ever increasing professionalism of our Bermuda artists and the ever increasing standard of work submitted. As evidenced with the work submitted for this show, the visual arts are alive and vibrant in Bermuda.'' So writes Laura T. Gorham, the National Gallery's director, in the opening forward in this Biennial's sumptuous and comprehensive catalogue.

It's a view that any cynic might regard with a quizzically raised eyebrow and a dash of pessimism.

After all, as Ms Gorham also states in her forward. this exhibition "embodies our mission to promote, benefit and advance the visual arts in Bermuda''.

Lofty ideals indeed but at the same time one can hardly expect a promoter of Bermuda's arts to then trash her charges.

Nevertheless the opinion that "the visual arts are alive and well in Bermuda'' is not one that this reviewer necessarily disagrees with -- and this exhibition does illustrate that statement to a point.

A few examples? Compare Andrew Trimingham's `Looking Back' with Graham Foster's `The World Fish'. Both incredibly strong pieces of sculpture, both beautiful in their own way, and yet, while sharing so many similarities, they are entirely different.

There are other contrasts to be made. Take, for example, Stacey Jane Amos' beautifully delicate watercolours with the dirt, heat and chaos of Vernon Clarke's `The Forge'.

And while there are some complete turkeys here (Louisa B. Flannery is surely joking with us -- just how did `Dreams of...' get in), the vast majority of the work is of an excellent standard.

And yet... This exhibition has three faults, two of which, I agree, the National Gallery cannot be held responsible for.

Firstly, the vast majority of this work has been doing the rounds for the last two years -- again and again and again. Okay, this is a retrospective show after all, a review of how the art scene in Bermuda has developed in the last two years. It's just that, with very little new to be discovered, the viewer can become bored.

Secondly, there are some glaring omissions with some extremely gifted and successful big names not being represented at all. Again, this cannot be blamed on the National Gallery itself -- if artists choose not to submit there is little that can be done about it.

Thirdly, just how critical was the judging panel? (David de la Torre from the Honolulu Academy of Arts and Susan Masuoka from Tuffs University Gallery).

Again in the forward the point is made that just 77 of the 304 works submitted -- just a little more than 25 percent -- made it onto the gallery's walls.

Sounds like the panel was pretty severe when it came to weeding out weaker work you might think.

But there's a far more revealing statistic exposed in the brochure. A total of 39 artists actually submitted work for the show. How many artists do you think got their own little piece of space in the gallery? Yes, amazingly every single contributor got at least one piece past the scrutiny of the judging panel.

This is the sort of attitude that the Bermuda Society of Arts always adopts, with everybody getting a piece of the action regardless of the quality of their work. Now it may be fine a charity made up of part-time painters who all pay an annual membership fee and become involved in the first place purely for the thrill of seeing their work on public display, (although it does mean that standards are compromised) but is it a policy that the National Gallery should be practising? I think not. It seems that some work on display here has been accepted not because of any artistic merit but rather because of a fear of causing offence.

Actually it's pretty difficult to figure out the thinking behind some of the judges' decisions. Why for example, did they choose five each of Jonah Jones' and Graham Foster's paintings and only one by several others? That said, this is in itself a pretty strong show even if you may get a sense of deja vu walking around the gallery. But it falls some way short of presenting a `best of' collection, the cream of what Bermudian artists have produced in the last two years. To present it as such is misleading and does the arts in Bermuda an injustice. Some artists are included who really don't deserve to be here while others are not represented at all.

The arts in Bermuda are certainly alive and vibrant at the moment. Sadly, this exhibition doesn't paint a completely true picture.

GARETH FINIGHAN REVIEW REV ARTISTS ART