As impressed as I got with Hlobo I got somewhat underwhelmed with Colen, it should be mentioned that I saw the Colen exhibition before the Hlobo one.
Maybe because this one was the piece that met me and it gave me serious expectations for similar things, things someting inside me really wanted to see more of. But alas, it was more like a visual cacophony. You can decide for yourself.
When I think about it this kind of reminds me of my initial reaction to Orozco, except it didn't fade. It's a bit difficult to say whether this is simply because I like the artist Orozco better than Colen or because when all came to all Tate is better at putting shit together than Astrup Fearnley.
Maybe it's like they said in Norwegain newspaper Aftenposten "You have to be a young man, living in New York, preferably with a lot of drug use behind you to exhibit at Astrup Fearnley". I mean, maybe there is a deep conection and a thoughtfullness I'm not trained enough to see, but then again maybe it's just a whole lot of shit that people bought because everybody else did? It all seems so superficial and uninvolved to me.
And maybe most of all because the man obviously has a talent when it comes to painting and it makes me wish he'd investigated it deeper or just left it alone insted of teasing me with it.