BILL
MORRISON
–
REVIEWS & PUBLICATIONS
Artforum
ArtsJournal.com
Highangle
(UK)
The
New York Times
The
New York Times
The
New York Times
Time
Out NY
Variety
Village
Voice
[back
to all artists]
|

Bill
Morrison at Maya Stendhal Gallery, Nov 6 - Jan 15 By
Elizabeth Schambelan
In A Voyage on the North Sea, Rosalind Krauss recalls that in the
late 60’s and early 70’s artists including Richard Serra
and Robert Smithson made a habit of visiting Anthology Film Archives,
where they absorbed the canon of modernist film up to and including
its structuralist endgames. These days, the at world seems
to be in the midst of a similar, if more diffuse, engagement with
the classics of experimental cinema-viz. Stan Brakhage’s
inclusion in the current Whitney Biennial or the modernism-is-dead,
long-live-modernism riffing of film and video artists from Jeremy
Blake to Haluk Akakce to Paul Sietsema. Experimental filmmaker
Bill Morrison’s recent show, which centered on the feature
–length Decasia, 2002, fell into alignment with this convergence;
Morrison’s films, which use decayed footage as medium and
metaphor, elegize the avant-garde tradition of even as they make
the case for its continued relevance.
What preservationists call “visual distraction” –
the derangements of the cinematic image that occur when celluloid
warps, emulsion cracks and blisters, or mold grows between the convolutions
of the reel- is the main event in Decasia. Commissioned to
make a movie to accompany a symphony by composer Michael Gordon,
Morrison trolled film libraries around the US, unearthing decomposing
newsreels, melodramas, and travelogues- most of them printed on
celluloid nitrate, the notoriously nonarchival stock that was in
wide use until 1951. He selected dozens of sequences and edited
them into a sixty-seven-minute black-and-white montage in which
cinematic conventions are repeatedly undone by the special effects
of decay.
These effects are endlessly various: They take shape as flat patterns-
linear striations or Art Nouveau-ish whorls- that appear to etch
themselves on the surface of the image or as billowing maelstroms
or Brownian swarms that appear to engulf the filmic space.
There’s no narrative here and not much intercutting or other
editing-room legerdemain- just a stately procession of decontextualized
clips, many in slow motion. A woman in a kimono emerges from
a nebula of lava lamp blobs; a man at a spinning wheel looks as
if he were lit from within by phosphor; a Jazz Age couple dance
behind a metastasizing colony of black dots. Toward the end,
parachutes descend through murky ether for an impossibly long time.
But to describe these sequences at all necessarily ossifies them,
since language can’t account for their jittery kineticism
(which is heightened by the momentum of Gordon’s atonal minimalist
score). The images’ constant flux defeats the viewer’s
attempts to fix and comprehend them, creating a sense of anxiety
and suspense,that, perhaps, qualifies Decasia as a peculiar kind
of psychological thriller. Here, the bogey is not a sociopathic
villain but the unstable of nature of cultural memory embodied in
its own physical support, which mutates and molders before our eyes.
This is probably the least successful part of Morrison’s show-
which also included three short films that combine found and original
footage- was a trio of silk screens that reproduce rotted, damaged
stills from Decasia and from the short Light is Calling, 2003.
Frozen, decay becomes patina, an attractive finish that proffers
all the comforts of nostalgia.
While Morrison’s concerns with obsolescence and with the archive
place him alongside any number of neo-Conceptualists, Decasia resonates
most strongly on a more reflexive level, where the history of film
itself is specifically engaged. Its aleatory animations point
toward an ironic denouement to the old conflict between representational
and abstract film- what Malevich called, with respective disdain
an approbation, “imitative” cinema and cinema “as
such.” Imitative cinema would seem to have decisively
won the day (not only in the theater, but, arguably, in the white
cube as well). But as Decasia illustrates, Malevich gets the
last laugh: All film, if let to its own devices, will eventually
become cinema as such.
|