Look, See

The impressive thing about Matthew Barney is that he has the project management skills, or the resources to hire good project managers, to create his films, installations, and props (some people call them sculptures).

The mysterious thing about Matthew Barney is the fact that he has the backing to basically do whatever he wants.

The depressing thing about Matthew Barney is how bland his work is.

The smartest career thing about Matthew Barney is that his work appears ambitious because it's big and colorless and uses unusual materials.

The surprising, and not so surprising, thing about Matthew Barney is how derivative his work is.

"DRAWING RESTRAINT is an ongoing performance-based project exploring the notion that form emerges through struggle against resistance[1]." That sounds good. But it doesn't look so good. I'd like to propose a moratorium on artists who explore notions.

The real show at Barney's SFMoMA exhibition (through September 17, 2006- be sure and miss it) is the viewer walking through these massive spaces. Video monitors are mounted hanging from the ceiling, everything is white, everyone is walking around looking up. One room is all hanging monitors and vitrines, white and quiet- it feels like fashion, like shopping, like walking through some hip clothing store with music videos playing on monitors. Everybody is trying so hard to figure out what the hell is going on here. They're all being good obedient art lookers.

Everything is so big. It obviously took a lot of work to do all this. The museum put some resources into this event. The museum has tried to celebrate this exhibition. It must be very important. That's the message.

I tried. It didn't work.

Barney's grandiose metaphors and mythology are trite. It's J. R. R. Tolkien and Carlos Castaneda rolled into... no, it's not even that good.

There are many many many Beuys references:

• Sketchy, shaky, faint pencil drawings of body fragments? Check!


• Vitrines? Check!


• Vaseline, the equivalent of Beuys' use of fat? Check!


• A 35mm film can on the floor? Check!


• The artist in costume, adorned, or transformed? Check!


• Industrial material in its natural, "formless" form? Check!


• The artist as a seer or healer? Check!


• Highly metaphorized and oh so grand mythology? Check!

Even the drawing on the wall above the stairs that he did on-site during a performance dressed as General Douglas MacArthur borrows the central cross form from Beuys.

The photo stills aren't anything special. They're just dull and thoughtless fragments. They're all frame and nothing interesting.

The drawings aren't anything special. They're just dull and thoughtless fragments. They're all frame and nothing interesting.

The sculptures are really big. It's kind of cool to see big blocks of cast petroleum jelly falling apart. I don't know why the exhibition doesn't stink up the museum.

The sculptures aren't much, however, without the videos to give them a little context. And the videos are tedious. The lighting and framing and the cuts are ugly. It looks like crappy digital video. Speaking of artists who think they're in the same league as Beuys, I'm sure Barney could get some sound film making advice from Julian Schnabel- it might be a huge improvement.

Aspects of the installation which place the viewer in the place of passive spectator are simply offensive- that one small room with all the video monitors and vitrines is awful because of the position in which it places the viewer. I was struck by what I perceive as Barney's indifference or disregard for the place of the viewer in the work.

One of the most fascinating things to me was seeing the fourth floor south gallery with all the walls removed- I'd never seen that space opened up like that. Three or four years ago the Eva Hesse show was in those very same galleries - that was a great show; I'd put Hesse up against Barney any day.

William Wiley is a really interesting, genuinely imaginative artist who creates characters and situations, invents little worlds, uses language in fun ways, is visually interesting, and deals in important topics. He could be seen as a predecessor to Barney, even more so than someone like Bruce Nauman, Jack Smith, Scott Burton, Ree Morton, Joan Jonas, John Waters, Yoko Ono, Vito Acconci... But Wiley's just a little ol' local boy Northern California senior citizen painter.

The saddest thing about Matthew Barney is that, despite my being open to the work and this exhibit, it's just plain boring. I'm not easily bored. I have a lot of goodwill towards artists, towards people trying to make stuff that has meaning. But this stuff isn't that interesting to look at, much less think too hard about. This is the kind of show that makes me think, now why do I have that museum membership?

Photos by mac-tasitc at Flickr used without permission.