Chris Ofili @ The National Portrait Gallery, Sunley Rooms
ZM
Emoji summary: š šø š
I havenāt been to the National Gallery in fucking agesĀ but i went to see the Chris Ofili show. I donāt spend too much time in the company of paintings; theyāre not my kinda people. But tucked away was this lil room, and iād read Adrian Searleās preposterous review (lol my laptop just autocorrected Searle to Seattle. puny man) so off i went to have a peep.
So you enter and thereās a nice lil reception room; like a hallway in a house, that in between space. And frames hung on the wall. Lil drawings, practice/plans, studies. My fave bit was a series of collages: Mario Balotelliās sideways, disembodied head floating above a drawn on body, large and cartoon comedy, a waiter pouring champagne into those flat, fat glasses. Someone once told me they were moulded from a french womanās tit. I said thatās a weird looking tit bc in my mind i was still imagining that long champagne glass. It took me a few months to realise that those are the kinda inevitable mix ups u have when u speak to posh white ppl. There was something about the way humour and whimsy was balanced, precariously, in these collages. I liked that cheekiness. Like on MTV, on Ex on the Beach, a lad is being proper cheeky so in his cutaway voiceover heās playing it deadpan but then a lil glimpse when he makes eye contact with the camera and his tongue sticks outta his mouth for too long.
AND THEN; you peel off to your left and another room with enormous high ceilings, empty almost completely apart from a tapestry covering the wall facing the entrance. ~So showstopper~. But even though the room was empty, it was enough as company goes. The space felt like it closed in around you a bit because of the greyscale figures painted on the length of the wall. And the harsh colour against the greyscale walls made me feel partly like i was in a well lit, cost cave. But also that expansive-ness of the room, high ceilings, tunnel-vision, focussed in on one particular spot. I felt like this was a moment to applaud the object of that tapestryā¦. maybe? idk man. I feel like i could speak about how this room felt; but actually itās one of those things. Maybe you do have to go to this one this time, maybe itās useless for me to try & translate it through myself. Maybe i canāt, i donāt feel strongly enough (iām only writing this out of spite towards Adrian), maybe it was such a slight, subtle thing that i donāt quite know what it is yet? I know we write about what it felt like to be in the room, how we experienced it. And tbh our jobs as writers is not to be good at using words, itās to be good at locating and describing as faithfully as possible, our feelings. BUT. also. This felt like a joke I wasnāt in on. Like when ur at a party and ur talking to two ppl who are bestest friends. And theyāve got their in jokes and they try and include you, so you laugh along a lil, but you donāt laugh as hard, and itās not quite as funny to you. Like that, but likeā¦ i wasnāt mad. Itās fine.
This show is called āWeaving Magicā which is a kinda sucky name. The tapestry as an individual object has a different name: āThe Caged Birdās Songā. Obvs, Maya. Maya, Mario, these broad spaces and the feeling of being in a rich personās hallway where they put up a ~showstopper~ wall mounted thing by the coat stand. I feel like maybe this show was talking broadly about blackness and boujeeness. In the slightest, subtlest way,,,, engaging with that narrative only dipping its toes in. but as i say that, iām also not sure. There was a film, an interview with Chis Ofili explaining the show off on the right in the hallway room. I wish iād sat & watched now a lil bit. But also, iām happy with the instability of leaving me in a precarious place when I ask myself what it meant. Iām glad it took me a couple of paragraphs to explain what it was. Iām not mad at it. I think it endears me to it that lil bit more.
But, I say this ^^^ bc i read Adrian Seattleās review (hahahahah not even gonna bother correcting that). I was gonna write this review only as a review of his review. But idk if a hot take is the right thing. I wana also talk about the actual show, and i wana do that without writing through him and his words. SO i will address him as a footnote. ACTUALLY. Below i will copy & paste a highlights reel of his review. If u actually wana read it just google āadrian searle chris ofiliā iām not gonna link to it or post screenshots bc he is quite frankly a cretin. But iām not gonna explain why his review was beyond problematic and actually kinda laughably preposterous; if you donāt know, iām not gonna explain it to you. Too often poc are asked politely to perform free emotional labour explaining the trauma of ~all this~ to yt ppl. I am not that polite or generous today. Today I am tired. but the internet never forgets and i took receipts:
"Part Hindu or Balinese temple dancers, part Botticelli floosies, or ethnic exotics in a tourist-trap floorshow. Some have fancifulĀ Fu ManchuĀ beards and ornate moustaches.ā (fu manchu is a rly tenuous reference when it comes to the problem-meter btw)
also: ETHNIC EXOTICS?????????????????????????????????ĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæĀæ????????????????
āBeside the drinker on the beach, her naked companion plays a vaguely oriental stringed instrument and seems to sing"
āa woman in fancy evening wear, and on the other by a man (I suppose it is a he, but you canāt really tell, there being so many moustaches about the place) carrying a birdcage."
"Who knows what this exotic reverie means.ā
āWhat elixir, what poison pours from the cocktail shaker?āĀ -Ā this isnāt problematic, itās just extra and i literallyĀ laughed out loud when i read it.
Weaving Magic is on @ the National Gallery in the Sunley Room until 28th August