from theDEFIANT SHEPHERD review....
Derek Stears saw David Shepherd's exhibition of recent sculpture at Oriel Cardiff
David shepherd’s exhibition of sculpture at Oriel provides not only one of the most intrinsically satisfying shows of recent years, but also acts as the unsuspecting repeater - recharcher of a lot of current art - critical pOlemic and debate.
A year or so ago on Meet for Lunch , VIncent Kane interrogated me on the “ difficulty ” of modern art as we attempted to round up the National Museum’s collection by getting Magritte first into the corral. It seems ever since then sub - editors have been pulling the food apart with their knives and forks poking about at the stringy long words and the gristly concepts. Does it have to be so difficult ?
Paranoid at being dealt a review article from the bottom - of - the - pack, even The Guardian has jammed into a defensive reverse gear in it’s regional arts coverage - whining about the man - in - the street and the lay - person finding penetrating analysis and certain contemporary issues too “ difficult ”. The exhibition - goer looking for pretty landscapes and undemanding trifles [ nothing too difficult, you see ] now seems to be pretty well served. Galleries show for him, art societies run for him, and writers garble for him.
Not surprising then, when Mr & Mrs John Citizen enter Oriel to find David Shepherd’s considerable baulks of timber emanating a pungent bitumen smell, defiant erect and consuming the space with a thrusting physicality; for them to turn for the door. the whole foundation of a particular aspect of the visual arts has been ripped apart, It is this torn fabric of a social understanding that makes such sculpture “ difficult ”.
If David Shepherd’s references to pier - heads, mine shafts, towers, docks, ramps and dock constructions. were copies [ a drawing painted in from a photograph even better ] then he would get an acknowledging nod of appreciation. The skill and craft of the technique could be quickly identified as the approximation to reality. I call this “ winkler’s art ” because it corresponds with a fleetingly entertained snap [ eye and shutter as analogy ]. Big simple headlines, loud bold commercials, news - as - sensation - or - inanity [ disaster and the royals ], are the media’s fascist alternatives to a crumbling and boring existence. The short - term good - laugh provides the bulk of the winkler’s art.
[ Sniff glue, mug a granny, copy a calendar are all on the same aesthetic dimension ].
The fact that major artists don’t play simple copy or reproduce superficial appearances is frequently responded to with hollow disbelief. What does “information”
or “understanding” mean anymore. Where is the sense in a wooden construction that has no function ? Why should anyone care if David Shepherd has taken it on himself to lurch horizontally to verticality - from walking over to walking around and under ? If the work is now “totemic” - aren’t the only real totems on Hollywood westerns ?
But enough of this incredulous banter with an invisible unbeliever, unless David Shepherd actually cares about communicating or teaching those people to come into contact with his work. He doesn’t. And yet he does. He isn’t drawn into any form of compromise [ apart from acknowledging the necessity of bringing the brown carpet tiles of Oriel’s floor actually into his ground plane through open crates ]. He won’t write about the pieces. He won’t even sell the Bill Craig photographs of his work in transforming progress, as products. But then the two pieces on show, Blue Dog Days 1 and High and Drying aren’t products themselves.
They are what they are because of where they are, and what
they have already been. The bits that go to make up the sculptural wholes are loose parts arranged and rearranged, and as soon as the show is over about to be jostled and jolted, rebossed and bolted into something else. The nature of David Shepherd’s art is freedom. He isn’t in the commercial grip of a gallery pinching and screwing, controlling his output. He isn’t in the grip of a consumerist demand buying Shepherd’s.
David Shepherd searches builder’s yards for reclaimed salvage, an artist in the construction - demolition business, thrilled by stacking systems, storage and retrieval, grouping, leaning, organised and chaotic units, simple material earthy appearances and material smells, shapes, sizes,out in all weathers, arranging manoeuvring. His work is part of a continuum, often involving him in hard physical effort - tussling with roof trusses, bolting large spans of wood and ritual interaction as he moves around and manipulates the places and spaces. He makes the constituents in advance, like two or three hundred framed cubes, at one time on the floor, now in Blue Dog Days 1 hoisted into the air, tied with dangle - ended string. The flat pieces of cut - out roofing felt packed on to the low centres f the piece are historical references to bits that were once of the piece in another life - time, back in the studio perhaps. The pasted - on bitumen not only acts as a tactile - sensual additive for the sake of the art, but as a preservative when the bulk of materials is stored outside. It is only in the gallery for part of it’s life, but that in itself is a challenge. That narrow through - corridor to the end room insists on a walking space in the lower gallery; it has ultimately to exist there.
High and Drying started life as a definitive object in the centre of the room, but the dark sucked at it like a dismal tomb. He got rid of the floor by making a new one, laying slats like a gymnasium. But the false floor then became an integral part of the sculpture itself, an important decision had to be taken as he faced up to the exigencies of time as well as space and materials.
The wood he brought were damp enough to start to curl and kink, and that natural manifestation was used spontaneously, as he stacked the wood on the right hand wall in open framed cubes in rows of four side by side, to dry and bend. He fitted his parts together arranging and wedging corners, The right hand storage stacks might now be seen to be the “work”. The environment of rows of cubes on a stepped floor merely an adjunct.
David Shepherd does not make concessions. His own art lives off other art - Andre is an influence, but not a fetish. His Wigan origins with its earthly mining community and his boyhood memories might contribute some psychological or simply geographical references. He evokes these only when someone criticises his piece for being “slightly sterile”, or someone else sees the uniform arrangement of passive little units as like an old schoolroom.
High and Drying
In High and Drying morbid or pretty or both ? It differs from the top room because it is less strident and physical. It is there, as an environment, to be taken in. David suggested lining up a corner line and experiencing it visually in a different way. it needs sensitive recipients. It doesn’t seek any extrovert didactic form. The pieces become “art” when the viewer injects something of him/herself into the work. The artist has done his bit. The rest is up to you. I’t’s not altogether so difficult! But don’t miss the point. There’s nothing wrong with rigour, tenacity, insightfulness and
determination. Getting them, and getting at them, may be difficult.
Derek Stears
