation and study of my predecessors. I am not autonomous, I am a painter that is a product of education and history. And so I resurrect that past. Time returns. It does not pass.

The Exhibition Agency engages with contemporary art through curatorial initiatives and exhibition production. The curatorial program for the 2010 — 2011 season is entitled The New Authentics. The first exhibition for the season, Uncrumpling This Much Crumpled Thing, will open Saturday, August 28.

Later this summer Katherine, Francesca and Corinna will be attending the ACRE residency to discuss long-distance curatorial projects. Looking forward to seeing what the ladies have in store for the future. In the meantime dear friends, Exhibition Agency is currently accepting proposals for exhibitions, programs, and events. Please send all questions, comments and ideas to theexhibitionagency@gmail.com.

The Exhibition Agency
2351 N. Milwaukee Avenue, 2nd Floor
Chicago, IL 60647
theexhibitionagency@gmail.com