At the moment the National Gallery is forcing visitors to enter through the small Getty entrance to the right of the main portico. You trot up some stairs and go through an airport-style metal detector security, walk past the enormous shop (there are three main shops in the gallery) into the long narrow space called the Annenberg Court, and then have to mount quite a big flight of stairs to reach the main entrance hall.
The stairs are black and are attached to one wall of a large white space. Usually it is painted pure white to create a sense of light and emptiness. Now, however, it has been decorated by leading British artist, Bridget Riley, with a series of large green, beige and grey dots.
Riley (born in 1931 and a Companion of Honour and a Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire aka CBE) made her reputation in the 1960s as a leading proponent of Op Art i.e. art interested in exploring all kinds of optical illusions.
The wall labels explain that this work is entitled ‘Messengers’ because Constable referred to clouds as ‘messengers’ in one of his letters. It is deliberately ambiguous so it can also be taken as an allusion to the numerous angels, messengers and bearers of news, that we see in the skies of so many National Gallery pictures.
A more direct influence is the pointillist technique of the French painter George Seurat, famous for large scale pointillist masterpieces such as Bathers at Asnières.
It’s easiest to think of Riley’s dots as a sampling of Seurat’s little dots which have been blown up to huge proportions. When this happens you learn that most of a Seurat painting is made up of the spaces between the coloured dots – just as the ‘solid’ atoms which make up us and everything around us are actually mostly empty space.
Because, in my opinion, what the dots do is emphasise the size and whiteness of the space, bring it out. Previously this was a big white empty space. Now, it has become much more problematic for the eye and mind. The wall label which explains the work suggests that, if you pause (on the landing at the top of the stairs or half way down the stairs) to look at the dotted wall, they will leave after-images on the viewer’s retina that suggest volume and movement.
Maybe. To the number-minded like myself they suggest some kind of pattern. In fact I quickly realised they are painted in broken diagonal lines. If there were a few more of them they’d begin to crystallise into Xs. As it is there are diagonal ‘paths’ between the lines. Can you see any other patterns?
Anyway, after reading the label and pondering Messengers for a few minutes, I passed on to the Boilly exhibition in Room One of the gallery, across the central hall (and next to another, huge, shop).
When I came back the same way, walking across the old, dark-wood-panelled central hall, I suddenly realised that, approached from this side, the big atrium and Riley’s dots are framed by a characteristically Victorian, huge, dark, oak-framed doorway.
Framed. Just like one of the thousands of Old Master paintings in the rest of the gallery.
My photo doesn’t really convey it, but to me this framing effect gave the image a lot more bite.
Standing on the stairs beneath the big white open space of the court felt a bit like being on the escalator at any number of modern shopping centres, with a vague sense of a big light space looming over you.
But framed like this, the image had more definition and power.
Also, God knows how many art videos I’ve seen which make a virtue of showing nothing very much happening, and so I found the framing effect almost transformed it into an art video experience.
In a sort of way, for a few minutes, I enjoyed standing there, in line with the centre of the doorway, watching people walk in and out of it, almost all of them busy and purposeful, but a few pausing to lean against the balcony and look out at the dots.
I liked the contrast between the black oak doors, the black outline of the balcony and the (mostly) black clothes that everyone was wearing and the ringing white walls of the Annenberg Court.
I liked the contrast between the complete stasis of the dots, caught/trapped/arranged in their punctured latticework – and the busy, chaotic strutting, strolling, ambling, chatting, pausing and hesitating of the people moving in front of it.
Related links
- Messengers by Bridget Riley
- Bridget Riley: Learning from Seurat at the Courtauld Gallery (January 2016)
Reviews of other National Gallery exhibitions
- Boilly: Scenes of Parisian Life (March 2019)
- Sorolla: Spanish Master of Light (March 2019)
- Landseer’s The Monarch of the Glen (January 2019)
- Mantegna and Bellini (January 2019)
- Courtauld Impressionists: From Manet to Cézanne (December 2018)
- Monet and Architecture (June 2018)
- Ed Ruscha: Course of Empire (June 2018)
- Thomas Cole: Eden to Empire (June 2018)
- Reflections: Van Eyck and the Pre-Raphaelites (February 2018)
- Degas from the Burrell (December 2017)
- Monochrome (December 2017)
- Michelangelo and Sebastiano (March 2017)
- Australia’s Impressionists (January 2017)
- Beyond Caravaggio (December 2016)
- Painters’ Paintings: From Freud to Van Dyck (August 2016)
- Delacroix and the Rise of Modern Art (February 2016)
- Every room in the National Gallery (December 2015)
- Goya: The Portraits (November 2015)
- Inventing Impressionism (May 2015)
- Making Colour (September 2014)
- Veronese (May 2014)
- Facing the Modern: The Portrait in Vienna 1900 (January 2014)