Top 5 Weekend Picks! (1/18-1/20)

January 17, 2013 · Print This Article

1. Fearsome Fable – Tolerable Truth at Hyde Park Art Center

tthp

Work by Tom Torluemke.

Hyde Park Art Center is located at 5020 S. Cornell Ave. Reception Sunday, 3-5pm.

2. Observer Effect at Gallery 400

17_01_49_701_file

Curated by Carrie Gundersdorf and Lorelei Stewart, with work by Jessica Hyatt, John O’Connor, and Steve Roden.

Gallery 400 is located at 400 S. Peoria St. Reception Friday, 5-8pm.

3. Archipelago, Lost Islands of the Atlantic at AdventureLand Gallery

new003

Work by Janie Stamm.

AdventureLand Gallery is located at 1513 N. Western Ave. Reception Friday, 7-10pm.

4. Stretches Topless at The Plaines Project

stretches-image

Work by Sarah Mendelsohn.

The Plaines Project is located at 1822 S. Desplaines St. Reception Saturday, 7-10pm.

5. Burkhart’s Underground at Alibi Fine Art

burkhart034

Work by Fred Burkhart.

Alibi Fine Art is located at 1966 W. Montrose Ave. Reception Saturday, 7-10pm.




New ‘Centerfield’ Post on Art:21 Blog: Nicholas O’Brien on Gallery 400′s ‘File Type’

June 29, 2011 · Print This Article

Christopher Meerdo, "Cypher," 2011 (.aes-256 file). Courtesy Gallery 400.

Our latest Centerfield column is up on Art:21 blog. This week, Nicholas O’Brien takes a look at Gallery 400′s current exhibition, File Type, which looks at how “formats… represent ways that artwork in digital or Internet media create particular standards of representation.” Nicholas also talks to the show’s curators, Lorelei Stewart and Chaz Evans, about their ideas behind the show. A brief excerpt below; click on over to Art:21 to read the full post!

When I initially saw the promotional poster for File Type, currently on view at University of Illinois at Chicago’s Gallery 400, I was immediately intrigued by the curatorial premise posed by curators Chaz Evans and Lorelei Stewart regarding how “formats… represent ways that artwork in digital or Internet media create particular standards of representation” (quoted from the curatorial statement). The variety of artists selected for the exhibition — a combination of local, national, and international makers – would have given me enough reason by itself for me to attend the opening. As I entered the space and browsed the works on display, I felt my curiosity continue in ways that I had not expected when initially considering the above statement by Evans and Stewart. Even after I left the show, questions kept reappearing and presenting themselves to me with intense frequency. Initially, I couldn’t help but question why some works were displayed on flat panel monitors as opposed to computer screens and as I continued to peruse the show, I wondered how the mounting of a physical show reflecting on the effects of network technology on artistic inquiry inevitably varies from a digital exhibition of identical material (something that perhaps I have had more comfort in discussing as of late). Can an exhibition highlight recursive dialogues between the language of the screen and the language of the gallery? Is there a sense of irony in the idea of a file type, since a great majority of the works deal with the translation and fluidity between codecs and mediums, as opposed to the static state of objects that galleries and museums tend to support and reenforce? Without outright calling File Type a “media art show,” how does this show effect the reception of the work, or even more importantly effect my (and the viewer’s) understanding of “media art?”

As these questions bubbled around in my brain, I decided take the initiative and voice these queries to the curators themselves. (Read more).