They changed the date now that it is over, but originally it was 21-28 July.
So I accidentally saw this on “What’s on” a week prior and thought I would give it a look. Coincidentally, a mate messaged me on the day I was going to walk up there that there are turtles in the lake of Alexandra Palace, and they are sunbathing on a log. So I thought great; 2 birds with one stone. I took the camera with me.
Here are some of the better shots I made of the turtles. Only 2 remained on the log by the time I got up there. These are unedited.
Walking up to the gallery after, I found it empty, near the entrance, in a relatively small closure. I have never visited an art exhibition here before, so I didn’t know what to expect. Anyway, I started exploring Niah McGiff’s paintings one by one. There were about 20 in there, medium to large sizes. At that time, I did not know the idea or the history behind these paintings, and I only saw the banner that is the main photo of this post. That was giving me impressionism vibes so I thought that would be timely, given the current art book that I’m reading. I quickly became disappointed. In a sense they were impressionistic, but so much so, that they got lost to me. Here is a pic why:
There was barely any definition of anything. Most of them were sort of light colours smudged, with sometimes some human forms or body parts visible. It was more like a warmup sketchbook before you start working on something more meaningful.
I later learned the meaning behind it, as it says on the website:
“Many of the paintings begin on top of older works. What started as a practical decision to reuse canvases has gradually become central to McGiff’s practice. Rather than completely covering what came before, she allows earlier marks and passages of paint to remain visible beneath the surface. The process of painting over, scraping back and repainting has become closely tied to the way she thinks about identity and memory. Just as previous paintings continue to exist within the new image, our experiences continue to shape us without ever fully disappearing. Each painting holds multiple histories at once, allowing the surface itself to become a record of change over time.”
It sounds nice, and I can imagine really amazing paintings emerging with this practice. Even though these are “older works”, considering I could see that she’s been through academic work by that time (judging by anatomical lines and hands/fingers from other paintings I did not take photos of), they still landed flat to me, unfortunately.
From an established and emerging artist who has the art education behind her and won awards and having her galleries travel around the world, this gallery was underwhelming to me. I’m sure she has masterpieces, though, but to me these paintings seemed like they were the “expendables” for this free entry gallery.
(Interesting thought emerged here while I was writing:
Does an artist need to have any masterpieces? No.
Can they create whatever they want? Pretty much.
Does she create from feelings? Absolutely.
If she creates from feelings, what separates a masterpiece from a non-masterpiece?
Well, to counter that, what separates a child’s smudged colours from an established artist’s “masterpiece”?)
I just checked her official website, and this seems to be her style, so it’s just the matter of taste.
She has it in her what I would be amazed by, though, because of the painting on her bio photo.
Look how awesome that is:
If she would create more of these type, I would be a big fan, and I’d copy for practice because I’m not sure I’m capable of that.
Anyway. She creates whatever and however she wants. Everyone, especially artists, has their own path and speed. She is still very young, with a lot going for her, so worth keeping a tab. I’m grateful to have experienced a time of her experimentational work. I hope to see future work of hers that would touch me like that bio painting.
viC