Part 1 Case Study: Nathan Coley's 'A Place Beyond Belief'

Case Study: Nathan Coley’s ‘a place beyond belief’

What’s your first response to this piece?

It’s minimalistic but very powerful. The placement is significant, a piece concerning faith and religion. It's almost antagonistic, perhaps questioning the power of religion in modern day society.

 • What questions are you going to ask in order to make sense of the piece? 

What year was it made? Where is it located? What are the artist's views on religion? What was involved in the making of the piece, for example materials.

• What type of work do you think this is? It could fit into several categories. How would you define it?

I would define this as a statement, expressing strong opinions through the medium of modern art. It could be considered site specific until i know more about the piece. 

 • What do you think the text is about?

I believe it could be a play on the word ‘belief’, inviting the viewer to consider where humanity can meet in agreement when it comes to religion. It could also be an expression of the artists view on religion, perhaps atheist.

Further research on this piece:

http://vimeo.com/79395527 [accessed 21/11/18]

• What are your first thoughts after listening to the monologue? • What other information can you find on Coley’s website about this particular piece? The ‘view text’ link, centre top, is a good starting point. • Where is it actually sited? • Does this alter your response to it? • Have your views on this piece changed after listening to Coley speak about it? If so, why?

After listening to the monologue, I was deeply moved. The anecdote offers a profound dimension to the piece, and I felt a whole new level of appreciation for the wording. Knowing they were not perhaps coley’s own words doesn't bother me so much because I think he has used a platform to amplify the woman’s story and gives credit to her by accompanying the piece with his monologue.

Looking at his website, there is not much more contextual information on the piece but there are more details on the specifics and links to reviews. He also produced a book using this piece as the front cover. The piece is actually sited in ‘National Gallery of Kosovo, Prishtina’. Prishtina is the capital city of Kosovo, and the country was subject to war in 1998/1999 due to the oppressive regime of Slobodan Milošević, which saw the attempt to purge the country’s Albanian population. I don't know the full details of the war, but the piece is sited over a hollowed out church which was protected by british troops when they camped inside the building. I think that is to emphasise the message the artist is portraying.

I feel like my views on the work is somewhat more comprehensive now due to the context, as I feel a lot more emotionally tied to it. I remember the events of 9/11 and the devastation around it, as well as briefly being aware of the kosovo war but not in great detail. I also had a school friend who was albanian, whose father was called to serve in the war. When learning the that these events were linked to the piece I felt like I could relate to it.

I don't think my views have changed so much as been explored further. I feel the piece is an aesthetic reminder to humanity and a protest against the repeat of history, as it is linked to more than one catastrophic and brutal event, leading to the death of thousands. It's a poignant statement to stress the atrocities of politics and religion on society. 

 Further reading: Charlotte Higgins’ review for The Guardian Newspaper

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2012/sep/23/nathan-coley-kosovo-sculpturebeacon 

Do you think contextual information is essential to gaining a greater understanding of contemporary work? Make a note in your learning log. • Do you think it should be an essential ingredient?

This is a difficult question to answer simply. As a beginner in the art world and learning how to interpret and analyse modern art, the context is, of course, useful to help me understand a piece. It gives me practise to see things I wouldn't normally observe or contemplate, which will hopefully help me to progress onto better analysing art. However I do question the essence of a piece of the context is required, because maybe it defeats the purpose of the piece, as a means of expression. In the majority of cases, artwork is accompanied by notation sometimes just with the basic details of the artist, title and year, and other times with more contextual information regardless of it being contemporary, or otherwise. So perhaps a basic level of background information is necessary for us to recognise and look into what the artist is exploring. Even that however is optionally read by the viewer. The answers to these questions are not as simple as yes or no, but in considering them I think I can come to the conclusion that context is optional. It could be considered necessary for deeper understanding and alternative perspectives that a viewer may not have previously been aware of, but a viewer has the choice to look further into the work for whatever reason. 

• What do you think about this piece? What do you think it achieves? • Have a look through Coley’s other work using an online search. What stands out to you? • Pick two or three other pieces that look interesting to you. His site is comprehensive, with linked reviews and articles and often video clips which can give you a more realistic view of the siting of a piece. • Consider whether you can see connections across his works. • Identify some of his major motivations for making work.

‘A place beyond belief’ is, to me, a beautiful work of art and takes me to several emotional states. The ‘place’ the text refers to is something to really explore within ourselves as well as within our society. Just looking at the illuminated words creates a sign like instruction and a memorial to the events that cost thousands of human lives in death and trauma. Yet I get a sense of hope, that a place beyond war and terroism and bloodshed could exist if we look beyond beliefs, and colour and gender and race. I feel like I truly connect to the message behind this work and the artist’s views, regardless of my religious or political views.

Coley’s other work:

‘Burn the village, feel the warmth’ 2012

• The wording is laid out rhythmically by being laid one on top of the other.
• It’s a sequence in order of action and consequence
• Also illuminated lettering
• Also a statement that could involve political views.

‘Never Trust a Loving God’ 2011

• Again, religious views
• Illuminated letters
• Lettering is laid out in a staccato rhythm

The Basic Material is not the Word but the Letter, 2018

• Installed in a library
• Permanent and site specific piece
• Poetic
• I don't really understand what the text is trying to say to the viewer.

Nathan Coley does produce a wide range of artworks, i previously picked his work titled ‘The Lamp of Sacrifice, 286 Places of Worship, Edinburgh 2004’ so I am aware he also creates pieces that are not based on text. I see that he bases a lot of his work on humanity and explores themes of religion, philosophy and politics. A lot of his work is identifiable by the font of his lettering and his characteristic lightbulb lit words and also his exploration of architecture through sculptures. 

I think his major motivations in producing artworks such as these lies within campaigning for equality and peace. He has works around the world and has an immense understanding of subjects concerning terrorism, war, death etc. possibly also due to his time as a court room artist. I believe he is also appreciative of literature and poetry considering his works involving texts.