Patrick
Murphy’s Belonging is an engaging response to this year’s
biennial theme Hospitality. Around 150
brightly coloured birds adorn both the interior and exterior of the Walker art
gallery in a laudable attempt to denote the nature of impermanence, as well as
the concept of the uninvited guest.
Commonly regarded as a familiar eye sore, a nuisance and banished from city centres, pigeons are utilised as a societal symbol within Murphy’s piece to comment on both acceptance and marginalisation. Murphy contradicts the typical urban context of pigeons in this piece – he depicts them as colorful, welcome visitors, evidently challenging the inhospitable reception they tend to receive. The pigeons can be seen to represent any social group or individual who is unable to find a place of innate belonging and acceptance, as well as those who frequently feel inclined to take ‘flight’. I believe that the piece not only addresses the concept of belonging in a physical sense, but in a physiological and emotional sense also. For instance, one may feel that they physically belong somewhere, like their hometown or place of residence, but mentally or emotionally they may feel differently; in other words, it is possible that a person could be discriminated or alienated in a place that they physically belong. Despite the aesthetic artificiality of the piece and its initial sense of playfulness, there are obviously some profound and moving messages within it. It is certainly a shame that the aesthetic does not initially promote this to the viewer. I feel that the playful aesthetic, which is primarily evoked by the lurid array of colours it possesses, may be liable to falsely convincing viewers that it is more of a novelty piece than it is an engaging and evocative one.
In a sociological sense I also feel that the piece is a response to hierarchy, as being a familiar sighting within the city, the pigeons can be regarded as an emblem of commonplace, and thus the everyday working class individual. With these arguable symbols of the working class infesting the Victorian architecture of the Walker we are reminded that the accessibility of the gallery has developed since it was first established in 1877. During the Victorian era the working class individual would obviously be less welcome to a gallery such as Walker than they are in present day, where anyone regardless of social background, age or culture can take advantage of its engaging collections.
Having recently visited the Walker and having seen this piece in the flesh I believe it is unquestionable that Murphy’s lurid flock of artificial birds have a conspicuous presence amongst the striking Victorian architecture of the Walker and William Brown Street. I just hope that the conspicuous aesthetic adopted by Murphy within this piece does not distract its viewers from the profundity and evocative nature of its interesting sociological context.
Commonly regarded as a familiar eye sore, a nuisance and banished from city centres, pigeons are utilised as a societal symbol within Murphy’s piece to comment on both acceptance and marginalisation. Murphy contradicts the typical urban context of pigeons in this piece – he depicts them as colorful, welcome visitors, evidently challenging the inhospitable reception they tend to receive. The pigeons can be seen to represent any social group or individual who is unable to find a place of innate belonging and acceptance, as well as those who frequently feel inclined to take ‘flight’. I believe that the piece not only addresses the concept of belonging in a physical sense, but in a physiological and emotional sense also. For instance, one may feel that they physically belong somewhere, like their hometown or place of residence, but mentally or emotionally they may feel differently; in other words, it is possible that a person could be discriminated or alienated in a place that they physically belong. Despite the aesthetic artificiality of the piece and its initial sense of playfulness, there are obviously some profound and moving messages within it. It is certainly a shame that the aesthetic does not initially promote this to the viewer. I feel that the playful aesthetic, which is primarily evoked by the lurid array of colours it possesses, may be liable to falsely convincing viewers that it is more of a novelty piece than it is an engaging and evocative one.
In a sociological sense I also feel that the piece is a response to hierarchy, as being a familiar sighting within the city, the pigeons can be regarded as an emblem of commonplace, and thus the everyday working class individual. With these arguable symbols of the working class infesting the Victorian architecture of the Walker we are reminded that the accessibility of the gallery has developed since it was first established in 1877. During the Victorian era the working class individual would obviously be less welcome to a gallery such as Walker than they are in present day, where anyone regardless of social background, age or culture can take advantage of its engaging collections.
Having recently visited the Walker and having seen this piece in the flesh I believe it is unquestionable that Murphy’s lurid flock of artificial birds have a conspicuous presence amongst the striking Victorian architecture of the Walker and William Brown Street. I just hope that the conspicuous aesthetic adopted by Murphy within this piece does not distract its viewers from the profundity and evocative nature of its interesting sociological context.
No comments:
Post a Comment