I am tempted....

to leave you my impressions about the Month Of the Photograph of Montreal.


But I prefer to wait to finish my race.


I will not be making gifts: I will categorize each exhibit by order of preference because this exercise obliges me to decide which is better from what is less.


The presentation of this year is completely unequal, what could seem foreseeable, but not when one remembers former editions much more acute, containing a lesser number of artists, brought together in a couple groups at some larger places (at least with regard to the principal set of themes).

What will delight several viewers, is that this year there are really many many "photographs". Finished the time when any medium could be used to support
any interpretation of certain concepts of photography.


I missed some important conferences that I wish I could be reading somewhere (if only the Month published the results of its conferences... It seems to me that it is the first goal of this program to propose a debate).


The presentation by Michael Snow at Uqam Gallery wasn't too enthousiastic. The man had allowed himself to read a long curriculum vitae describing his career, which seemed to me a little redundant, or worse, which had helped me observe the redundancy in the recent works of this otherwise important artist introduced at this gallery.

It should be said that a certain air panic had taken me having to sway through an incredible number of students present there. I would be curious to be able to read the myriads of school papers which will surely be written by the end of the season about this small exhibit of Snow. Hmmm... Good blood, I did not say my last word on this subject.

In short, Snow discussed about the motif of the "window" which forms the corpus of the works presented until Saturday at Uqam, motif which was the subject of some major works of his unfortunately missing in the present event.

Photographs of windows, objects taking the shapes of windows, and photographs borrowing the form or the perspective of the window: in short, structural exercises playing on the framing quality and the permissiveness of the medium of the image.


Jesus, Cedric, aren't you just repeating in your own words the press release of Martha Langford?


In fact, I am trying to warn you, so that if you decide to go than you know what you are up to: simple and austere art, for the amateurs of conceptual demonstrations. It is not exactly the opening towards the imaginary that was promissed by Langford. It would even act as a serious blocking in this favour.

The imaginary, with Snow, is within his way of demonstrating, of fabricating photographic "objects", which sometimes almost denounces the medium.

Finally, Snow is a great "patenteux" of the conceptual era.



My choices for the Month Of the Photograph of Montreal for those of you who do not intend to see everything, are as follows:

- Michael Snow at Uqam, all the same, for the event itself (that finishes Saturday)

- Tracey Moffat at the Museum Of the Fine Arts of Montreal

- Diane Borsato at Occurence

- Karen Brett at La Centrale (that finishes Sunday)

- Alain Bublex and company at Maison Of the Frontenac Culture (that finishes Sunday)

- Adad Hannah at B-312 (that finishes Saturday)

- Iain Baxter at Vox

- Les Revenants at MAI Centre.


One spoke to me in good terms about Uncertain Places exhibit at Saydie Bronfman
centre, but I remain perplexed until my visit.


You missed Evergon, but a section of his works is at the gallery Three Points until Saturday.

You missed another beautiful exhibit on the 2nd floor of Art Mûr. Too bad.

You missed Robert ParkeHarrison at Toho-Bohu but you can always get the book.


I did not yet decide on the subject of my favorites for this events, but I believe that the choices listed above have more chance to be appreciated (except Michael Snow) by a greater number of people. It is a big taboo in a country where art is subventionned to make the difference between an "interesting" art and a "fascinating" art. Through reading the official statements written by Martha Langford for the event, she does not seem to make the difference. But for this blog, I take the audacity to establish this distinction.



There are also works which are fascinating for the bad reasons...


I will be back.


Cedric Caspesyan

centiment@hotmail.com




Addendum (the morning after):


Ok, ok, last minute surprise heart pop during the Month Of the Photograph in Montreal:

Add this to the yesterday list:

- Lynn Marsh: "Crater" at the Cinémathèque.

I did not expect it would raise me that much, since I had not enjoyed very much what I had seen from this artist before.

You have 3 days left to visit this work. It will only take you a tiny 5 minutes to see the whole thing, but, to come back to something I said earlier, I think that
we can speak about fascination with this work.

Fascination is like esthetics: a perspectivist question, therefore of taste.

And yet, there are processes which seem all ready to fascinate, and it is exactly the impression which arises from experiencing Crater by Lynn Marsh.


More about it later,




PS2: the artist Roadsworth will discuss at the gallery Zeke next Sunday evening. Alas, I will probably not be abe to make it. The artist seems to not have gotten along with the galerist to present his (first?) solo exhibit. Please ask him if he intends to exhibit documents of his street art at some point. Examples of his stencils, explanations about his choices of motifs, etc... His Bicycle path recently presented by Quartier Éphémère had re-assured me about the relevance of his work (not forgetting the artist's talent).