Angry Art? A Review of Richard Bell's solo exhibition 'You'd believe me if I was a white man'

“I’ve been accused of making angry art...just because it makes them feel angry, doesn’t mean that I am angry” claims Richard Bell. It is difficult to associate the word angry with Bell’s recent solo exhibition ‘You’d believe me if I was a white man’ on show at Milani Gallery, Brisbane. The exhibition featured four substantial canvases strategically designed to fit comfortably on the walls of the traditional white box gallery space.  On first impression, the works appear as a flat mechanical surface of bright patterns - a convergence of traditional aboriginal art and modernist styles.  White text stands out from the paintings, contrasting and merging with swathes of black and white in the background.  Statements such as Western Art does not exist and The first shall be the last and the last shall be the first directly confront the viewer with a content that may be considered challenging and accusatory to a conservative, and dare I say 'white', art audience. On closer inspection, it is apparent that there is a conceptually complex paintings with layers of additional and partially hidden text of a similar vein weave in and out of each painting's plane.

Like most of his previous work, the paintings in this exhibition seek to challenge perceived notions of aboriginal culture and art, as well as touching on issues of religion and politics.  Bell has continued to build upon his Bell's Theorem series first initiated with the painting  Scientia E Metaphysica (Bell’s Theorem) (2002), which boldly states ‘Aboriginal art it’s a white thing', and an accompanying essay which explores the ethical and political issues surrounding the rising commodification of Indigenous art. From this concept has grown a series of paintings that prominently feature text taken from western art and legislative sources, often reinterpreted from his own indigenous perspective in way that seeks to question and challenge the status quo of Australian culture. The difference between the larger paintings in this exhibition and previous works, is that they are prettier, with use of vibrant colours and a touch more attention to finer detail.  Bell is the first to acknowledge that these new works were not entirely painted by his own hands, but rather by assistants working under his charismatic direction.  This different way of working seems to have granted Bell with a fresh approach that has helped him to resolve some issues in the work.

Scientia E Metaphysica (Bell’s Theorem) (2002)

'You'd believe me if I was a white man' exhibition view

Bell claims that he wants his paintings to look "pretty" so that they might “bypass the conscious to go directly to the subconscious”.  The paintings manage to pull the viewer back and forth between embodied experience of the works and a conscious awareness of reactions and emotions to the content.  Do I feel angry? Perhaps for a fleeting moment as a response to the initial feeling of being lumped into the category of 'white'.  But most importantly, I take from the work a questioning of this reaction and a desire to rise above any ignorance of the white/black history and present culture that exists in Australia.  This is not angry art.  Bell is more than a contemporary artist and political activist.  He is a communicator.  The viewer of this exhibition, surrounded from all sides, is encouraged to take part in a dialogue.  For Bell, this seems to be where the real art begins - the conversation between black fella and white fella.

Caitlin Franzmann