Jane Alexander's 'African Adventure' - A New Perspective
by Maren Ziese
Part One
There seems to be no real questioning of Jane Alexander's work in South African art-criticism and academic circles. From what has been produced it seems that curators, critics and academics think that questions surrounding one of Africa's most important artists have been settled. Typical criticism normally centres on the fact that she is reticent, that her art is political, that her art is enigmatic and difficult to define, spooky and scary. I believe that closer scrutiny of the uniqueness and innovation of Alexander's newer works can potentially unearth a wealth of other interesting meanings.
According to Marilyn Martin, Director for Iziko Art Collections, Alexander's 'African Adventure' differs from her earlier work "in that organic materials such as earth and animal skin are combined with well-used implements and toys, wooden boxes, a brightly painted drum, fine fabrics and ornaments. These elements disrupt and alter the clinical austerity of her earlier installations". (1) In her review for ArtThrob Kathryn Smith hints at new ideas contained in 'African Adventure', but she does not develop her thoughts, and merely states what Simon Njami has said before.
The art critic Simon Njami is the only person who has made the effort to unearth new meaning in Alexander's work, and problematise her biography. His essay in the Daimler Chrysler exhibition catalogue is interesting and new for two reasons. Firstly, he is truly critical and does not safely regurgitate old ideas about her work. He also criticises the formal and technical quality of some of her works of art. Secondly, he is one of the very few critics to generate specific arguments regarding her work. The claim that the work is too complex has left most critics simply describing the artworks, without engaging them properly. A potential controversy and lively discussion of the work has thus fallen by the way.
Simon Njami has proposed at least two theses about 'African Adventure', both of which I want to refute in this article. Njami states: "The most recent piece, 'African Adventure', seems to me emblematic of the new vein Alexander has chosen to follow." (2) Regarding this first argument, he describes the latest characters created by the artist as different to her earlier figures. "Humanised memories of the monsters of earlier years, these playfully intrepid little characters suddenly become recognisable elements of a specific context, whereas up until then Alexander had been bent on describing an imaginary world in which she forced us to strive after connections with a suggested reality. In the works mentioned, it is as if a book has opened, spilling its secrets.
"The setting and the characters are suddenly part of a tangible reality, in spite of her masks and their physical deformities. The title, the positioning of the subject and the implicit criticism of an all-embracing system bring us to a work that suddenly begins to speak." Njami then demands: "An exposed work must be coded, encrypted. It must demand an effort." Njami's second thesis states that he sees "this work as a tableau, reassembling the elements of a sparse, scattered world. Like the end of a historical period, of a section of a life".
I agree that something new is afoot here, but I also do not totally agree with Njami. At first glance, one might agree (with Simon Njami's opinion) that the artwork is easily read. Some of the 'African Adventure' sculptures are depicted in her photomontages, and share the same title. They are shown in a specific context. The visitor can see them on Cape Town's Long Street, for example. Here the overall theme of street kids is visualised. But on a second reading, all is not as Njami believes. I do not think that the artist makes art that is only retroactive. I believe, that she uses 'African Adventure' as a staring point and that a visionary perspective is inscribed in 'African Adventure'. In addition she has not ceased to code her work.
In my careful consideration, 'African Adventure' is completely enigmatic and complex in its structure, techniques and appearance. The spectator cannot gain an overview or a very deep understanding of it as the artist uses new techniques to conceal her work, to keep its secrets. It is just that no one has seen that until now. This is by far Alexander's most extensive project, and most of the issues that it raises are intangible and hidden. My arguments in this regard are based on at least six observations, quantitative as well as qualitative.
Firstly, the work consists of three series of photomontage (37 single images in total); 15 sculptures; and three videotapes, each running on a separate screen. Part of this project also includes works in progress, such as the installation in the British Officers' mess. This is vast. Secondly, one title encompasses a variety of media: video, photomontage, digital projection, one site specific work and a performance acted out in a work in progress video piece.
The third observation relates to the new forms of temporal and thematic connections that exist between parts of the works within 'African Adventure', connections noticed by other writers too. These connections occur vertically: old figures are reinvented, repeated and transformed, and elements exist in relation to older, themes and topics. Horizontal connections also occur: the sculptures of the installation are simultaneously depicted in the videos and photomontages. The figure called 'Harvester', for example, is shown in at least four photomontage series, in the video 'Meal with Harvester and Grain', and as part of a site-specific work at the Castle of Good Hope.
This renders the work supremely complex. The site-specific work for the Castle of Good Hope, for instance, contains at least seven iconographic allusions to different African and South African historical periods:
1. the russet coloured earth points to the ancestral history of the country and Khoisan;
2. the Castle of Good Hope embodies, among other things, the early colonial history of South Africa;
3. the refugee from Kinshasa can be seen in the context of 19th century colonial history, around the time of the Berlin Congo Conference (1884/85);
4. the refugee also symbolises the period of African independence, the Congo one of the first countries to gain political independence (1960);
5. the refugee also hearkens to the civil wars of the latter part of the 20th century;
6. the black man stands for one aspect of the present situation of South Africa and the Democratic Republic of Congo;
7. the 'Pangaman' refers to a popular Apartheid-era myth from South Africa.
This list of complex references could be added to endlessly.
By reworking old pieces Alexander ensures that her entire oeuvre lives. This constant intertextualising, a fourth point in my argument, means that nothing is closed. This is clarified by the artist in a quote describing 'African Adventure' as "a confluence of related fragments". Alexander has also stated that, "this installation has been in progress since 1999". (3) This begs the question: when before has the artist worked with fragments, with unfinished pieces that have been extended and continued with whenever she likes? When was "confluence" a characteristic of her work before?
The open, process-oriented character of 'African Adventure' is exemplified by the movement of the sculptural figures between media embodies my fifth observation. At first glance, it seemed that the artist positioned her sculpture through photomontage in a specific place with a specific significance. But, the figures then move from sculpture to photo, from photo to video, between the three and back. They are here and there simultaneously, they exist now and then, they are omni-present. Take the 'Harbinger', which runs through different photomontages. And the Congo refugee: aside from being a part of the installation at the Castle of Good Hope, he is well depicted in a photomontage called 'Mountain View - Safety Class 6 x', and is also a protagonist in the new video works.
This point leads to my sixth, and final, point in my argument, the secretive qualities to 'African Adventure'. For Njami, Alexander's sculptures are easy to understand. Personally, however, I do not think they are. It is not just their horizontal and vertical movement. The figures in 'African Adventure' are hybrid (sic) in a different way than before. Quite possibly it is difficult for South Africans, who are too aware and constrained by the more obvious political masks and forms, to see these new expressiveness in the media.
Previously the hybridity of Alexander's work has manifested itself in surface and form, in the mingling of references. But in 'African Adventure' there are media-hybrids. The figures exist simultaneously as video image, in photomontage and as three-dimensional form. They creep like chameleons between media, and meaning is, to an extent, contingent on the intrinsic dictates of those media. For example, the 'Harvester' wears a plastic bag over his head in a photomontage and is also depicted in different positions/ perspectives in other photomontages. A question springs to mind: is this still the same figure, or is it meant to symbolise somebody new?
All these points contrast with Simon Njami's thesis of some sort of conclusion in the work. This is not true for 'African Adventure'. Asked about Simon Njami's opinion, the artist explained: "I don't think it is a summary or conclusion. It does bring together a number of areas I have explored in earlier works but also additional elements. As I am not sure where my work will go from here, it may be a conclusion of some aspects, but I don't know yet and I tend to repeat areas of my work". (4)
Because of the different techniques the artist employs, she eludes closure in her artworks, easy interpretation, and an overall understanding. Her works of art can only be understood piecemeal, as fragments and as extracts. Why does the artist employ this strategy? And how are we to interpret elements like openness, dispersal, transgression of border/limits, process and movement, transformation and connection? What does the escape of her figures from their specific contexts mean, and why are viewers and critics lead to believe that they are easily readable and containable? And finally, why not view Jane Alexander as a vigorous visionary with a tricky, experimental attitude - not the dead serious mistress of history?
References:
(1) Martin, M., 2002, 'Art in a State of Disquiet and Metamorphosis - reflections on the work of Jane Alexander', paper for the Exhibition Talk DaimlerChrysler Contemporary Berlin, 15th September 2002.
(2) Njami, S., 2002, 'A Turbulent Silence', in Jane Alexander, DaimlerChrysler Award for South African Sculpture 2002, Hatje Cantz, Stuttgart, p. 18-19.
(3) Jane Alexander quoted by Njami, S., 2002, Ibid.
(4) Ziese, M., Interview with Jane Alexander, 4th December 2002.
Maren Ziese completed a Masters in Contemporary Art in Berlin and will undertake a PhD programme in African Studies/Museum Studies in New York. She worked at the South African National Gallery with Emma Bedford. Her thesis on Jane Alexander, which will be published soon, discusses concepts and theories of space in 'African Adventure' and outlines different approaches to Alexander's oeuvre.
Opens: April 26
Closes: July 27
South African National Gallery, Government Avenue, Company Gardens, Cape Town
Tel: (021) 481-3823 from 8:30am-1pm
Fax: (021) 461 0045
Email: ebedford@iziko.org.za
Website: www.museums.org.za/sang
Hours: Tues - Sun 10am - 5pm
