You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
“Modern, experimental, tender, passionate, couples” were words in neon lights advertising an art exhibition at the Barbican Centre. My hopes ran high with the idea of art actually focusing on couple relationships. Were the couples going to be in the actual art itself, the creators of it, or both? I had in mind the famous East End artist couple Gilbert and George, who, ironically, were not included in this display.
Interestingly this exhibition was not confined to painters, but embraced the creative professions such as writing, music, architecture, textiles, sculpture, and photography. Although a bold idea, one of my difficulties with this show was the breadth of its concepts and partnerships, which included an overwhelming amount of data from famous avant-garde pairings, such as Pablo Picasso and Dora Masar, or Man Ray and Lee Miller, to the more obscure couples such as some followers of the Russian Constructivists. Given the size of the exhibition—nearly fifty partnerships, with separate rooms demarking their couplings—there was surprisingly little substantial art on display, but instead a staggering amount of writing (literally on the wall) to read. Oddly, the writing did not seem to convey anything of import about these artistic partnerships, although if you had energy and/or time to read it, there were some fascinating biographical and historical facts: Salvador Dali's seemingly intimate relationship with Federico Garcia Lorca, or Oscar Kokoschka's passionate affair with Alma Mahler, resulting in his producing a life-size doll of her when they separated. Equally, it seemed strange that, although Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera's famous partnership was included, there was almost no art by them. The overriding feeling was one of confusion in relation to what this exhibition was attempting to say about couples and art.
The glossary provided on arrival seemed particularly symbolic, containing phrases such as: “break-up”, “non-binary”, “mad love”, in themselves pertinent,