Evan Hockett, artist critique

Review, Amy Tsui (skulls on Plexiglas diptych)

The most striking formal aspect of Amy Tsui’s skull diptych is the way in which she utilizes layered Plexiglas panes in order to achieve pictorial depth within both works. This technique serves to enhance the viewer’s perception of physical space in a composition which, composed of a single figure, would otherwise be characterized by one-dimensionality. In this way the very structure of the artist’s chosen canvass plays in integral, and successful, role in the ultimate resolution of the picture plane into a space with discernable depth. If the artist were to continue working on Plexiglas, I believe it would be worth exploring the use of light shone through the stacked sheets of plastic, thus drawing attention to the layered quality of the piece and adding further texture to an already rich canvass.

The repetition of content within each half of the diptych also plays a strong role in the viewer’s overall perception of the piece. The same skull is depicted from the same angle in each half of the piece, a fact which I immediately registered upon viewing the piece. The strong connection between each piece’s content naturally engages the viewer in a visual dialogue carried out between the two skulls. Because the two are identical in origin, a fixed variable within the picture plane, the focus of the conversation then shifts to the style in which each skull is rendered. Herein lays one of the most interesting aspects of the piece. By creating a situation in which the viewer is encouraged to draw strong comparisons between each piece, the artist naturally highlights the differences of each half of the diptych. For instance, the background of the upper sheet is left clear, allowing the viewer’s eye pass directly through the Plexiglas eventually coming to rest on the wall on which it is hung. In contrast, an unmodulated orange plane comprises the lower half’s background. The lack of a pictorial background in the upper piece situates the painted and collaged image on the wall itself in a manner reminiscent of poster and street art. In contrast, the painted background of the lower half maintains the autonomy of the picture plane, thereby utilizing the depth of the Plexiglas without relinquishing the skull to the wall behind it. If the artist is to continue exploring the relationship of the wall to the image as in the upper half of the diptych, it might be worth considering the visual quality of the wall itself. Rather than an untreated wall, the artist might paint or collage the wall itself, thereby furthering the dialogue of layers already present in the piece.

Finally, a strong collage element is present in each skull. In the upper half of the diptych, the upper dome of the skull is comprised of a photo, merged seamlessly with the hand painted portions of the skull. The teeth of the lower skull are rendered in the same fashion. While the dome of the upper skull situates itself relatively unobtrusively within the composition of the upper pane, in contrast the teeth of the lower pane stand out quite clearly from the whole of skull. In my opinion, the use of collage in the lower pane is more successful than that of the upper pane specifically because it does not hide the fact that it is a piece of collage. Because the layered panes of plastic already situate the composition in the realm of collage, it makes sense that the collage elements within the image of the skull identify themselves as such, thereby furthering the conversation between disparate elements which, despite their physical separation ultimately comprise a unified whole. In this way I feel that the artist was on the right track with her use of teeth in the lower skull.