Read more about this at: http://www.stuxgallery.com/
source
*Update:
I attended the opening of the exhibition with two friends. Beforehand, I scoured the internet looking for information on the artist, as there was no clear explanation of the different installments, and what they represent, the artist's intentions, etc. I was initially intrigued, when I learned van Empel was from the Netherlands, with black representation in his pieces, I wanted to find out a little more about the message he was trying to portray.
Very reminiscent of the 'noble savage', with dark complected children, in their Sunday's best (the medium was collaged digital photography so it is questionable whether the subjects were actually wearing the attire in the finished product), with wide eyes staring at the viewer, against a background of water lilies and greenery. The few images with white subjects lacked the rigidness of their black counterparts. Towards the back of the gallery, in an elevated section, there was an installment that had more to do with the artist borrowing imagery and memories from his childhood and placing them in the same images. That is to say a toothbrush and a kettle are not necessarily situated in the same room, but for these ephemeral purposes, they were found along the same counter as other familial bric a bra, yet nothing seemed out of place. What made this section different was the fact that there were small bits of prose/poetry/anecdotes found as the placards or exhibition labels.
After giving permission to be filmed speaking amongst ourselves about the works we were viewing, and hearing an older black lesbian, arguing loudly, with her white male counterpart about some one's family heritage and some one's mother being black, while asking not to be insulted, we, my friends and I, thought it was time to get to the bottom of the artist's background and intentions.
We asked the person that asked our permission to film if he knew anything about the artist and the exhibition, it turns out the artist was his brother and he would introduce us to ask him ourselves. Very simply, in trying to portray innocence, he used a white girl with blond hair, blue eyes, and a blue and white dress, to which he was told that he was subscribing to a very Aryan aesthetic. So, he decided to use black children, because they are not normally seen in that light and it was different. When asked about the stiffness of their postures as well as their unyielding attire, he responded that that was the way he dressed for a photograph in his childhood. All of a sudden we were able to enjoy the exhibition. This also led to a discussion, amongst ourselves, about the difference between race in America versus abroad, and his simple resolution to utilize black children to show innocence, because his prior attempt was problematic. As Americans, we must think about the multiplicities of identity, perception, reception, and overwhelming sensitivity, when van Empel, was just trying to make sure people would by his art.
See it if you can.
