Modern art has hit the buffers: a curator’s introduction to an exhibit by a Portuguese painter

A letter from Portugal

“The criterion behind this choice of paintings by Manuel Amadon, now shown at Casa das Historias , that is to say, the various possibilities of creating groups and relations within this universe of images, is freely devised in a curatorial approach that is unrestrained  by any kind of systematic vision or predefined selective methodology.  Even though they share a common subject – the empty but inhabitable spaces of houses, or of theatrical stages and boxes- these pieces, created between 1975 and 2008, only coalesce around an enquiry into a meaning that emerges out of things. “The pictures all have an ominous simplicity,” the curator states.  There is indeed no doubt that Manuel Amado’s work develops out of a mystery that is, in principle, a simple one; normal things are seen from a different angle, and thus our conceptions of subjectivity in comprehending the world may become the real source of the enigma. Each one of these paintings is, then, an exercise in perceiving the invisible in the visible of the piece.  Instead of reflecting the visible , Amado’s painting makes something visible.

The invisible forces in Manuel Amado’s painting are, first of all, the affective ties to the spaces he has inhabited, which are revealed through the memory, not a photographic one, but a reconfigured memory that contains resonances from both the present and the past, the moment in which these spaces are being remembered by the artist through painting. (  ……….and on, and on, and on, etcetera. It gets even worse, I promise you, and I am having to copy it laboriously by hand onto my i- pad.  Enough!)

The paintings were actually rather good.  The painter has a unique and rcognisable style and one could easily imagine one of the paintings on one’s own living room wall.

But where do they find the people to write this gobbledygook, and who is persuaded by it?  It’s an attempt to claim the work is somehow something it is not, a use of language designed to bamboozle the viewer with the use of highflown language, making the comprehensible incomprehensible. Does it add value to the painting? No, it does not.  In fact, it gets between the painter and his potential market and encourages the purchaser to put  his credit card back in his wallet.

2 Comments

  1. I’m fantasizing dining with the curator of Casa das História’s exhibition of Manuel Amadon’s works. I’d insist that we travel to a Florentine trattoria located within walking distance of Giotto’s paintings just to set the mood.

    The curator would look at the menu and I’d interrupt to insist: “Please choose your dinner ‘unrestrained by any kind of systematic vision or predefined selective methodology’.”

    How do you say “rubbish” in Portuguese? As you noted, though, the paintings themselves (via Wiki) are very nice nice to look at.

  2. Totally agreed. Pay a visit to Tate Modern in London. Then go straight to the National Gallery. If you then believe that the former contains the greater art than the latter, you’re either drunk or a fool.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.