Gerhard Schoeman ‘s critique without meaning

In the latest issue of art southafrica Gerhard Schoeman has made and attempt to review my exhibition 'Project: Pictures for Life'.

Missing the exhibitions (and the project itself) point totally, Schoeman explores an image which contains self-reflective elements. An Honest Image (not Picture as stated by Schoeman) seems to have captured his attention, however he critiques the rest of the exhibited images as being “naively realist conception[s] of representation” and that these have been reduced to “sentimental, picturesque objects”. Schoeman also defines these photographs of being “static” in comparison to other contemporary photographers. He furthermore explains how the photographer “attempt[s] at honestly documenting his subjects”.

It seems that Schoeman clearly misapprehended the idea behind the exhibition and the nature of the images presented. It was clearly advertised and presented, before and during (and even after) that this exhibition was a project in conjunction with the Centre for Social Development, a project which aimed to stimulate community development through the arts, one which could generate profit in order to aid such development.

Schoeman’s critique does not mention this at all yet it seems to reflect his personal studious ideal of fine art photography – and these images were never meant to be placed into such a category. On the contrary, the images are reflective of a variety of emotions produced by those who are aided with development projects. The series of images form part of the genre of activism and development and not fine art. So Schoeman’s interpretation, which is ultimately one that reveals his lack of self-reflectivity, is inappropriate and unsubstantial. His critique aims at the photography and how it has not satisfied his personal connection and understanding of the art.

This ultimately questions criticisms in general. They can be very valid and constructive [or deconstructive as in this case] yet should adhere to some sort of quality and content control. A solid criticism should ultimately relate to the idea of what has been criticised and not be an arbitrary rant which reflects an individual’s lack of attention to detail and deficiency of comprehension about the subject matter.

With this in mind I am glad that Schoeman has created some sort of publicity through this review, yet am afraid that he stumbled into a puddle of misconception and shallow critique.

posted by Gregor @ 12:50 PM