Mark Francis Fenning, Polaroid Boys, Ards Art Centre, until 30 June 2018

During a passive contemplation it all looked like polaroids: white framed,  round frame, no frame, and assemblage.  As if multitude of sameness were exercised to include differences.

Mark Francis Fenning with his camera – some eight years after graduation.

As images of male persons, faces or torsos, they tell of identities.  Until the eye gets entangled in the see- through the gossamer of deliberate double, treble exposures.  Something more than likeness is transmitted, intangible but real: conversation of the sight with the lense.

 

To capture the likeness,  identifying the image as a kind of a “portrait”, apparently matters to both the subject and the artist.  It is not just view and click, stimulus and response,  it is  a continuous response.  It is also a  call not to succumb to the current pathology  of cynicism that dismisses anything sincere as  simplistic and to be rejected.

The exhibition is made up of four different formats:

Above are examples of two of them: Framed Polaroid 600 White Frame Photographs  and Large Giclee Polaroid Prints on Hahnemuhle Paper.

The decidedly smaller scale of Lomography wall assemblage (below somewhat flirts with  the spontaneity of too much evidence, hoarding linear narrative into  a vertical axes. In addition – the grid tolerates variables of viewer’s choice.   Observation, viewing and looking   converge, collide and jump over the thematic grouping.  The lens registered both acuity of the vision and its opposites.  It is like inscription on wax tablets in hot weather. A simile Plato applied to memory.

Black & White Polaroid Round Frame ( unframed)

These are the most acute, static, expected, straight images exhibited.   They also support the perception that concerns about the form are indelibly concerns about meaning.  The round  black and white  series deal with time differently from the previously mentioned sets of images, accentuating signs of the past, history, memory as stable. Frozen time.

Looking at each image includes expectations, questions, hunches or theories a viewer has in her/his mind.  And all that  structures and directs viewer’s attention and awareness, as if  illustrating what E Gombrich called “beholder’ s share”.

 

As an image of identity it is not precise, yet, it successfully  approximates identity.  Deciding what is relevant and meaningful  involves hiding what is not relevant.  At times, what is vital is overlaid and hidden  by what was irrelevant.

Fenning’s ingenuity lies in crafting questions about human nature and cognition, directed   against the current obsessions of judging  one gender as flawless and the other as eternally guilty.

Fenning’s friends are autonomous men, free spirits, confident to survive the hysteria which developed after numerous revelations of  serious moral failures.   They will survive and defend  – not just themselves.

The layering of exposures  enables the image to minimise the pathos  of  social constructs of masculinity. Instead, it succeeds in presenting  men  as alive and true individuals, not reducible to gender stereotype. Fenning – it appears to me-  also hints at understated celebration of being.

 

Images courtesy Mark Francis Fenning.

Advertisements

About Slavka Sverakova

writer on art
This entry was posted in essay, review and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

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