The sculptural installation of CHARLIE CITRON 'String History has no Age' (2000) hung centrally in the space, which has a central dome ceiling. This piece was important in giving definition to the space architecturally and providing a pivotal point to the other works. The work of Citron was sight specific, consisting of an eleborate set of objects wrapped and rubberised. The objects were suspended from tendril like rubber band strings.
The most present motif was that of two candelabras suspended one above the other. The piece was hung through the centre of the vaulted dome of the building's clock tower.This meant that the piece set attention to the whole of the building. The other elements in the configuration of the work weaved a narrative, which declared traces of both childhood and adult imagery. For instance toy dinosaurs or walking sticks of elderly men. The consequence of the juxtaposition of elements summoned up a field of half remembered visitations on a child's surrealistic imagination. The impressive feat that this work demonstrated was in giving an apparent lightness of touch that was underpinned with darker associative themes and discourses.

In the central space were the computer-generated animations of PAUL TABAK. The three loops were presented on a VCR, and consisted of three connected sequences 'Meat,' 'Smoke' and 'Clock'. Each of the animations lasts approximately fifteen minutes. The first in the sequence 'Meat' consits of an image of an almost cartoon-like depiction of a beefsteak, that looks as if it is slightly past it's sell by date. Around this depiction there is a fly that circles around, it buzzes giving an omnipresent irritation to the exhibition. The sound is very important in this sense.
The animation that follows 'Smoke' consists of a cigarette in an ashtray that has been left trailing an undulating plume of smoke. In the background we hear the muted sound of a gathering of people chattering indistinctly. The final animation is of a clock that transcribes a minute; it is always two o'clock. The sound of the seconds ticks by.
The work of Paul Tabak [ 1964, AU] had a quality of ambient music that occurs in American shopping malls. Each of the short animations is directed at the passage of time, but engenders a feeling of both waste and death. Paradoxically these concerns are described by a very highly wrought image whose complexity reminds us of the still lives of the golden era of Dutch painting. They are reminders of death, which was an important theme in these still lives. However, the theme is placed into a modern context, the ashtray in 'Smoke' is placed on a modern tabletop surface. The surfaces and textures are all used to denote the kitchness of our existence in a modern age. There is also a cynicism in using these images, which have the glossiness of advertisements; the products in Tabak's creations - not selling a golden life-style - remind us of the futility of an existence based around purchasing our well-being.

The installation of DAVID GARCIA 'The Translation Machine' (2000) was placed in the space behind the central room. The work required reduced lighting; this was achieved by changing the entrance of the space. What was important about the piece in term of the logistics of it's installation was that the viewer approached it from a distance. The piece was located close to the rear door of the gallery, so that people would have to go through the installation in order to get to the bar and toilets. The initial impression that the viewer beheld was of a screen that projects and magnifies the image of a neo-classical statue that rotates. The effect, when seen from the middle space made the image seem like some hi-tech manifestation. The sculpture appears colossal. However, as the viewer investigates the installation, the effect lessens and then the viewer realizes that he can look behind the partition in which the screen is held within. Behind the partition the sense of a complicated hi-tech construction is radically transformed because the viewer sees that the elements are constructed out of low-tech components. The statue we see, is a found object. It is a miniaturised tourist souvenir of a neo-classical statue, which is bound in a string. This reminds us directly of Gulliver's travels when - as a giant in Lilliput - Gulliver awakens to find himself bound by the tiny Lilliputians. Behind this rotating sculpture is an old television set that is sending out a field of static which through the lens initially appears to be an expansive spectacular effect. The work of Garcia, curiously given his involvement with new media, seems almost a critique of the spectecular effects that technology presents. In this work we are presented with the transformation of an image from the grand and spectecular, to the common place and insignificant. This condition of the work reminds us of the Wizard of Oz and of how the little old man is caught behind the curtain working the controls. The work is also defining - through a reverse mechanism - the sense in which art has historically been used to aggrandize individuals and ideologies.

The work of RENEE RIDGWAY [1965, Mountain Home, Idaho US] was presented in the space to the right of the central space; this space also contained the work of Peter Lelliott. The piece entitled 'Le Noir et Le Blanc' is a video made from a drawing and presented on a VCR. The drawing was made explicitly in order to be filmed. In this film, the viewer is led through the images of the drawing. These images seem to be related to the spoken narration, which we soon realise is from a French learning tape. This lesson is: the conversations a man, new to his village, has with various shopkeepers, in order to obtain some material. The series of conversations reveal the man to be a collector of butterflies. There is in the drawing a series of pathways connecting images. These images are given titles ironically defying the classification of the image. The superimposition of different narratives in this piece presents us with a kind of mystery, which is couched in different layers of language. We are asked to enter into this work with the idea that things will be revealed to us. This happens in part, but it is often through the contrast between image and text - where it does not show us the expected correlation - that the ironical message lies. The drawing is revealed more at the end of the film where there is a final pan that returns us to the beginning. This corresponds with the revelation in the spoken narration; of the identity and purpose of the man searching for some light and strong material that he needs to make a net to catch the elusive butterfly. The spoken narrative is translated in English subtitles; this is both informative and an addition to the layering of the work. For an English speaker the surreal nature of the narration is revealed.

The work of PETER LELLIOTT [1961, Nairobi KE] consisted of a series of computer-generated paintings. They were evenly placed on the far right hand wall of the right hand space. These works were presented in glass covered frames with passepartout mounts. There were seven images in all. These works were related to each other in that they were in a landscape format. They all were representational, using photographic sources. The images were highly detailed reminiscent of Indian miniatures. There was also in most of the works an Indian theme, for instance in 'Brutalised' (2000) we saw a seemingly pleasing portrait of a young Indian girl. However, with closer scrutiny we saw that she had been beaten. The work had a duality and utilised the extreme detail possible with the computer rendering to produce glimpses into a darker narrative.

JIM HARRIS [1968, London GB] showed a series of five paintings in the space left to the central domed space. The work was all made within the month before the exhibition. The work was observed and painted directly in the outdoors, in front of the scene depicted. The work is of the railings on the side of the ferry port in the North of Amsterdam. This is not important in the understanding of the work, which maintains a painterly formalistic understanding of the scene. The paintings of Harris - although the most traditional in the exhibition - are in fact the most resistant to the notion of narrative; in that we are moved not by the events described in the work, but by the skill and quality in the handling of the surface of the paint. The show reckoned on providing a platform to develop an approach to narrative in fine art. It seems then that Harris' work is out of keeping with a general theme. However, it provides a counterpoint to the exhibition and shows the boundaries of narration in art and this is useful within the intent of the exhibition.

The work of the six participants was successful in conveying a set of diverse mediums and perspectives around the theme of narration. The range of work did not conflict in terms of the installation of the space and produced a harmonious overall unity, allowing the individual voices of the artworks to be seen in the best possible way keeping the integrity of each work.