Art for Pretenders

In an increasingly critical art world, Julie Rrap cannot put a digitally manipulated foot wrong. Lets think about why Australians have so eagerly jumped aboard the Rrap bandwagon, and how her current exhibition, Body Double, is forcing its viewers to double take.

Walking into the current Julie Rrap exhibition at the Museum of Contemporary Arts is a confronting experience, particularly for those who feel uncomfortable with viewing the naked body anywhere but the bedroom.Rrap forces us to leave our comfort zones at the door with Body Double, an unyielding and subversive retrospective encompassing twenty-five years of her practice. And while we argue internally with ourselves on whether to run cowardly back to the main lobby where we can dabble in the less challenging exhibition on the bottom floor or tediously post-modern exhibition on the next, or whether to bravely indulge in the damning social commentary and sexual confrontation that Rrap’s pieces have to offer, the photographs and installations wait.

Rrap has produced a body of work that is not only a surprisingly powerful and capturing experience for all, but also one that transcends the years and attitudes in which she has worked. As Rrap uses her body as a vehicle to express her creative ideals and social perceptions, curator Victoria Lynn uses the gallery space to enhance the journey and as they work in harmony, we critical gallery-goers realise that this is a terrain worth exploring.John Tagg likens every exhibition to a metaphorical map. This map “separates, defines and describes a certain terrain, marking its salient features and significant points, omitting and simplifying others, yet depicting the ground according to a method of projection: a set of conventions and rules under which the map is constructed” (Tagg: 1979, p70).

This metaphor becomes relevant when examining the way in which Body Double has been curated to define and enhance its audience’s experience and perceptions of the works. This idea of the ultimate construction is further supported by Bruce Ferguson who asserts ‘there is a plan to all exhibitions, a will or technological hierarchy of significance, which is its dynamic undercurrent” (1996, p175). So what was the plan, how does the undercurrent run?Lets first consider the name of the exhibition.

Body Double. As Tagg suggests, “the name of an exhibition helps to construct a position and a viewpoint from an inside that looks out…to title is to entitle”. Just as a map labelled “treasure map” alerts us to the fact that the document will steer its beholder towards an unknown treasure, we grasp at, and are intrigued by the clues in the title of Rrap’s exhibition. As one enters the Museum of Contemporary Arts, where the exhibition is displayed, one is met with the words Body Double and their accompanying image. It is an image that will be given greater context later on in its place on the wall amongst its contemporaries, however here it serves to intrigue and give light to the title of the exhibition. We may understand that concepts of sexuality, discontentment and popular culture will all come into play. Different aspects of the body as an experience, as a phenomenon, will be addressed.

So as we begin to explore our luscious artistic landscape, we are met with the first plot on the metaphorical map. Stepping out of the elevator we arrive face to face with a life size photograph of Julie Rrap. She stares at us with an expression that is a mixture of apathy and concentration. She is naked and seems uncomfortable, with parts of her body encased in plaster moulds. Another image of Rrap hangs next to this one on the wall. They are part of the Vital Statistics 1997 collection, which is completed by the plaster mould sculptures that are arranged in front of the photographs.Brian Ferguson discusses a theory that, in relation to the exhibition, the desire of a public is “to establish a proper distance from the art on display and to have a reasonable debate about it. To be too close would be to be blindly identified with the objects, the definitions of fetishism, a closeness which is uncomfortable” (1996, p182).

If this is in fact the case, then Rrap has called upon fetishism and decided discomfort from the get-go with Vital Statistics. We are encouraged to approach and examine these moulds up close, taking in every crevice, curve and acknowledging the imperfections. The moulds facilitate a sense of intimacy with the artist, one that continues as we follow the Body Double map.Taking a right turn, which seems the natural progression, one enters into a hallway so wide that it may be considered another room with only two walls.

On one of these walls we are given a treat. Overstepping, 2001-the image which has been prominent on catalogues, posters, and press releases advertising the exhibition as well as on the cover of contemporary art magazines- is hung here in its true form. It is striking in its rightful size (which isn’t all that large at 120 × 120cm) and relieving for its audience. No doubt, having shown interest in the work of Julie Rrap one would have come across this image of a woman’s feet bearing fleshy stiletto heels that appear like natural extensions of the feet. Finding it here, relatively near the beginning of one’s journey instigates an element of smug understanding. We have seen it before and we understand the joke. It tells us we can continue exploring because we deserve to be here.

The map leads us to an expansive space in our terrain. We find ourselves in a large room, in which the Soft Targets, 2004 and Fallout, 2006 collections share space. Large photographs, again digitally manipulated to form a series of confronting images, hang in a symmetrical manner. The images have not been frames and instead hang thinly, as if they have been precariously stuck on with bluetac. This has the valuable effect of creating a workshop or studio environment, drawing the audience closer into the photographs and inturn closer to the artist herself (Pearce: 1994).The sense of space in this room may be overwhelming if it not for the low sculptural installations placed seemingly unsystematically on the floor in front of us.

These installations function as sensual environments that consume the space. They are plaster moulds which show where Rrap has come and gone and invite the viewer to follow in her footsteps. They exude a sense of play that encourages the visitor to cross the threshold from observer to performer by actively engaging in Rrap’s work. The codes of “civilised and decorous behaviour” in the gallery that Tony Bennett discusses (1995, p165) are thrown out the window as hands and feet explore the artwork. Shoes are removed, bodies contorted. Television screens are positioned in front of these moulds so that the fearless participant can watch their every move. One can’t help but think that Rrap is touching upon and experimenting with the “relations of power”, which Ferguson believes “surge and course through the exhibition environment” (1996, p 184).

At the same time, we must not downplay Victoria Lynn’s role in establishing and determining our experience. We enter the next room on our voyage and find a series of nine small screens, each playing its own film. Each a mini-artwork in itself. It may be presumptuous to say that the collection Porous Bodies, 1999 would not be as effective displayed any other way than the way it has been here, however constricting these minor works into a frame and constraint that refelects their size and nature seems a logical and aethetically sound choice. Conituning along to another room we find Disclosures, 1982 a series of photographs of Rrap exploring different artistic and photographic mediums in her workshop. Somewhat resembling film stills, the images are numerous, yet effective in their numbers and individual discrepancies. Everything from the size, scale, blurred resolutions and disregard of logic denotes a kind of chaos, but at the same time, creates a strongly Romantic effect. By hanging the images from the roof by fishing wire, Lynn creates a regimented structure that counteracts such chaos and allows the audience to view the artworks at eye level.

They move through the room, following a set path, absorbing the photographs in the order that works best aesthetically and conceptually.Any subject for Rrap - whether it is the body, the portrait, gendered motifs or cultural references - invites the possibility of endless speculation. While the subjects are central, it is the response and individual experience of each viewer that makes Rrap’s work so powerful. Drawing upon the performative aspect of exhibiting (Ferguson: 1996) as well as Tagg’s concept of the exhibition as the map, Victoria Lynn has ensured that there‘s quite a journey to be had though this terrain of photography, video, sculpture and installation. It is a journey that takes the artist’s voice and projects it, encourages interaction, dialogue and conversation, stimulates debate and ensures that we, the happy gallery-goer, will leave no less uncomfortable than we were when we arrived.