“Voyager,” work by Mariella Bettineschi
Museum of New Art
May 20 – June 30, 2005

 

by
Christina Hill

 

It shouldn’t be 90 degrees in Michigan in May – air conditioning after we’ve just paid off those astronomical winter heating bills?! Speaking of astronomy, witness the work of the Italian artist Mariella Bettineschi at the Museum of New Art in Pontiac for the month of June. In a too-gushy press release, the artist explains that her work is “an exploratory voyage inside and outside of ourselves, from Duchampian figures and sidereal spaces to astronauts and flying machines.” Excuse me? But her works’ cool formalism, specifically her photographic “sandwiches” -- made by pressing black and white images onto plexiglass and backing them with mirrors – is visually chilly, if not “chilling” (meaning superlative). “Sidereal,” which I had to look up, is defined as “of or relating to the stars.” Bettineschi does play with imagery of distant orbs in dark freezing galaxies quite decoratively in these pieces, almost as with polka dots.

Bettineschi’s work does have a cosmic elegance. The deep silvers (from the mirrors) and the strong blacks of the photographic prints suggest otherworldly and eccentric realms: stormy (not the typically luminous) cloudscapes as if seen from an airplane window, Alice having fallen into the bowels of a giant camera, silhouettes of primeval nocturnal beasts as if seen with night-vision goggles, eerie phases of a moon familiar to a planet other than Earth, a geometrically-patterned kimono as powerful in design as a lethal weapon. She also dabbles in science fiction clichés, as in: “oh my god space ships have landed!” (Why that, now?) Yet, her photographic process is intriguing, as are the results. As interpreted by artist John Cynar, “it feeds and devours the image at the same time.”

Bettineschi does, then, manage to carry viewers “towards an unknown dimension” (another claim from the press release, funded generously, as is its catalogue and its visits to seven cities in the United States, by S. Pelligrino, the fizzy water people). As concerns her faux-Duchampian “Large Glass” – I refuse to go there. MONA’s director, Jef Bourgeau, claims the small model on display here – with black machine-like diagrams à la Duchamp sophomorically drawn on plexiglass pieces and installed as if sails on a boat – is less powerful than Bettineschi’s larger-scale replication of Duchamp’s singular piece displayed in Santa Monica. Could be. But Duchamp’s work was specific to its historical context: the disillusionment of avant-garde artists with the horrific results of World War I and the Dadaists’ resolve to negate all artistic values of the past with their nihilistic work. That attitude cannot be replicated, especially with a corporate sponsor, nor should it be for any reason I can think of. But call me an idealist.

In another series of work, Bettineschi experiments with the optical effects of swirling colors fused fancifully onto discs, discs which are then hinged onto the gallery wall at various angles. The installation creates a pleasant play of bouncing colored shadows, pretty to look at. But I am forced to note that while Bettineschi’s play with color and shadow is amusing, it doesn’t provide the viewer a powerfully hallucinogenic experience like Bridget Riley’s groundbreaking Op Art work (whose brilliant retrospective was recently at Cranbrook), which is unforgettable. Bettineschi’s work is merely a shadow (yes, a pun) of Riley’s, albeit with the distinctive imprint of classic, modernist Italian design which remains alluring and eye catching.

But I must ask, why has Bettineschi chosen to do a “riff” on Riley? A riff on Duchamp? A riff on Man Ray’s photographic experiments from the early 20th century? Giancinto Di Pietrantonio, who wrote the effusive catalogue, claims that “in a singular way, Marielle Bettineschi is a mystic.” Is Bettineschi’s “mysticism” and “singularity” to be found in her “channeling” of the historical avant-garde? So while her craftsmanship is admirable and her imagination does take the viewer to worthwhile otherworldly places on her self-described “Voyage,” I don’t find much novel here in terms of contemporary art. By disregarding such overblown claims, however, there is much in the exhibition to be enjoyed on aesthetic terms.