45 GRANGE RD. LONDON SEI 3BHOPEN THURSDAY - SUNDAY 3 - 7PM

OR BY APPOINTMENT

REBECCA FAIRMAN: 077131 89249

WWW.ARTHOUSE1.CO.UK

PRIVATE VIEW 11 JULY 6.30-8.30pmFINISSAGE 3 AUGUST 2019WITH ARTISTS TALK TEA & CAKE 2pm - 4pm

Hanna ten DoornkaatAnnamarie Dzendrowskyj Sinta Werner

[un]seen

[un]seenI am standing in an art gallery with two and three dimensional works. I know I am here because I have a body which is making a physical impact on the space as my feet impress their presence on the planks of wood beneath them. My breath takes in oxygen and repays the debt with carbon dioxide. My eyes reveal artworks before me and the familiar hush indicates this is a reflective space.

My vision is the bridge which connects me, where I am, to the art, where it is. I see straight lines which I conclude are horizontal because they match other things that everyone agrees are horizontal, like the horizon and the floor I’m standing on. And I see other lines which are vertical since they match the uprightness of my body and the sides of the doorways. Angles are a little trickier. Luckily I have knees and elbows which facilitate bends without breaking to inform my eyesight that all is as it should be. So familiarity between myself and what I am seeing underscores my certainty.

I also know I am here because I have a mind which does not cease at the surface of my skin so I can think about what I am observing. I decide to walk around the sculpture, closer to the wall images and past them. Now I have a much more fractured vision of the artwork. In fact, if I did a drawing of my experience of both direct looking and my peripheral view, it would probably be like a jumbled version of cubism where everything is in bits from different angles and one thing merges into another and everything merges with its surroundings. Things are beginning to feel a little less reliable. Perhaps I ought to stand still and look at the work with more intention.

Between the artwork and myself is a connection which I sense exists even though it’s not visible. Instead and of course, this connection is an idea. But as to where I end and the artwork begins, along the pathway connecting us, is a complete mystery to me. All I know is that my body which houses my brain is in attendance and Hanna ten Doornkaat’s work, which is a physical combination of wood and graphite, is also definitely present. But all the ideas I might have about Hanna’s work and all the ideas that her work contains are infinite. So not only is my mind indistinguishable from its physical base and the same with Hanna’s work, but also the ideas that surround and are within myself and her work are interrelated. So my simple beginning of me being here and the artwork being there is collapsing and all the moreso as I linger.

Hanna ten Doornkaat

‘(Art is something to satisfy our) craving for the cloud of unknowing beyond knowledge and for the silence beyond speech. Art must tend toward anti-art, the elimination of the subject (the “object”, the “image”), the substitution of chance for intention and the pursuit of silence.’Susan Sontag, ‘The Aesthetics of Silence’

Between passivity and action, Hanna’s linear proposals nod to primal marks. They are straightforward and not at all, as they project and deny a complexity of the art making process. Paint and graphite are adhered at different stages then often partially removed. The aesthetic derived from their removal is not entirely in the artist’s control. The result is the reveal of a process of assertion and denial: I am here, no I am not; I want you to see me, I want to hide. This inherent contradiction is helped all the more by their modest size and the fact that they are made on wooden blocks. This material easily clarifies them as objects, which is then contradicted by the sides left bare which seems to describe them as surface images. Side by side the wooden blocks activate the space between them, while their simplicity illuminates the difference between one work and another, as well as the difference between all the works and the surrounding walls.

If there were no differences, then it is difficult to imagine what might be there. Say, for instance, you were creating a map of a landscape. If all the topology was the same it would be a flat, undiscerning space so there would be no need for a map at all. Though of course, we do have maps. We can see streets and mountains and lakes not for what they are, but for their representational images which mark their difference from whatever they happen to be next to. A lake next to dry land. A road next to a strip of retail stores. So it follows that it is difference that makes the difference. The meaning is in this difference. Sinta Werner’s images and sculpture exemplify this and also help us to explore further.

Sinta Werner

‘Opposite to painting (perspective creates a more real space), in architecture perspective enabled the possibility of using walls in a representative way and by that means turned a real space into a space that creates illusion. It has been new that architecture became itself the representation of architecture, imitated reality.’ Peter Eisenman, ‘Presentation of Doubt’

Sinta presents us with a view of the world which is so measured that it slides off-kilter. Her installations and images tease us with unsolvable puzzles. Working with the physical space, lines and lights, Sinta’s work is presented with clear cut clarity, yet also jolts us with a simple and confounding confusion between expectation and reality of where we are and what we are looking at; moments akin to déjà vu. We cannot deny their straightforwardness, as if we should be able to figure them out and accept their strangeness, but it often proves impossible, in the same way that we cannot simultaneously see the vase and the figurative profiles of Gestalt imagery. Viewing Sinta’s work challenges our sense of the space it inhabits, then goes on to redefine the rest of the gallery space as we walk around with a heightened sense of spatial awareness in relation to ourselves. At some point we might accept there are things ultimately unknowable to us.

If to see something relies on there actually being a something, then what is it we are doing when we acknowledge a presence that is not physically there. If it is an idea then where might that idea be located? It seems that the idea is not only a known which we cannot visualise, but it also relies on the context of its physical surroundings to shape it, as well as the gallery visitor being open enough to imagine it. Annamarie Dzendrowskyj’s images underline the conundrum of our belief in something that we cannot discern.

Annamarie Dzendrowskyj

‘What we could see was just the steamer we were on, her outlines blurred as though she had been on the point of dissolving, and a misty strip of water, perhaps two feet broad, around her-and that was all. The rest of the world was nowhere, as far as our eyes and ears were concerned.’Joseph Conrad, ‘Heart of Darkness’

Annamarie’s work is located in an unknowable space despite i t s beginnings being rooted in her l ived experience. In distinct contrast with Sinta’s output, clarity is neither possible nor worth pursuing . We may be submerged in an underworld or skybound and emerg ing f rom a dense c loud . We may be floating in something bodily, else wandering about in a subconscious space. It is impossible to distinguish if a misty screen has fallen across an otherwise complacent scene or if this is the scene itself. It is a start, a middle or an ending. It is without calendars or straight lines, l ike a sl ippage between time and place, indicating somewhere that is nowhere in particular. What we can see is what we can imagine. And what we can imagine invites other senses to direct our muffled way, as if linking sound with silence. Perhaps here is where the physical and metaphysical worlds meet, where we can return to our origins, of existence and of abstraction.

‘What we believe ourselves to be should be compatible with what we believe of the world around us, even though knowledge and belief themselves involve deep chasms of unknowing.’Gregory Bateson, ‘Steps to an Ecoology of the Mind’

If we are inseparable from our surroundings then to destroy our surroundings is to destroy ourselves. Psychoanalysis would speak of this in the context of, say, a home. To destroy your home would be to rubbish your interiority. Sociologists would speak of this in the context of, say, a neighbourhood. To not care for those around us would be careless of ourselves. Environmentalists would speak of this in the context of, say, the welfare of the planet. To be irresponsible with natural resources would be to destroy the chance of ensuring our longevity. Artists speak of this in the work they present to the world and how this work might be a conduit to further and wider thinking.

Sinta, Hanna and Annamarie’s [un]seen gives us access to the fundamentals of perception and amplifies the power of our ability to not only make connections between ourselves, the artworks and the space in which they reside, but also to extrapolate connectivity to the world outside the gallery. Critically, these associations are personal and unique. The ideas formed by my looking are different to my friend’s. We leave the gallery and point out that which connects to what we’ve just seen. Naturally, neither of us are right or wrong and sharing our observations broadens our expanse of seeing and betters our sense of where meaning is located. And therein is the use of it; that we become more able to accept there is no one great truth, but many. All the while, this process cannot exist without interaction between ourselves and the artworks which prompt them, making a compelling case for just how essential art is as a tool for constructing ideas about our world.

Jillian Knipe, May 2019

Further Reading & Listening:

Bateson, Gregory, ‘Steps to an Ecology of the Mind : Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution and Epistemology’, first published University of Chicago Press 1972Conrad, Joseph, ‘Heart of Darkness’, first published Blackwood’s Magazine 1902Han Kang, ‘The White Book’, Portobello Books 2016Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, ‘The Phenomenology of Perception’, first published Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1962New College of the Humanities, ‘Philosophy for our Times’, podcast, Episodes 137, 141 and 143 Sontag Susan, ‘Styles of Radical Will’, first published Picador 1966

Annamarie Dzendrowskyj. Dissolve - Venice XIV.I, 2018, oil, inkjet print on synthetic vellum. 21 x 20 cm

Studied BA (sculpture) at Kingston University and MA

(sculpture) at Wimbledon School of Art (UAL). In 2015

her work was shortlisted for the Jerwood Drawing prize,

London, the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition and Derwent

Art Prize. In 2017 she was shortlisted again for the Royal

Academy Summer Exhibition and the ING Discerning Eye. In

2018 she had a solo exhibition ‘In the zero of form’ at One

Paved Court Gallery, Richmond. She has exhibited in the UK,

Germany, Australia, Canada, Belgium and has curated major

exhibitions such as ‘Selfies - Revisited’ at The Stables Gallery,

Twickenham and more recently ‘WhiteNoise’ at The Crypt

Gallery, London, St.Pancras. Currently ‘Personal Structures’, a

collaboration between GAAF, a Dutch non profit organisation

and ECC (European Cultural Center), is showing as part of

the 2019 Venice Biennale.

Hanna ten Doornkaat

After sunset. 2019. Pink secrets. 2019. Blush I. 2018. Ode to Agnes I. 2019. Materials: gesso, graphite pencil, acrylic, on board. Approx 20 x 15 x 2 cm

Between the lines. 2018. 25 x 20 x 2cm. [un]seen I. 2019. 40 x 30 x 2 cm. Seeing /unseeing. 2019. 20 x 15x 2 cm. graphite pencil, colouring pencil

mini series black/orange. 2019. gesso, graphite pencil, acrylic, board 10 x 10 x 2cm. Divided. 2019. gesso, graphite pencil, acrylic, board 20 x 15 x 2cm

Divisive measures. 2019. gesso, graphite pencil, acrylic, board 50 x 50 x 2 cm Grey is for cowards. 2019. gesso, graphite pencil, acrylic, board 20 x 15 x 2 cm the metaphor of the line (Plato) (diptych). 2019. gesso, graphite pencil, acrylic, wood, plywood

(b. London) trained as a classical ballet dancer followed by a career as a PADI Scuba

Diving Instructor/Examiner. She holds a BA Hons Degree in Philosophy specialising in

existentialism and aesthetics (Lancaster University), BA in Fine Art and BA Honours

Degree in Painting (National Art School, Sydney, Australia). In 2019 and 2016 her work

was shortlisted for the Arte Laguna Prize, Venice, Italy - recipient of a Biafarin Honours

Award and the Fallani Serigraphy Residency Award. In 2018, Circle Arts Foundation

France, Artist of the Year Finalist Award, and shortlisted for the Lynn Painter Stainers

Prize in 2016, 2013 and the Art Gemini Prize 2016 - 2014, awarded 2nd Place 2015. She

has exhibited in UK, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Austria, Egypt and Australia and her work is

held in both public and private collections.Dissolve - Venice Series. 2018-19. oil, inkjet on synthetic vellum 20 x 21cm (gallery insitu shot)

Annamarie Dzendrowskyj

Between the Space I - IV. 2019, Inkjet print on organza. 20.5 x 29 cm

Dissolve - Venice XI.I. 2018, oil, inkjet print on synthetic vellum, 21 x 20 cm

Dissolve - Venice II & XIX.I 2018. oil, inkjet on synthetic vellum 24 x 20 & 20 x 21cm

Passing Time I & II . 2019. oil on aluminium panel. 19 x 14cm

Twilight - Bruges IX & X, 2018, oil on linen, 40 x 23 cm Dissolve - Venice II.. 2019. Oil, inkjet print on synthetic vellum. 24 x 20 cm

(b. Germany) lives and works in Berlin. She studied at the University

of the Arts Berlin and completed her Master of Fine Arts at

Goldsmiths College in London, 2007. Her installations and collages

toy with spatial perception by forming unstable architectonic

realms, teetering between pictorial representation and sculpture.

The creation of architectonic works notably contributes to her

exploration of virtual and physical boundaries, the notion of intervals

and “in-betweens“ alongside other such aspects linking the two- and

the three-dimensional. Previous exhibitions include ‘Reverse Cut

– A Matter of Degree’ at alexander levy, Berlin, ‘Eruption from the

Surface’ at Marta Herford Museum, Herford, ‘Public Art Festival’ at

Berlinische Galerie, ‘Das Scheitern der Oberfläche’ at Christinger

de Mayo, Zurich, ‘Setting the Setting’ at Nettie Horn, London and

‘Higher Atlas’ at Marrakech Biennale.

Sinta Werner

Broken Line

49 square mirrors are

placed upright in a

45° angle to the joints

between the floorboards.

A broken line appears

that is orthogonal to the

joint, setting a mark as in

a layout plan dividing the

space into two. The line

though is nothing material,

it exists in it’s own

ephemeral realm.

Echoes I - XIV Opposite to painting (perspective creates a more real space) , in architecture perspective enabled the possibilty of using walls in a representative way and by that means turned a real space into a space that creates illusion. It has been new that architecture became itself the representation of architecture, imitated reality. (Peter

Eisenman - Presentation of Doubt).

All of the 14 short sections of the walls that are parallel to the walls with windows are painted with an image of themselves, the same section of the wall, but slightly shifted, so that the wall appears as a double exposure of itself and its image. A double exposure is something that only exists in an image, but that is here transferred into the physical space - or it can be put the other way round: Here the space is turned into an image. Nowadays images have become equal elements of our perceived environment to the natural and built environment. The simulated transparency achieved by painting into the space and its architectural elements, the room looses its material density. This also corresponds to our loss of groundedness and orientation when we more and more tend to be connected to the world through internet and digital media

Dialectic of Frames I. 2019, collage made from archival pigment print, 44 x 31 cmDialectic of Frames II. 2019, collage made from archival pigment print, 31 x 44.5 cm