| <<
GO BACK
(Feature on Gemini Sculpture Park, New Statesman,
2001)
A scene in the film Fight Club is
likely to set the blood of any artist or critic racing, in fervent
approval or revulsion. In it, the pugilist rebels dynamite the moorings
of an ugly, spherical piece of corporate sculpture, sending it rolling
down a long cascade to crash through the window of some fast-food
chain. That oscillation of feeling may depend on what viewers think
is being attacked, for the corporate sculpture appears to be a slippery
object, part art work, part business propaganda. Sculptors often
make several casts of a particular piece so a single Henry Moore,
for instance, may have one existence in a civic space, another in
a gallery, yet another presiding over the entrance to a bank. As
with an image that can take on two distinct meanings (like a line
drawing of a cube that sometimes appears to project out of the page,
sometimes to sink into it) it is hard to hold the two elements together
in the mind.
An intriguing exhibition
currently on display at the Leeds City Art Gallery, and (with no
little irony) funded by the Henry Moore Institute, brings these
issues into sharp focus. Chris Evans has set up a body he calls
the UK Corporate Sculpture Consultancy in which he acts as a facilitator
and broker between companies and artists. He has been to the Gemini
office park on the outskirts of Leeds to talk to the firms there
about their requirements for a sculpture that would stand outside
their offices, and has commissioned various studies from artists
(Padraig Timoney, Toby Paterson and Graham Fagen) in an attempt
to visualise the results. For an artist to take on such a role is
nothing new but Evans' contact with the beleaguered companies of
this area is highly revealing.
Evans has recorded his
discussions with the businesses and displays them beside the resultant
images. Company managers, it turns out, have well-developed views
about appropriate and inappropriate forms. Banks and building societies
like solid-looking sculpture, we are informed by one management
consultant. Telecommunications, on the other hand, want 'something
very sharp, clean and shiny.We're not a teddy bear factory so a
warm fluffy image isn't appropriate. Matt black and shiny chrome
spring to mind.' A computer manufacturer likewise wants a fluid-looking
shiny chrome sculpture that will reflect the idea that their business
is constantly adapting to changing markets and technologies. In
a conversation which is the closest he comes to overt satire, Evans
persuades a debt-collection company to symbolise its activities
with a tiny sculpture of a Venus fly-trap.
All the companies have
pressing practical concerns: that the sculpture should not obstruct
their buildings and brand names, that is should not impinge on parking
space, and that it should be resilient enough to withstand the iconoclastic
attentions of the local residents. The computer firm, which is regularly
robbed and ram-raided, wants their sculpture to double up as a barrier
to protect the building.
With the general run
of corporate sculpture, the kudos attached to ownership of the piece
is generated by the separation between the art work and its function
as propaganda. In the creation of a large, apparently useless object,
an artistic temperament is allowed full rein, and the result has
only a loose symbolic connection to the company's activities. The
piece says simply: we have money to spend, and we do so in an enlightened
way; or perhaps a little more specifically: this art is creative,
innovative and 'cutting-edge', qualities that reflect the ethos
of our company.
Evans' twist to this
situation is first to offers his skills to companies that would
not normally be in a position to commission such art (one, indeed,
ceased trading before the show opened), and second to place himself
fully at their disposal by taking their artistic requirements seriously.
The result is, among other things, a sharp parody of Labour arts
policy which is fixed on a vision of business and the arts fusing
in symbiosis, business becoming cultural and creative, the arts
profit-driven and productive. Evans' work also lets corporate sculpture
step out from behind the veil with which it modestly covers itself,
being revealed as a concrete, condensed sign of wealth and power
in which artistic qualities are after all implicated. Evans has
made some screenprints, simplified depictions of the sculptures
which (as Will Bradley points out in his catalogue essay) seem familiar
because they look like both a lot of contemporary art and many company
logos. There is nothing strange about this: high art and corporate
culture are necessarily locked in an embrace in which the giant
tends to smother the midget. Only when the embrace is tightened
so that the spine of the frailer body begins to crack is the relation
revealed in its full absurdity.
<< GO BACK
|