An Exhibition of Imagination
The Valdosta State University Art Gallery recently exhibited an array of diverse and unmistakably unique works. With art ranging from classic to unusual, viewers had plenty to keep them interested. Open to public viewing from September 25th to October 6th in the Fine Arts building, viewers could see some of the most creative talent the university has to offer, as the gallery showcased the Faculty Exhibition. An annual showing of works by teachers of the VSU Art Department, the show included paintings, sculptures, jewelry, and photography, among other types of works. As the show had no thematic guidelines, the artists were free to express themselves without any restrictions other than the limits of their imaginations, making for a very interesting and pleasant display of talent. As a whole, the exhibit took on a pleasant demeanor, inviting the viewer to take time and care to enjoy the works on display, and, with a few exceptions, enjoying the show was not a difficult task.
The primary and almost solitary offender to the gallery’s pleasant aura is of such magnitude that it cannot be overlooked. As the viewer enters the gallery, he or she is immediately assaulted by an overpowering and unsettling painting by Professor Harry Alley. His “Nude in Landscape” shocks the senses by imposing a scene the viewer simply cannot balance. Alley lavishes upon the sky an outburst of red that irrevocably unbalances the work. To bluntly accentuate the uneasiness Alley creates in the viewer by the piece’s sky, his rendition of a nude woman annihilates any chance of redemption to the viewer. One needs an object upon which to focus his attention to offset the imbalance of the sky, but as the woman has no definite form, the viewer cannot focus his gaze upon her. It is the lack of definite shape in the painting more than any other factor that frustrates the viewer and urges him to quickly leave the painting for a less disturbing piece.
Fortunately for the viewer, not every work in the exhibit evokes feelings of disdain. Some pieces, such as those by Clyde Edwards, evoke very little feelings, if any at all. His “Untitled” does not appear to be anything in particular and correspondingly causes the viewer to become detached from the work. If one intently inquires of the sketch what precisely is circumscribed in its intricacies, one could entertain the idea that Edwards has incorporated the form of a man wearing a suit into the scene. Just as likely, however, the viewer concludes that the man is only an apparition and not real at all. The impossibility of ascertaining the truth of the matter causes the viewer to continue to search through the seemingly disorganized sketch, leading to an entirely random visual flow through the work as the eye fruitlessly searches for a definite form that cannot be found. Using shades of gray to create the work increases Edwards’ success via premeditated disorganization further underscoring the work’s lack of centrality or focus. By successfully detaching the viewer from the piece, Edwards creates an apparently formless and random vision in the viewer’s mind, allowing no opportunity for feeling to develop. A lack of feeling, however, in no way detracts from the quality of Edward’s sketch, but it does prevent the viewer from settling upon the piece as one worthy of acclaim.
To find an example of art at the show that can exemplify the overall quality of pure imagination at the exhibition, one need look no further than J. Stephen Lahr’s “Big Stone Henge.” An enticing combination of warm, vivid colors in the painting’s background with darker, cooler colors in the foreground gives “Big Stone Henge” an excellent visual flow. Lahr’s calculated use of color persuades the viewer to look through the stones, up towards the sky as if he or she were actually in England at the ancient site. Using an underneath perspective enhances Lahr’s ability to make the viewer feel part of the painting. While Lahr doesn’t strive for absolute realism with his portrayal of Stonehenge, he achieves a hybrid of fantasy and reality that is convincing enough to become reality itself, a product of pure imagination. His process of visual hybridization can also be seen taken in the context of time, as Lahore affords the viewer a glimpse of history simultaneously ancient and modern: he shows the enduring strength of stone eroded only by the passing ravages of time while somehow working in the modern appearance of intersecting lines across the face of the painting. Even as Lahr recreates Stonehenge’s strength, he allows the viewer to interpret the scene in his or her own way by making the enduring stones partially translucent. The viewer can see the immovability of Stonehenge if he or she looks at the shape, but can also interpret the translucence as a sign of passing times, a fading into days long gone. Either way, Lahr leaves the conclusion completely to the viewer, allowing the viewer to use as much or as little imagination as he or she desires. Whether the viewer feels transported to England by the painting can only be decided by the viewer, but the decision to feel entirely detached from the scene is certainly an impossibility, due to Lahr’s ability to draw the viewer into his painting.
The spirit of creativity Lahr captures in “Big Stone Henge” is consistent throughout the Faculty Exhibition. As the overall quality of work becomes increasingly apparent, upon searching through the gallery works, an infectious atmosphere of enjoyment develops, to art enthusiasts and passers-by alike. Even with stark aberrations such as Alley’s “Nude in Landscape” casting an ugly stare upon the gallery, such a fine array of works decorate the walls and floor of the gallery that a few major blemishes are unable to bruise the convivial ambiance.