Homework for you

Eric Troncy Expository Essays

Rating: 4.9/5.0 (17 Votes)

Category: Essay

Description

Ric Troncy

Éric Troncy Life and career Edit

In 1991 he curated the exhibition No Man's Time a 'key' group exhibition of fine art of the early-1990s which has become a 'well-known historical show'. [ 3 ]

Between 1997-2003 he curated the trilogy Dramatically Different. Weather Everything and Coollustre. [ 4 ] described by Troncy, as an "exposition d’auteur" (as one would say "un film d’auteur"), the exhibition is curated as a succession of scenes in which the actors and landscapes are the works themselves.
The method is the same for all three exhibitions : a precise choice of works from over the last 40 years, some known to the public, others that have only been seen as reproductions, sometimes never at all, is presented in small assemblies, voluntarily narrative.' [ 5 ] Presenting itself as a temporary collection, it also addresses questions on hanging and display.

As well as his own magazine, Troncy collaborates regularly with a large selection of high brow publications such as Beaux-Arts magazine, Numéro. Air France Magazine, Les Inrockuptibles. Standard Magazine, l'Officiel Homme.

Journalist on the French radio station France Culture. on the show Tout arrive ! [ 6 ] in till 2012, he has since been part of the show La Dispute on the same radio station.

Curated exhibitions Edit Writing Edit
  • Le colonel Moutarde dans la bibliothèque avec le chandelier – textes 1985-1998, 1998 Les presses du réel. [ 10 ]
  • Critique et théorie et Le docteur Olive dans la cuisine avec le revolver – Monographies et entretiens 1989-2002. 2002 Les presses du réel – Critique et théorie. La suite du Colonel Moutarde.
  • Coollustre. Les presses du réel – Art contemporain. Publié à l'occasion de l'exposition eponyme, ce catalogue richement illustré documente trois expositions d'Eric Troncy : Dramatically Different. Centre national d'art contemporain Le Magasin. Grenoble. 1997 ; Weather Everything. Musée de Leipzig, 1998 et Coollustre. Collection Lambert, 2003. L'ouvrage est dessiné par les graphistes M/M Paris. [ 11 ]
References Edit

Other articles

Eric troncy expository essays

Une proposition de Eric Troncy pour le 13ème Prix Fondation d’entreprise Ricard / An exhibition curated by Eric Troncy for the 13th Ricard Foundation Prize

Erwan & Ronan Bouroullec, Gaétan Brunet & Antoine Espinasseau, Erwan Frotin, Corentin Grossmann, Adrien Missika, Loïc Raguénès

Vue d’exposition / Exhibition view I The Seabass. Fondation d’entreprise Ricard, Paris, 2011

  • Une proposition de Eric Troncy pour le 13ème Prix Fondation d’entreprise Ricard / An exhibition curated by Eric Troncy for the 13th Ricard Foundation Prize

    Erwan & Ronan Bouroullec, Gaétan Brunet & Antoine Espinasseau, Erwan Frotin, Corentin Grossmann, Adrien Missika, Loïc Raguénès

    Vue d’exposition / Exhibition view I The Seabass. Fondation d’entreprise Ricard, Paris, 2011

  • Une proposition de Eric Troncy pour le 13ème Prix Fondation d’entreprise Ricard / An exhibition curated by Eric Troncy for the 13th Ricard Foundation Prize

    Erwan & Ronan Bouroullec, Gaétan Brunet & Antoine Espinasseau, Erwan Frotin, Corentin Grossmann, Adrien Missika, Loïc Raguénès

    Vue d’exposition / Exhibition view I The Seabass. Fondation d’entreprise Ricard, Paris, 2011

  • Une proposition de Eric Troncy pour le 13ème Prix Fondation d’entreprise Ricard / An exhibition curated by Eric Troncy for the 13th Ricard Foundation Prize

    Erwan & Ronan Bouroullec, Gaétan Brunet & Antoine Espinasseau, Erwan Frotin, Corentin Grossmann, Adrien Missika, Loïc Raguénès

    Vue d’exposition / Exhibition view I The Seabass. Fondation d’entreprise Ricard, Paris, 2011

The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits - Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy”

In 1991, in response to critiques of his exhibition “No Man’s Time” at Villa Arson in Nice, curator Éric Troncy wrote a letter to the editors of Flash Art. in which he argued that the exhibition had been “based on no particular concept,” thus locating it outside of any theoretical framework. Instead, he positioned the show in proximity to Guy Debord’s idea of the spectacle, at least insofar as the viewer was presented with a spectacular kind of art—political, according to the curator, simply due to its negation of the heavily theoretical objectives and attitudes of galleries and institutions at the time. But in its apparent insurgency, Troncy’s radicalism seemed to belong solely to the leisure class, soliciting a conflation of art and life, which advocated a liberation from ideology, yet irrevocably gave way to a perverse commodification of the self.

Whilst it may seem uncalled for to hold Troncy to objectives declared over two decades ago, it is difficult to consider his recent exhibition at Almine Rech, “The Shell (Landscapes, Portaits & Shapes),” without being influenced by its resonances on the curator’s former conceptual approach. The exhibition, saturated with 42 paintings and a singular sculpture (a polyester caveman titled Giant, by Katarina Fritsch [2007]), aims to consider the medium outside of genre, period, or context. To achieve this, Troncy employs a panoramic display, presenting the works side-by-side in close configuration—the effect being a leveling of distinctions between discrete pieces and their concomitant histories. The works, in other words, are uncoupled from their original contexts, rendering any particular content or message irrelevant. The more paintings are included in the exhibition, the less of an impact each individual work can make. Instead, they become viewed as mere contributions to a larger pool of thought—a circulatory system of art, which negates individuation for the purpose of abundance, production, or accumulation. This approach not only neutralizes the works from any historical potency, but is also quite profoundly depoliticizing in its total failure to acknowledge the social, political, or even aesthetic differences present. Painting, within this context, becomes little more than an object of conspicuous leisure—a pretty picture with an exchange value.

Even more problematic, however, is that Troncy not only strips the paintings from a past potency in favor of accentuating their entertainment value, but also to an extent dismisses their future reception as anything but. In order to compensate for the lack of distinction, Troncy’s curatorial method employs a spectacular display that relies on the emphasis of newness to create impact in “unexpected” or “accidental” pairings between historic and young artists. It isn’t difficult, for example, to imagine the juxtaposition of Julien Schnabel’s painted tarpaulin The Day I Missed (1990) and David Ostrowski’s abstraction F (dann lieber nein) (2014)—yet here, they are framed as a novel and surprising interaction that is purely contingent on curatorial precociousness. Moreover, in the press release accompanying the exhibition, Troncy muses that “to the new generations, art from the past few decades may present itself as a Tumblr, a panoramic view with uninhibited entertainment virtues.”(1) As this is framed as a curatorial policy, not only does it come off as disturbingly patronizing towards younger, critical viewers, but it also strongly seems to suggest—in what seems a optimistic tone, mind you—that the potential to question artistic convention may be lost to future generations.

In this, perhaps the counter-theorizing ideologies that permeated “No Man’s Time” still hold high rank in Troncy’s curatorial index. So much so, in fact, that it is arguable whether it is a mere coincidence that in John Welchman’s Art After Appropriation (2001), one finds a discussion of Troncy’s aforementioned 1991 exhibition, preluded by a description of practices in the early 1990s that were “viewed outside the shell of any theoretical dependence—or even, at the extreme of this tendency, beyond reference itself.”(2) If this holds true, and Troncy’s intent is to liberate painting from its “shell” of references, then why hold on fastidiously to a model that only reinforces immediate—though not necessary accurate—cross-referencing between the works themselves?

Troncy’s model brings into close proximity, for example, Jonas Wood’s quirky interior, Landscape Pot 2 (2014), Jean-Baptiste Bernadet’s abstraction Untitled (Vetiver IV) (2014), John Currin’s Dream of the Doctor (1997), and Bridget Riley’s Aria (Azure) (2013–14). Again, the irreverent mismatching of background and context not only negates the possibility of understanding the works, but legitimizes Troncy’s suggestion that they need not be understood. That is, the connections established within the rooms seem, at best, like obvious visual parallels—the reticent formalism of Erik Lindman’s Untitled (2014) closely framed by Bertrand Lavier’s Walt Disney Productions#21 (2014)—or, at worst, meaningless connections that emerge out of the sheer human impulse to find them. This is not to say that the exhibited works lack common ground; on the contrary, there is something inadvertently astute and cohesive about the selection: the exhibition can be considered as a survey of the past few decades in painting, which follows through the changes imposed on the media through its circulation. But whatever meaningful discourse could have emerged, particularly from such a comprehensive selection of painting from recent history, is negated by the curatorial choices made by Troncy, who clearly still prefers a spectacular model of production over a critical reconstruction, even if that spectacle is now far from what Debord intended.

(1) Eric Troncy, The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits and Shapes) . Press release, Almine Rech, 2015.
(2) John Welchman, Art After Appropriation: Essays on Art in the 1990s (London: Routledge, 2001), 31.

Sabrina Tarasoff is a curator and writer based in Paris.

1 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.

2 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.

3 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.

4 Julian Schnabel, The Day I Missed. 1990.

5 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.

6 Jean-Baptise Bernadet, Untitled (Vetiver IV). 2014.

7 John Currin, The Dream of the Doctor. 1997.

  • 1 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015. All images courtesy of Almine Rech, Paris. All photos by Rebecca Fanuele.
  • 2 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.
  • 3 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.
  • 4 Julian Schnabel, The Day I Missed. 1990. Oil, gesso on tarpaulin, 243.8 x 193 cm .
  • 5 View of “The Shell (Landscapes, Portraits & Shapes), a show by Éric Troncy,” Almine Rech, Paris, 2015.
  • 6 Jean-Baptise Bernadet, Untitled (Vetiver IV). 2014. Oil and cold wax on canvas, 200 x 180 cm .
  • 7 John Currin, The Dream of the Doctor. 1997. Oil on canvas, 198.1 x 154.9 cm.
  • 8 Erik Lindmad, Untitled. 2014. Found surface, aluminium, oil on hemp over panel, 243.8 x 152.4 cm.
  • 9 Katharina Fritsch, Giant. 2007. Polyester, paint, 195 x 95 x 70 cm.

STEVENSON. Cape Town

News - Erik Lindman

Almine Rech Gallery is pleased to announce Blanks, the third exhibition by American artist Erik Lindman at the gallery- the artist’s second in its Paris space - from March 21 to April 22, 2015. The exhibition will be comprised of entirely new paintings.

"Over the past few years, I have been using found surfaces in my paintings. The found surfaces incorporated an objective correlative into the painting: a pre-made element from which to begin. In the studio, I would edit these surfaces through reshaping and orienting them on the canvas.
It was important to me that the added surfaces not have a physical dimension. I would integrate them into the picture plane through building up paint layers to the level of the found surfaces on the supporting canvas. Through this process, the marks and the shape of the found surface would read visually integrated, not dimensionally separate.
My interest in these elements was always painterly, not in the specificity of the surfaces. Painting over the found surfaces, their shapes and lines became guiding principles. The incidental marks on the surface brought forth in previous works were no longer present. Painting over the surfaces obscured their source and created a highly specific shape that exists only in the painting itself. The obscured surfaces made the resulting work directly engage with a language of painting instead of an appropriation of its vocabulary.
Embracing this language allowed for a freedom to create new paintings from proxies of the found surfaces. In this new body of work, I have traced the found surfaces directly onto paintings, transforming them into drawing elements. I have traced the found surfaces onto sized canvas that I have collaged onto new paintings. I have collaged multiple versions of the same form onto the same canvas. I had previously described the surfaces as anonymous, but now a better word is eidetic.
The new paintings frame spatial excerpts. And in the process of their creation, the paintings veer away from the surface to which they had originally referred. The original shape may just be a suggestion of its final manifestation. In its creation, each painting is at some point lost, dies, becomes new.”

Erik Lindman, 2014

Image: Erik Lindman, Untitled, 2014
Oil on Linen over Panel, 96 x 60 inches

Wednesday February 25, 2015

Universit - de Montr - al - Facult - de m - decine v - t - rinaire

Facult� de m�decine v�t�rinaire Éric Troncy
  • Professor (coordinates )
  • Director of Animal pharmacology research group of Quebec (GREPAQ )
  • Regular researcher affiliated to the Research Centre of the University of Montreal Hospital Centre (CRCHUM)
  • Adjunct professor, Department of Anaesthesiology of the Faculty of Medicine of theUniversité de Montréal
Professionnal expertise
  • Pharmacology of analgesics and anaesthetics
  • Metrology of animal pain
  • Psychometric measurements
  • Animal behaviours
  • Physiological measurements
  • Functional evaluations
  • Kinetics, kinematics
  • Neuro-physiological evaluations
  • Neuro-imaging
  • EEG, Neurogenomics
  • Neuroproteomics
  • Neurocognition
Research interests
  • Pain and osteoarthritis
  • Acute surgical pain
  • Pain killer herbal therapy
  • Development of new analgesics

Research focuses on the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis in animals and its functional repercussions. Using experimental models, new therapeutic strategies are investigated in vitro, ex-vivo, and in vivo. Using spontaneous osteoarthritis models in dogs and cats, new therapeutic strategies are confirmed in vivo. We are looking for the application of these strategies to the animal market or its transfer to human disease.

Collaboration with the researchers of the RC-CHUM’s Osteoarthritis research unit :

  • Linking functional evaluations (kinetics – ground force reactions; kinematics –motion; accelerometrics) to structural damages, quantified with biomedical imaging (MRI, X-rays), histology, biochemistry, and molecular biology.
  • Optimization of neurophysiologic methods for correlating the degree of nociception stimulation to neurogenomic, neuroproteomic, and neurocognitive changes linked to the animal’s condition.
  • Validation of animal pain assessment methods
Publications