Iridescence, domesticity, and sweaty cheese: a show and tell with Anna Hrund Másdóttir

Iridescence, domesticity, and sweaty cheese: a show and tell with Anna Hrund Másdóttir

Iridescence, domesticity, and sweaty cheese: a show and tell with Anna Hrund Másdóttir

I remember the first time I had a Pop-Tart. It was Frosted Strawberry flavoured, with a thick, shiny, baby pink glaze and rainbow sprinkles smeared across the top. I wasn’t quite sure what to expect but I had a feeling it would be sweet, so it drew me in immediately. It was clearly processed, and too artificially seductive and modular to be “real” (yet it was). I remember my six (or so) year old self staring at it for a while, confused and curious as to how to approach it. (Do I break it in half or bite right in?) I bit into a corner and discovered that it was filled with strawberry “jelly”. The pastry crumbled all over my shirt, and I felt an unexpected wave of rebellious satisfaction. It tasted exactly how I imagined: sugary, with lots of layers and textures, and an overbearing essence of artificial strawberry running through it. It was satisfyingly synthetic, and I was hooked.

I revisit a similar joy whenever I encounter Los Angeles-based artist Anna Hrund Másdóttir’s work, as it often prompts me to question and revisit the reality, possibility and integrity of the seemingly mundane. There also exists a similar rebellious satisfaction when visually ingesting the vividly (un)real yet organic nature of her practice. Both highly saturated, odd, clever and appealing from the outside, and only more satiating as you dive in.

Three time zones and over 4,000 kilometres apart, I find myself in a beautifully strange conversation with Anna Hrund. Meeting across the internet, we covered everything from her favourite authors, to the wonder of Jacaranda trees, to her curiosity with cocktail cherries. Anna has this way of weaving connections between seemingly unrelated objects and things in a way that only seems a given after you see or hear it from her yourself. With a background in mathematics, it’s clear that her approach to life and the objects within it is methodical, but I prefer to think that her unique mindset fundamentally stems from her genuine love of curious things. Working within self-generated systems of categorization and logic, she fuelled my curiosity as she generously talked me through her current cerebral landscape.

As our conversation unfolded, Anna spoke to me about some of the objects and things that are currently occupying her headspace. Most resonant, perhaps, was her enthralment with the writing of M.F.K. Fisher, the iconic American writer from the 1900’s who was un-paralleled in her ambitious writing on food culture and gastronomy from a woman’s perspective. Fisher wrote candidly, intimately and honestly about her experiences and interactions with food, as well as the practice of eating, preparing and enjoying it. Anna Hrund spoke so fondly of Fisher’s The Gastronomical Me, wherein she states that as humans, our three basic needs are for food, security, and love, and how the three are so inherently intertwined[1] and essentially inseparable. This led us into speaking about domesticity, how she’s navigating through her role(s) as a homemaker in her personal life, and how that’s seeping into her art practice. Anna’s work is marked with her frequent use of edible materials in thoughtful ways that lead these often outrageous objects to appear elegant and rather minimal. “Almost-not-food food”, as she affectionately calls them (such as cheese puff balls, candy dots, and Jawbreakers) have always led her curious, admitting that the candy aisles in her local dollar and bargain stores often catch her attention first as she finds their colours and iridescent nature so beautiful. This curiosity extends into her current fascination with cocktail cherries and sweaty cheese, mentioning that she is interested in how these foods change, sweat (and shine) over time.

Untitled pyramid, 40 x 40 x 70 cm, 2015, cheeseballs on pink IKEA crate.

The notion of labour was quite prominent throughout our entire conversation. While labour from an artistic or professional perspective is highly complex in and of itself, the majority of our talk was more so centred around domestic labour. It’s evident that there are various facets to it – whether societal, systematic, biological or self-imposed – that inherently exists more prevalently amongst women, especially when taking on and considering “domestic” responsibilities. They’re woven into our communities and day-to-day lives, carrying their own intrinsic complexities that impact us all regardless of gender. In the American artist Anne Truitt’s journal Daybook, she speaks about the familiar strain of sustaining the various demands of daily life[2] as she unpacks the numerous tasks she undertakes within her role as a mother, and how that can sometimes juxtapose with her role as an artist. Truitt also acknowledges that she feels as though doing her many duties as well as she can is essentially self-serving, as it keeps her from being angry from being away from her studio, stating that efficiently channelling her focus on household routines sets herself free for clear concentration in the studio[3]. Mentioning to Anna my immediate association with her current lifestyle and Truitt’s writing, I asked her about how she balances these roles, and about whether she felt there was or if there needed to be a distinct division between who she fundamentally is and what she does professionally or personally. I often battle with this enigmatic reality myself, so it was refreshing to hear about how Anna welcomes all her roles blending into one another, and that while there are definite challenges, in her case, the opportunities for organic collaboration between the different corners of herself prove to be worth it.

Currently working out of her Los Angeles home that she shares with her family of five, various communal surfaces, such as their kitchen and living room tables, in turn act as her studio all the same. She also spoke about walking, and how the action of walking is fundamental to her practice as a means of research, reflection and material play. From scouring the aisles of any odd store in her vicinity, to walking around the urban L.A. landscape, Anna’s work is deeply influenced by her surroundings. The generally well-tempered climate of Southern California lacks the turning of seasons, so one’s perception of time can often be questioned in these “never changing” environments. As she spoke of the opposing extremities she has experienced between the Icelandic and Southern Californian climates, her connection to nature rang clear, particularly when she spoke about Jacaranda trees. Her fondness for them lies in their ability to reveal the seasons with their blossoming. With their vibrant blossoms acting as place markers of sorts, they also imbue a rebellious quality, refusing to conform to the schedules or temperaments of other flora in their surroundings.

Jacaranda Tree on Eagle Rock Blvd.

A close friend once told me that the key to sustaining art in our lives is to be curious and to always ask questions, and I believe this to be true. That said, I have never been more curious talking about commonplace things as I am when speaking with Anna Hrund. As she generously welcomed me into her headspace, I felt slightly as though I was experiencing déjà vu, getting to revisit things I thought I understood, but from another perspective. Her ways of seeing prompted me to (re)write and (re)categorize their potentials. It’s evident her understanding of these strange objects and things is intimate, which may partially come from consistently living and working so closely with them over time. The pace of her work truly lends to slowness. It was inspiring to speak with an artist with such depth and wit, as it’s apparent that her understandings surpass surface-level knowledge. Anna takes her time to get to know these objects honestly, for who they are rather than what they are, and her practice and person act as refreshing and necessary reminders to consistently make space for looking, asking and learning.

Juliane Foronda


[1] Fisher, M. F. K. The Gastronomical Me. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1989, e-book.

[2] Truitt, Anne. Daybook, the Journal of an Artist. First Scribner trade paperback edition. New York: Scribner, 2013, p. 57.

[3] Truitt, Anne. Daybook, the Journal of an Artist. First Scribner trade paperback edition. New York: Scribner, 2013, p. 58.

Anna Hrund Másdóttir (b. 1981 Reykjavík) has lived and worked in Los Angeles since 2014. She holds an MFA in Art from CalArts, BA in Fine Art from the Iceland Academy of the Arts and attended the Mountain School of Art.

For Anna Hrund, making art is a process of discovery. Working with manufactured materials that are sometimes edible, often disposable, she combs through her surroundings while on daily routine, exploring landscapes of shelving displays, scanning a wilderness of linoleum aisles; the nature that surrounds her. What she brings to us are objects that leap out from the ordinary. She loosely assembles them, like wildflowers clenched in her hand, and brings it all as a gift; a display of findings.

 

Cover picture: Spongecake // Svampkaka, 40 x 40 x 15 cm, 2016. (Pepto-Bismol plaster between blue filter material)

Artefacts from the restless art’s excavations

Artefacts from the restless art’s excavations

Artefacts from the restless art’s excavations

History occurs in a space between the archive and life,

between the past that is being collected and reality,

understood as everything that has not been collected.[1]

 

Today the Living Art Museum – Nýlistasafnið as well known as Nýló publishes and makes available to the public its performance archive. By digitalising the objects left from the performances of different artists, whether it is a proper documentation material or a crumpled note left on the floor – they invite the public to peek into their records of art “that refuses to settle”.

One of the most prevalent arguments about archives and their political legacy is based on the dichotomy of inclusion vs. exclusion. The criteria on which something is to be chosen to memorise are always a starting point of criticism. The contemporary archive of whatever nature today is criticised on the basis of representation, since by the process of choosing what to be represented – the institution is cementing a certain historical narrative. Nýló’s Performance Archive, is however in its core somewhat different from a collection based on a clear methodology of choice – it is a celebration of randomness and fellowship, that lacks any scholarly coherence. In the same time, paraphrasing one of Sol LeWitt sentences on conceptual art – the archive follows its irrational nature absolutely and logically.[2] Not a scholastic collection, rather an incomprehensible artwork, put together by artists, museum caretakers and fellow travellers, created by chance, contingency and a devotion to taking care of ephemeral matters of performing arts and preservation of memories.

 

The past is not “memory” but the archive itself, something that is factually present in reality.[3]

 

The Archive was founded in 2008 by the board of the museum. Since its foundation, some of the materials have merely been stored, but un-archived in Nýló, while others have been brought by artists to the museum.

The collection of boxes, each bearing the name of a particular artist that has made a performance in Iceland (or elsewhere), in association with Nýló (or not) present artefacts left from a particular event or a context surrounding a certain occasion. If perceived as an archaeological collection, the viewer can look at it with the same eye, as one would look at drawers with ancient ceramic bits, tools and incomplete jewels remains small witnesses of craftsmanship of the past.

Content of Sigríður Guðjónsdóttir’s box. Photo by Ida Brottman Hansen.

These objects are traces left of something that aimed to be a “disruption” of public experience, and they certainly “disrupt” the expectation of the ”archive”. No selecting, no curating, no arranging, no connecting, but a whole lot of collecting is employed as an archival tool in this work. Neither the representation of a certain taste – an attitude of the 19th-century collection, nor a modern historical museum’s attempt to represent contemporary diversity, it is a provision of care of what is left or being given. Instead of a figure of a gatekeeper typically occurring in the conversation about archives, we meet a caregiver taking care of any type of memory given.

The artefacts and documentations are left in 60 separate boxes named after Icelandic and international artists such as Ásta Ólafsdóttir, Ásdís Sif Gunnarsdóttir, Bryndís Hrönn Ragnarsdóttir & Clare Charnley, Sjón, Ragnar Kjartansson, Nam June Paik, Myriam Bat-Yosef, OXSMÁ, Bruni BB, Halldór Ásgeirsson, Hannes Lárusson, Karlotta Blöndal and many others. Viewers are invited to glance at the content of the boxes – photographs and scans of the objects. There are two elements of the archive: a lineage of occurrence of historical events and the collection of artefacts of an archaeological type. Typically, the two narratives operate simultaneously and independently, but in this case, the second dominates the other. 

Content of Bjargey Ólafsdóttir box. Photo by Ida Brottman Hansen. 

Artefact from Hannes Lárusson’s box.

“Something moving around slowly wrapped in a white cloth, maybe a sick train conductor”, says on an old yellow page with a small sketch of “something obvious” found in Ásta Ólafsdóttir box together with a cassette tape named “Ásta Ólafsdóttir songs”. Neatly stored in plastic files, images portraying Bjargey Ólafsdóttir horses, playing unicorns with glasses of sparkling wine. A black and white photograph of a man in a soaking wet costume with a bow and white gloves leaving the seaside in Lars Emil Árnason’s box. A letter that shouldn’t be open by anyone but the museum’s current collection manager in case there is no way to play an audio file by Örn Alexander Amundson. A photograph, a postcard with greetings sent to the Reykjavik Art Festival by Ragnar Kjartansson in conjunction with his performance “The Great Unrest” – “The three weeks performance done in the abandoned theatre/dancehall Dagsbrún”. Scribbles and notes – “references about and after performance at NYLO”, a lady’s magazine cover FRUIN from 1963, which backside asks the readers if they have children as well as telling the names of participants of the performance “The Beginning of the Country Band – The Funerals”.

Artefact from Ragnar Kjartansson’s box.

In the box named after Nam June Paik the visitor finds newspaper clippings from the magazine Fálkinn from 1965, connecting us to the story described by Joan Rothfuss in his book Topless Cellist: The Improbable Life of Charlotte Moorman. This incredible story is about the difficult life of the composer association Musica Nova, stuck between the irrepressible movement of Fluxus and the all so decent Icelandic public. The artist Dieter Roth, living in Reykjavik connected his friend Nam June Paik with Musica Nova, an association of composers and musicians, whose main goal was to introduce modern music to the Icelandic public. The association invited Nam June Paik together with cellist Charlotte Moorman, and arranged a concert in Reykjavik, throughout which the following were shown and played in different inventive ways: striptease, water barrels, shaving cream, pistols, dropped pants and so on. As a result of the memorable evening, Musica Nova was denounced and felt compelled to publish an open apology calling the concert „an unforeseeable accident.“[4] 

Fálkinn magazine page from Nam June Paik’s box.

Another hidden gem of this collaborative collage of beauty and the absurd, is placed in a box named “Recordings of performance evenings”, which is a collection of video documentation of a performance evening that took place in Nýló. On the taped-over VHS cassette through the glitches and noise, follows one after another: a naked golden man walking a dead fish around the gallery, three men in black twirling wrists of their right hands in a synchronized manner, a person driving an imaginary car in the light of a projector, and two artists asking one another “why do you make your art here in the most poor country of art in the world?”. The recording ends with darkness, and through smudged visuals of a 1979 screening by The Icelandic National Broadcasting Service, emerge the quarrelling characters of the soap opera “Dallas.” This unintended relation, the small accident of the taped-over VHS, creates a very specific sequence, where the proximity of the cultural extremes on one tape, is both absurd and typical to Icelandic contemporary art throughout its history.

Photograph of VHS with „Recordings of performance evenings“.

The equation of the mundane and the sublime, significant and vulgar could give it a status of exceptionally democratic art – which ironically stands untouched by the major political trends going through today’s European art striving for democracy. Those trends are vividly present in the rest of Scandinavia, shaped by the current form of identity politics and distinguished by missionary didacticism, trapped in its ambition to create great social change or represent a political critique of the strong partisan kind.

Whether in opposition to them or in oblivion, many artists in Iceland instead take on a different role: that of a holy fool, elevating the trivial, the boring and the unbearable, transforming them into beautiful sights full of consolation, where irony is a prerequisite for the magic beam to work. The Performance Archive, just as some of other NYLO’s projects are no exception. It escapes both academic formalism and the obscure context of the discourse of International Art English[5], it is instead telling us magically unexpected stories by picking on the seemingly small and unimportant, freely roaming on the grazing lands of the past.

 

Maria Safronova Wahlström

 

[1] Sven Spieker, Boris Groys: The Logic of Collecting, ARTMargins, January 1999,

https://artmargins.com/boris-groys-the-logic-of-collecting/)

[2] Sol Lewitt, Sentences on Conceptual Art, Art-Language England, Vol.1, May 1969, p.11

[3] Sven Spieker, Boris Groys: The Logic of Collecting, ARTMargins, January 1999,

https://artmargins.com/boris-groys-the-logic-of-collecting/

[4]  Joan Rothfuss, Topless Cellist: The Improbable Life of Charlotte Moorman, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusets, 2014, p.121

[5] Alix Rule and David Levine, “International Art English”, Triple Canopy,

https://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/contents/international_art_english

 

Cover Picture: Content of Halldór Ásgeirsson’s box. Photo by Ida Brottman Hansen.

 

Nýlistasafnið’s archive can be seen here: http://www.nylo.is/collection/gjorningaarkif/
 

Hreinn Friðfinnsson’s assistants on the outside looking in (from the inside)

Hreinn Friðfinnsson’s assistants on the outside looking in (from the inside)

Hreinn Friðfinnsson’s assistants on the outside looking in (from the inside)

Recently on view at KW Institute for Contemporary Art in Berlin from September 28th, 2019 to January 5, 2020, was a retrospective of Hreinn Friðfinnsson’s work To Catch a Fish with a Song: 1964 – Today. It was organized in partnership with Centre d’Art Contemporain Genève where the exhibition was on view from 24 May – 25 August, 2019, coinciding with a new book on the artist’s career launched in Geneva and Berlin. 

Befitting the intricate storylines of Hreinn Friðfinsson’s work, which often contain notions of time interwoven with revelation and concealment, I decided to talk to three of his current and former assistants about the artist instead of taking the usual research routes into the gathering information. I realized while walking around the exhibition To Catch A Fish With Song at KW that, although I had been writing about Icelandic art for a few years now and had even interned at his gallery, I8, in Reykjavik, for a year, the artist had somehow slipped from my focus.

HREINN FRIÐFINNSSON Correspondence, 1991-2014 envelopes, paper 14 x 18.2 cm. Courtesy of i8 Gallery.Hreinn Friðfinnsson Correspondence, 1991-2014 envelopes, paper 14 x 18.2 cm. Courtesy of i8 Gallery.

An opportunity to study his work closely never arrived, and perhaps, I never felt the push as he is such a mythological figure in the Icelandic art world, like a godfather of Conceptual art in Iceland. He is often mentioned in context with the brothers Sigurður and Kristján Guðmundsson of his generation, who studied in Holland in the 1970’s and returned to Iceland, mixing the international modes of conceptual art with a distinctly poetic Icelandic gesture, really using our connotations with words as a work in itself in this fluid play with words. I always got this sense that there was a level of respect that you just have for the Eddas and poetry in general when you grow up in Iceland. I always thought about these old stories about how poets in the Sagas didn’t use swords or, but if you wanted to fight you would have a battle with words as though they were real physical weapons themselves. What these magic words are I have often thought about, especially in making a connection to a specifically Icelandic style of conceptual art. 

HREINN FRIÐFINNSSON House Project, First House, 1974 Mixed media. Courtesy of i8 Gallery. Hreinn Friðfinnsson House Project, First House, 1974 Mixed media. Courtesy of i8 Gallery.

Perhaps I never wanted to penetrate the elusive figure of Hreinn and rather wanted to keep him in this lofty and unreachable place of inexplicable poetry that was somehow tied into a tradition of poetry that the language just oozes, in the way it adjusts to situations and objects, like a phenomenological lens of the world in itself. This is very much an outsider of the language looking in, although I speak it enough to get by, but not with an inner sense for the language. I don’t have a feel for words. This was the golden halo I had wrapped Hreinn inside, faithful to the truth or not, at least it was conceptual. I was familiar with Hreinn through the exhibition and book called Homecomings edited by Annabelle von Girsewald and Cassandra Edlefsen Lasch, which looked at Georges Perec’s Espèces d’espaces (Species of Spaces, 1974) in the context of Hreinn’s House Project which also launched in 1974.  In talking to his assistants, I saw the form of my gaining knowledge of the artist as being akin to this most sustaining narrative work of his career, the House Project (1974 – ), which began as a gesture that would successively take many different forms.

“In the summer of 1974, a small house was built in the same fashion as Sólon Guðmundsson intended to do about half a century ago, that is to say, an inside-out house. It was completed on the 21st of July. It is situated in an unpopulated area of Iceland, and in a place from which no other man-made objects can be seen. The existence of this house means that ‘outside’ has shrunk to the size of a closed space formed by the walls and the roof of the house. The rest has become ‘inside’. The house harbors the whole world except itself.” (1 Hreinn Friðfinnsson, House Project: First House, Second House, Third House (Crymogea, Reykjavík, 2012).)

HREINN FRIÐFINNSSON House Projcet, Third House, 2011 stainless steel 64.027060, -22.070652. Courtesy of i8 Gallery.Hreinn Friðfinnsson House Project, Third House, 2011 stainless steel 64.027060, -22.070652. Courtesy of i8 Gallery.

Sólon, to add another layer to the project, is a character set in 1912 in the novel ‘Íslenskur aðall,’ (“Icelandic Aristocracy,” published in 1938 by Þórbergur Þórðarsson. Using the story of Sólon, the artist made an inquiry into the boundaries of space, an inquiry that has continued to unfold in different iterations. The work continuously shapes to its environment through dematerializing by making an inversion of the surroundings or by mirroring them. In my conversations with his assistants, their perspectives of the artist become a metaphorical practice in the exterior of the house of Sólon looking in at the character of the artist known as Hreinn Friðfinnsson. His assistants are the outside looking in (from the inside). 

 

Styrmir Örn Guðmundsson, former assistant 

Hreinn is on the phone with the whole world. He just sits at home and calls whoever he’s working with. When he’s producing work or a show, I feel like he is a puppet master.

Or maybe it’s better to put it this way: he will get an idea that has something to do with astrophysics, let’s say, and then he’ll call an astrophysicist in Iceland that he knows and asks him how something works and why some object is turning like that. And then he’ll get an idea for something physical so he calls a carpenter in The Netherlands and starts building something, and then calls the assistants, and then he calls the gallery. He calls a hundred times in one day and then everything sort of falls into place. I’ve always been very fascinated by his way of working. I think it is interesting that he isn’t working in the studio himself but he makes these correspondences, directing this whole process of conceptual art production. 

At the end of the day, it is all Hreinn. That’s the fascinating thing is that he is so brilliant at capturing ideas that otherwise would just fly by. Often people all around him are, in a way, reflecting on something that he’s talking about and then this idea of a work comes into the open. He’s really good at capturing these ideas going on on the telephone, calling immediately the next day someone who starts working on it. So, what I meant to say is that I think there are a lot of people around him that play a big role in his way of making things that in the end, of course, are his creation. Even though he is a conceptual artist working with found things and readymades, there is still this Friðfinnsson style. 

He is definitely a super storytelling artist and he uses text especially in his 1970’s work. It was really what he was busy with just combining text and images, but also Icelandic ghost stories, so he’s really a good example of an artist who is big with storytelling, even though later it is maybe less. His work is not literary, but when I am with him in his house, he is always making up stories, rhymes, even raps, especially after I was infecting him with my rap practice. He was immediately coming up with some rap lyrics because he comes from that old Icelandic tradition. So he has that really in him, deeply rooted, to make up rhymes and that’s really amazing. 

I think Hreinn is a sorcerer at times in his works. He doesn’t know physics on an expert level but he uses it in this way that you describe that is like a kind of sorcery. He is even like a sorcerer in the way his phone conversations is him just picking up the phone, without even having an agenda, and he becomes like a bit-torrent that is just downloading as long as he’s reaching out to people. I imagine it’s like a remedy for any artist to just be active making phone calls and emails and slowly having everything assemble into a whole show.

HREINN FRIÐFINNSSON A View in A (1), 1976 black and white photograph 52.5 x 64.5 cm. Courtesy of i8 gallery. HREINN FRIÐFINNSSON A View in A (1), 1976 black and white photograph 52.5 x 64.5 cm. Courtesy of i8 gallery.

Hrafnhildur Helgadóttir, current assistant 

There is a word that kept coming up during the process of making the publication, which ended up not being in the publication, a word that was often used to describe Hreinn: Titlaflakk. Literally, titla (title) flakk (wanderer). 

Being busy with the archive and the chronology of his work we were really going through his whole career, and for people who are working with the installation, we saw how some titles return again and again. In the 1980s, everything was untitled which was very popular then, but very annoying for registration. 

For example, Above and Below hasn’t been with a title for ages until now. It’s almost like a work can be seen as being in process until the title comes. In the publication, you can even trace the title of the works and how they changed. For a lot of artists, this is part of their practice. It was nice to put it in the book as an official thing. Sometimes I’ll come to the studio and suddenly there is a title where there wasn’t one before. Sometimes just one word inside of a title has changed, such as ‘my’ sky or ‘your’ sky. 

Also, all the people who work for him have nicknames for works as well. For example, a video work at KW made in 2018/2019 of Hreinn’s hand and a candle. Like many of his works, it is an illustration of scientific discovery. The staff nickname is ‘reaching out’ but the official title is: Reaching out: left-hand shadow sent on a journey to infinity through the window in the small room. Once you project the shadow in space there is nothing keeping it in the room…. It is on a trajectory to infinity. Words chosen have to carry the meaning. It took months to choose what the title was going to be and moving between English, Icelandic, and Dutch. It was almost like knitting.

The title of the show, How to Catch a Fish With a Song, comes from a series of text works by Hreinn called Clues because they are actually sentences taken from NY Times crossword puzzles. Hreinn doesn’t know the answer to the puzzle.

HREINN FRIÐFINNSSON Seven Times, 1979 seven black and white photographs each: 29,8 x 20,3 cm. Courtesy of i8 Gallery. Hreinn Friðfinnsson Seven Times, 1979 seven black and white photographs each: 29,8 x 20,3 cm. Courtesy of i8 Gallery.

Halla Einarsdóttir, current assistant 

He is fluid with words, but also a bit greedy. For example, if he liked a title he would put it on several things and as time went by he would neglect the fact that he had already used it. Greedy in a funny way, but at the same time very ready to cancel out the fact that he has already used it. He can also be controversial with himself which was a funny wall to hit constantly as we were gathering things for the publication. We came across the fact that he is writing his history with this book, so there is a constant struggle because with some works, which is also perfectly his decision, but works he didn’t like to take out of the canon but the editors liked it. So it was a constant back and forth process.

He basically had to trace his life from the 1960s, emotionally as well. It was amazing how much he remembers and is very quick to remember. It’s this self autobiographical work with the fence that began my archiving part. It’s basically that he walked, when he was 24 or 25, since he comes from the west of Iceland on a farm, for a summer job for two years where he was guiding a fence that had been set up because of the sheep disease. It was an insane distance, like 50 km every other day. He would walk one distance and his brothers would drive and pick him up. He made this work in 2014/15. I was reading these yearbooks from a newspaper around this area and from then on it escalated and I started to scan his archive which was loads of work. As Hrafnhildur probably mentioned, he hasn’t been consistently updating the archive. I picked up where Styrmir had made his own logic and it wasn’t until then that I realized how great it is to have many people in on the logic of organizing it. 

Conclusion

Styrmir observes that Hreinn is on the phone with the whole world like a distant puppet master, or a „bit-torrent that is just downloading as long as he’s reaching out to people.“ Hrafnhildur observes Hreinn as being a ‘title wanderer’, never settling on a name for an artwork and letting it drift throughout his career, signifying his careful attention to words to specify artworks or to connect them to otherwise disparate works. Halla observes the importance of having many people involved in the logic of organizing an archive. Hreinn is writing his own history, being controversial with himself, writing his own history, being ‘greedy’ with words and wanting to use it everywhere. Hreinn’s assistants give us a different perspective on the artist, clues to the artist that are poetic, indirect, and perfectly befitting, just as the title for the show at KW was borrowed from a NY Times Crossword puzzle clue for which the answer is irrelevant. The clue to the answer contains all the poetry and points of departure needed, like a Koan for which there is no answer but the thought processes involved in trying to solve it are the answer itself.

Erin Honeycutt  

 

Cover picture: Hreinn Friðfinnsson, House Project Fourth House, 2017, polished stainless steel, 255 x 325 x 195. Courtesy of i8 gallery.

New, dystopian and unexpected: „I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthan life“

New, dystopian and unexpected: „I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthan life“

New, dystopian and unexpected: „I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthan life“

Disarray. Carefully scripted disarray, with plastic-wrappers, video-makers, light-fixtures and oil slicks, peculiar, confusing, mysterious; welcome to Knut Eckstein’s constructed world. 

“Tread lightly,” the woman beside me warns, “there are things on the floor.” Standing at the threshold of Gallery 02, Eckstein’s arena within the Akureyri Art Museum, I watch the cadence of the visitors shift from stride to tread. Uncertainty is etched on faces. One throws the question to a nearby group,“are we allowed inside?”  

At first glance, the exhibition space resembles an adorned construction site. Sheets of dark green plastic engulf the floor, submerged and ship-wrecked objects appear to float within these layers; both hidden and accentuated by the shards of film that blanket them. Nonsensical items are strewn underfoot; palm-leaves, dehydrated water-bottles, a wigged human mask left compressed, as if petrified under ice. The sparse assemblage, to say the least, is one of eclectic intrigue.  

Knut Eckstein, I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife, Akureyri Art Museum, Gallery 02. (24/11/2019) Photography: Daníel Starrason.

German artist Eckstein (b.1968), who creates by “inverting the outside inward” offers visitors to Akureyri a distinctive twist on the gallery experience. By using the whole floor space, the artist turns the underfoot into his canvas, invoking the “sensory impression” of a monumental, walk-in landscape painting, where viewers are invited to step onto the art itself. Building on his earlier bodies of work, such as ‘On a Shaky Ground’ or ‘La Vague’, Eckstein’s installation explores the emotional conflict between certainty and uncertainty, engineering an environment in Akureyri that both invites and refuses entry. To house this diametric interplay, curator Hlynur Hallsson placed the exhibition in a transitional gallery. The sight of the rooms behind Eckstein’s work offers visitors an unspoken invitation to cross the piece, without interrupting the discord within the exhibition. 

“I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthan life” was presented in two stages, the final version unveiled in a sweeping performance held in Akureyri Art Museum on the 26th October 2019. In a dynamic show, the artist took his floor-centric work and brought it up onto the dividing wall, transforming the dialogue within the space. In this second instalment, spectators witnessed Eckstein mount three parasols, as well as erect his signature cantilevered overhang; a gravity-defying structure built using only cardboard boxes, tape and clotheslines. Drawing on the architectural philosophies of Frank Lloyd Wright and Le Corbusier, he orchestrated a spirited subversion of balance, both structurally and aesthetically, one which served to counter the instability of the terrain below. The cantilever, a style which takes materials and dances them to the point of near-failure, stands as an architectural beacon of unconventionality and dare. A dual ethos invoked by Eckstein, who not only designed an unorthodox structure, but turned the act into a dauntless performance. “I wanted to go beyond borders, beyond what I’ve done before,” says the artist. “I wanted to push myself in front of the abyss.”

Knut Eckstein’s Performance for I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife, Akureyri Art Museum, Gallery 02. (26/10/2019) Photography: Hlynur Hallsson.

Knut Eckstein’s Performance for I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife, Akureyri Art Museum, Gallery 02. (26/10/2019) Photography: Hlynur Hallsson.

Through performance, Eckstein demonstrates the creative mechanisms behind his work, allowing him “to tell more than just the story of handcrafted set-up.” He compared his installation choreography to that of musical notations, reading his movements like a score. “I went through it in detail imagining step by step,” he recounts. “It was like learning a textbook; trying to figure out how to manage the difficult parts and the edges to come around.” In the vein of an architect, all compacted works he produces come with a set of transferable drawings, ready to install in different locations. He began introducing cardboard boxes early on in his artistic practice, sometimes recording their installation on tape alone in the studio. From this, he notes the natural transition to install in front of an audience, the performance aspect allowing for an element of improvisation. Which makes it “real, re-actable and connected to the situation and time.” 

Eckstein’s performance was captured on film the night of the 26th, the show documentation available to watch on iPhones in the gallery. Small and intimate, viewers can lean in and witness post-hoc the installation. These videos, says the artist, “Reflect the history of the set up,” offering visitors hooks of continuity amongst the ephemeral nature of the space. Embedded in Eckstein’s philosophy is the concept of impermanence, creating works, such as performances, that in his words both, “resist time and external influences; eventually only to remain in the mind.” For curator Hallsson, the addition of cameras and iPhones also prompts viewers to think about the transition within the space. Together, he notes, “they allude to how it was before and the potential of what could happen there.” 

Rounding the corner into adjacent Gallery 05, Eckstein’s work undergoes a thematic shift. The floor comparatively stripped bare, the focus is moved towards two separate installations. The former, a metal figure bedecked with colourful clothes, the latter, a re-fashioned roll of leftover material. “I was looking for a quotable image,” recounts the artist, whose practice often cites contemporary iconography. “I ended by using a Yves Saint Laurent advertisement I found on the back cover of a magazine. The structure is linked to the Hellenistic sculpture of the Nike of Samothrace, with a comparable posture as well as aspects of the clothing.” 

Knut Eckstein, I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife, Akureyri Art Museum, Gallery 05. (24/11/2019) Photography: Daníel Starrason.

Eckstein often produces versions of advertising logos that are “simplified, rough and raw.” In this instance, he departs from the Saint Laurent design, traces it back to its sculptural influence, before contracting it to its basic form. He uses just the curve of a wire to trace the figure’s outline and alludes to the goddesses famed drapery using only bedraggled clothes. The quotation of The Winged Nike, whose diametric pose has been described as where “violent motion and sudden stillness meet,” also engages with the conflicting environment next door, which both invites forward “motion” into the space and triggers a “sudden stillness” amongst visitors. 

Used by the likes of Marinetti as an archetype of beauty, the Nike of Samothrace has been termed “greater than life,” offering an apposite comparison to Eckstein’s work. “I am interested in greatness,” says the artist, “the extraordinary, the extra-large, the super. Life is the measuring scale and there is nothing bigger, so I’m interested in the greatest there is to achieve.”This philosophy is echoed in Eckstein’s title, the artist often using simple words to convey complex thoughts. “The title is loaded with ideas,” he explains, “and this time I wanted the words to be connected to life and size. I tried to change my thoughts into Icelandic using translation machines, converting the words back and forth to get as close as possible to my point.”  

Knut Eckstein, I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife, Akureyri Art Museum, Gallery 05. (24/11/2019) Photography: Daníel Starrason.

This technique is seen redeployed at the back-right corner of Gallery 05, which houses a roll of excess material furnished with pink wig, tripod and a translated paper sign. “The paper resting on top came with the transport crate,” explains Eckstein. “The museum staff were asked to install it on the central wall in Gallery 02 before the opening of the show and before the whole space was transformed by the later installation performance.” The text was intended to ask people to bring materials on the day of the performance, which Eckstein would then work around and react to. For Eckstein, the inaccuracy of the translation machine renders “something new, dystopian or unexpected” to his words. “In some ways wrong,” he laughs, “therefore being right.” 

At each stage of this exhibition there is a sense of suspended completion. Dystopian in its nature and governed by the need to push boundaries, “I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthan life” will take your stance and turn it on its head. “This show is like a process” says director Hallsson, “and that’s what’s interesting about it.”

 

Portrait of Knut Eckstein for I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife, Iceland (24/11/2019) Photography: Helene Leslie Eckstein.

 

Claire-Julia Hill 

 

Knut Eckstein’s show I’m notreallyinterested in anythinggreaterthanlife will be on display at the Akureyri Art Museum until 20/01/2020. 

„Lucky Me?“ by Lucky 3 at Kling & Bang

„Lucky Me?“ by Lucky 3 at Kling & Bang

„Lucky Me?“ by Lucky 3 at Kling & Bang

In the exhibition Lucky Me? the art-collective Lucky 3, consisting of Darren Mark, Dýrfinna Benita Basalan, and Melanie Ubaldo, draws to attention their experiences that fall in between identification with- and marginalization of the Filipino community and culture. They invite, as they say in the catalogue, a mostly white audience (including me), to experience a reconstructed nostalgia that is not of the audience’s own—while serving as a celebration of the Filipino community in Iceland.  

Installations, videos, clothes, and karaoke are all parts of the engrossing whole that makes up the cultural reminiscence that Lucky Me? consists of. Situated in the white and cold space of Kling & Bang in Marshallhús, and taking place in the darkest days of winter; the exhibition is warm, welcoming, and personal while still being true to one of its core messages of displacement, and mixed feelings of self-identity. The experience of the contrasting elements were inviting and thought-provoking simultaneously. Which left me with the feeling of political awareness of the multicultural reality that we inhabit today in a good way. That is, the cultural breadth of a society is a gift worth appreciating, within an artistic context as well as outside of it.

The first room of the exhibition displays a kind of street imagination; a basketball court, punching bag, and sportswear hanging as if it drying after a wash. The space showcasing clothes and installations by Darren Mark instantly pulled me out of the Icelandic snowstorm raging outside. Where it’s practically impossible to enjoy basketball outdoors, into a context that’s warm and where the worries of daily life are completely different. It set the mood, a soft reminder that I was there as a viewer to let someone else influence me with their vision of what life entails.

The reminiscence continued in the next room but, was neither soft nor pleasant. A brick wall covered with broken glass met me and behind it a video of a flood—a most likely devastating flood—followed by children violently dancing and inmates following a choreographed routine. Confusion.

The brick wall almost barring entry while being curiously intriguing. In an interview with Menningin Melanie Ubaldo said that the brick wall represented a common sight in the Philippines, where they use broken glass for security against burglary.[1]

The wall could be seen as protecting the small “store” installed inside the gallery. The small „store“ functions as a tribute to a concept called sari-sari, a type of store that usually has for sale a variety of single-use items, such as soap or food, and sporting familiar brands such as Head & Shoulders, Nescafé and Palmolive. Thus, this struck me as a reminder of the unequivocal effect of mass consumer culture and how vastly the effects of it reaches, but at the same time it gave the sari-sari a faintly familiar air to it. On display in the sari-sari was the popular Filipino noodle brand Lucky Me! which the exhibition derives its name from. Lucky Me? is an almost ironic or cynical twist to the name of the noodle brand that brought up in me deep questions about self-identity, and belonging in the light of racism.

On the last wall, two artworks were displayed side by side. A small screen, situated opposite to the other screen in the room, showing a Filipino family, in a typical Icelandic house, eating dinner, and chatting sometime around Christmas. A casual scene which was relaxing to watch and listen to while not understanding the language while being in stark contrast to the active, and tragic scene on the other side of the room. Next to the family eating dinner was a big fan. Painted with a picture of what might express a feeling, probably not describable in words, of plants growing brutally out of a bleeding corpse lying comically with its tongue out to the side. Vile yet comic, the picture on the fan struck me with discomfort that most likely was intentional.

Karaoke, the crown jewel in the last room, served as a great reminder of playtime. Put on a song of your choice and enjoy it. I personally chose Heart of Glass, sang out of tune and enjoyed the hell out of it. In the room with karaoke was a sofa wrapped in plastic, not very welcoming and a big golden altar made of foam spray and candles, looking spectacularly fancy from afar while not so, up close.

The installations, by Lucky 3, complement each other to bring the audience into a new group-perspective, one that is not readily available for many members of the audience. The artistic expression of culture in this personal exhibition, therefore, becomes a vulnerable practice that can be felt and almost touched. In the catalogue, Lucky 3 expresses their hopes that the exhibition will be a learning experience, which for me it without a doubt was.

Eva Lín Vilhjálmsdóttir

 

[1] https://www.ruv.is/sjonvarp/spila/menningin/27844/8l2s7i

Pictures courtesy of Kling & Bang and the artists.

„Kiss the day goodbye“ by Charles Atlas at i8 gallery

„Kiss the day goodbye“ by Charles Atlas at i8 gallery

„Kiss the day goodbye“ by Charles Atlas at i8 gallery

As the sun disappears from the sky in Iceland, it seems fitting that i8 Gallery should choose an exhibition of this kind to end the year and take us into the new decade. Charles Atlas’s 2015 video installation Kiss the Day Goodbye displays a romanticized vision of the sun, the sea and the sublime. Ironically as I see my own connection with the sun has become that of a long-distance relationship; there is an inherent sentimentality which runs through the video and audio work on display. Concerning the idea of a sun and the memory of how it feels and how these allusions, these false suns, is all that we have left as we move deeper into the winter months. 

This video piece differs from many of Atlas’ existing works due to its absence of a performative human body. Its subject instead being that of Florida, the Sunshine State, alongside the Gulf of Mexico which makes up the majority of this American peninsula’s border. It is clear that the sea, sky and sun not only are features that fully encompass the most southerly region of the country but is likewise reverently reflected by Atlas’ use of these three core elements. Arguably it is the latter of these elements, the Sun, which commands the space of the exhibition. It becomes a character in its own right, one which wears many masks and outfits. Not only being cast as an entity of warmth and light. At times it flashes subversive moments of dark coolness through its deep hues paired with the looming twilight skies which surround this figure. The sunset, which signifies the end of our days and the start of our nights, controlling the flow and structure of society since the dawn of time and man, is replicated here 24 times all of which at differing heights and times. A reliable symbol of consistency, Atlas portrays its inconsistency. The work plays with a heliocentric perspective. Snippets of earthly presences, which include kites and birds, flit across sections of the screen to disappear at the border. Shadows would similarly be cast across the wall of the exhibition as car headlights from outside illuminate passing figures who disappear just as suddenly. Nevertheless, nothing seems to compete with the intimidating monument of our star.

The horizon has disintegrated. The limit of the seen world from a given point becomes a void at the end of an ocean. The grid which contains these suns, and numerous seas, similarly have a fracturing effect. Atlas’ implementation of a grid structure as a key motif within the exhibition introduces the audience to his focused portrayal of nature. The black space becoming segmented and numbered as if it were a loading screen counting us down. There are several moments of order which then gradually transition into a patchwork environment as even the grid itself is not bound to an eternal pattern. Instead, these digital edges mimic the border of two domains, cropped images emulating the natural world while also constructing vertical horizons as well. These apparent lines touch and stretch themselves into the other. Shifting and sliding. I cannot help but notice how this movement imitates that of window blinds that reveal and conceal my view of the world and the larger outside. As conversations surrounding borders intensify, especially in the United States, it is refreshing to be confronted by a world where boundaries move and adapt to the surrounding environment. Nothing is set or determined within Atlas’ perspective as edges are no longer defined limits. Sky and sea become fluid as if they are dancing, a give and take which shares the screen. Speaking of the screen, the installation is not even limited to a single wall and instead wraps itself around the corner of the space, extending into multidimensionality which wraps and consumes the viewer.

Charles Atlas
Kiss the Day Goodbye, 2015 (installation view)
two-channel video installation with sound
© Charles Atlas; Courtesy of the artist, Luhring Augustine, New York and i8 Gallery, Reykjavik. 

 Charles Atlas
Kiss the Day Goodbye, 2015 (installation view)
two-channel video installation with sound
© Charles Atlas; Courtesy of the artist, Luhring Augustine, New York and i8 Gallery, Reykjavik.

This world of edges, oceans, and endless skylines is filled by a soundscape that evokes a sense of tradition and nostalgia. The audio of a bagpipe playing closes, or maybe opens, the scene like the cockerel cries to the sun as it rises. It’s arguably one of the most recognizable instruments in the western world due to its powerful droning notes that makes an impactful impression within the small space of i8; even masking the passing traffic at times. This instrument alludes to moments of celebration. Often used as a ceremonial element of funerals around the world as this Celtic instrument migrated with its players. In a way, we are asked to attend the funeral of the sun and day as it is buried beneath the waves. Furthering this idea that we, the human race perhaps, are running out of time and an end is approaching. Pondering on how we approach these finalities, considering our innate fear of mortality. Additionally, Atlas has chosen to complement this archaic instrument with a synth soundscape reminiscent of an 80s crime thriller. These minimalist waves of sound become the voice of the scene steadily pulsing its energy into the room. Steady like the setting sun with bursts of industrial squeaks and echoes. Even within this natural landscape the presence of human activity inserts itself. This space is inherently human-made.

It is hard not to consider time while viewing the work in the dark and enclosed gallery space. Evoking ideas of both cosmic and anthropological time. How our perception of these vast planetary movements is almost impossible to register. The digital format and editing of the video allow us to acknowledge our minuscule presence. Our relationship between planetary entities and the human attraction to these distant orbital monoliths. Time and space are used to give ourselves structure and stabilize our position in a universe. There is a balance to it all; fitting since astrologically my sun is a Libra. Important to note is how this presentation of Atlas’ work differs from previous incarnations. Being previously shown in the 2017 Venice Biennale within a larger video/audio installation by Atlas. This included an adjacent digital clock that ran down from 18 minutes, the time it takes the sun to set. I am glad that this countdown clock is absent here. Time resides within ambiguity in this darkened space, a bubble universe where the sun constantly sets. This apocalyptic notion of the end is still present yet less overt, instead of relying on implication and atmosphere. I find there is a hope for a new day as the video resets and the countdown begins again. 

The separation of sky and land has fascinated mankind for centuries. The distinction between the heavens and the human world. The mystery of what lies beyond, the intrigue of the unknown. I am intrigued too. I find it ironic that Atlas has, either intentionally or unintentionally, embodied the mythological role of his titanic namesake. A being, who, as the myth goes, was condemned to support the heavens on his shoulders and therefore separate the sky and land for eternity. A responsibility that appears to show signs of degrading and neglect in this shifting exhibition.

George Cox

 

The exhibition Kiss the Day Goodbye by Charles Atlas runs at i8 Gallery until February the 1st, 2020. 

https://i8.is/exhibitions/173/press_release_text/

 

Cover picture:  

Charles Atlas
Kiss the Day Goodbye, 2015 (installation view)
two-channel video installation with sound
© Charles Atlas; Courtesy of the artist, Luhring Augustine, New York and i8 Gallery, Reykjavik.

UA-76827897-1