|
The video installation
Who Told the Chambermaid? manages to transform one's experience
of the entire museum apparatus at first glance, both in the case
of the viewer's visual apparatus and in the museum¥s organizational
exhibitive structure. The thematization of hidden infrastructures
and power relationships inside an apparently 'neutral' exhibition
space has been one of art's greatest ambitions in the last few years.
In it one can see, in all its entirety, a contribution to the unmasking
of power mechanisms. Ann-Sofi Sidén's work deals with this
theme, predominantly interpreting it, however, in the sense of transforming
the aspect of 'institutional-criticism' into a rigid formal space
in relation to the explosive psychic contents which really interest
her. Sidén's work pushes institutional criticism to the extreme,
up to the point where the viewer is able to concretely experience
madness. More than in the artist´s typical formal security,
it is in this inscription of psychic-borderline situations of social
reality that the great potential of Sidén finds its basis.
Visitors discover
Who Told the Chambermaid? in two phases. Firstly they see video
surveillance monitors in the exhibition rooms, making them involuntarily
spy on various hotel rooms. The monitors appear, at first glance,
to be 'ready-made' surveillance. There are probably already other
examples found in art over the last few years, but this aspect only
superficially concerns the artist. At the end of the museum visit,
visitors come to a room in which video images from hotel rooms flood
in. Seventeen monitors with black-and-white videos, installed on
supports between piles of washing, constitute the perverse surveillance
of the hotel quests, devised - as the title of the work suggests
- by a chambermaid in one of the city's many hotels.
This is already
a strong metaphor for surveillance and the 'control society' Deleuze
speaks about. However, the power of Ann-Sofi Sidén consists of psychically
charging this type of mechanism and freeing it from all narrative.
On the wall containing the monitors are precise scenic passages
analogous with Pollock's all-over between each screen. This introduces
a cinematic distance to the work which brings to mind Pasolini's
free indirect discourse. In fact Sidén comes from Swedish underground
cinema rather than figurative art. The video, apparently showing
images in actual time, in reality involves a fictional discontinuity
in that the hotel guests being observed are asked for their approval
and are therefore in a false Candid Camera situation. With this
intermediate solution, with the black-and-white images and the elaboration
of the time factor, one feels oneself transported into the semi-suggestive
atmosphere of one of Vito Acconi's first video works. Finally, the
artist implicitly turns the situation on its head, and in the place
of a moralistic sentence she creates an abstract portrait of an
anonymous woman in whom it is possible to recognize, in analogy
with other films and previous installations, a kind of alter ego
of SidÈn. Her shocking work induces the viewer to think of a negative
feminist heroine who is trying to assume control of the objective
social situation whilst accepting schizophrenia. This subterranean
and uninterrupted theme of Ann-Sofi Sidén and her psychic energies
are mode perceptible in a visual and not literary way. Therefore
one can interpret Who Told the Chambermaid? as an experimental film,
regardless of its psychic contents, distributed over numerous monitors
and using the medium of video installation to represent time and
all its psychic intervals.
|