The Big Nothing at the ICA is one of those shows that has such a range of work in it, it almost doesn’t make sense to talk about the individual pieces but it does make sense to talk about the concept.
But I have to admit I saw the concept as more of an excuse for a show than something to take all that seriously. It’s not that I don’t think that nothingness isn’t a concept in contemporary art. I do. And I think that nothingness is a concept in much of this work.
Another video (which you can view on the web at this link), “Swamp,” from Nancy Holt and Robert Smithson, shows close up, in the grasses, a weedy plot along a highway, plants regarded as nothing because they are not cultivated, in a garden not a garden for the same reason. The whining cars are invisible and so are the filmmakers (but aren’t filmmakers almost always invisible, except via their message)? This is a different take on nothingness–it’s about things not valued and therefore usually invisible, made visible in the video.
There were a number of pieces that seemed to be about death as well, which I suppose you could argue is something or nothing, depending on your point of view, but if you remember someone absent, it’s hardly nothing. It’s like a thought. It’s real. But it’s incorporeal. Gabriel Orozco’s “Empty Shoe Box” and “Yogurt Caps” fit the bill, as does James Welling’s “I” (from the “Drapes” series), in which a funereal black drape, it’s form barely visible, is the photo’s focus.
I suppose I’d also put Richard Artschwager’s vinyl black blips, shaped like submarine doors, which puntuate the walls of the show in unexpected places. I got a similar buzz out of James Lee Byars’ “Scroll,” a black blip shape that looks rather like a fingernail on top of a thumb. Both Artschwager and Byar give us an opening into nowhere or no opening at all.
Whether all this adds up to incoherence or not, this is a show worth seeing.