|
I was delighted to be asked to speak at the opening preview evening of Ruth Bianco’s film installation “don’t run over the birds, please” installed at the Museum of Fine Arts in South Street, Valletta (17t March – 10t April). I was aware of Ruth’s work in London and of the filming that she undertook in Brixton for the making of this artwork. I was somewhat astounded by the commentary in Gilbert Calleja’s piece in your Sunday newspaper, Malta Today Sunday 19 March, 2006, which he titled “15 minutes round the block” in writing about her videowork and feel urged to offer a quick response.
Calleja’s interpretation of Ruth Bianco’s work misconstrues the true purpose of this work. The opening paragraphs provide an upbeat account but arguably go on to suggest the piece to be essentially “a 15 minute documentary film” taking us “through life in one of the black quarters in London” and that it relies on the use of what the artist calls “street reclaims”.
This is erroneous as the referred “EXTerritorio” is the specific title of an installation photograph (recording the event transformed into the poster) taken in 2003 of the artist creating the graffiti within an improvised installation of street-found reclaimed objects. Inspired by this Ruth soon returned to the streets of Brixton to begin a video shoot which was developed in 2006 in its present form. The film hence does not rely upon “street reclaims” but is an artist’s eye capturing the breakdown and fracturing of a multilayered society which is transformed to the dynamics of video language. It is by no means solely a documentary but rests within the arena of contemporary fine art time-based works. Its superior strength lies in a rare combine of fine art expression and journalism and challenges the defining line between the two.
“Don’t run over the birds, please” is wholly a visual/sound experience. Rarely have I seen a large audience engrossed within a contained space as was the case at the preview on Friday 17 for the length of the full duration and even a second viewing following this. Therefore, the issue that text needs to precede this visual experience is absolutely wrong. The audience had flowed in without requiring to initiate the experience via a brief introductory contextual statement. The final claim that the “work is however a welcome contribution to the local art scene” is condescending and misrepresents the credibility of an artist who is growing in international stature with recent work secured in the Tate and other major museums and who, in any case, would not wish to be simply a part of the limitations of a local art scene!
Richard Davies
Director of Fine Art
University College for the Creative Arts, UK
Canterbury Kent
Editor’s note: Art critics or criticism is always subjective and at times unreal, but Gilbert Calleja’s piece was neither. Malta is completely alien to any commentary about Art. All art is lauded and praised. Calleja’s piece was neither derogatory or scathing. The reaction from someone who origins from a nation where Art critics are renowned for their cruel descriptions is therefore astounding. Yet it encourages us to believe that after all we are not so different from other European art scenes.
|
