I've started looking at compiling my "imaginary show" based on squares...I've read that Quadrum means "Square" or "frame" in Greek...very handy!
I've been reading today of many foundations to suprematism (Malevitch) and de stijl (mondrian). I've been learning of the influences of the Russian constructivists (Malevitch, Khlebnikov, Kruchenikh, Rozanova), from Ferdinand de Saussure and his ideas on language as "Signs" to Heinrich Wölfflin's ideas on painterly vs linear.
After finishing the "art since 1900" book (when I say "finish", I mean flipping through every page to find art that is based on squares, and reading those pages) I have compiled a great list of selected works, I skateboard up to the shops to have a good solid focused think on what I am doing, and I realise that a show based only on "art with squares" is missing the point (well, in respect to my work). I need to curate a show that includes any use of squares, that is, the everyday, mathematics, architecture, computer games etc.
Chloe comes round to say goodbye (she's heading off to Europe again, to travel, and experience the world...) So I run my ideas past her. She points out that "good curation is simplicity", that is; A simple approach to a subject can not fail. She also talks of hard nosed editing (or "selection"). Each item in a show must convey something important to the subject matter, or context of the show. I can't "just" have a room filled with paintings, sculptures and architectural models, if I want this "show" to be something more than "just" an art exhibition. I feel I could run into the trap of making an "educatory" experience, not a bad thing in itself, but I would like to curate something that still had artistic merit, but also does open a world of high art and everyday "culture" to people.
I love the idea of the square as a basic building block, a construct for modern life. There is something infinitely elegant about the square, its simplicity, its functionality and rationality when combination is required. There is also something cold and impenetrable about the square, "unnatural" if you will (although the simple Sodium Chloride or Pyrite crystal would disagree!). It is a futuristic shape, something inorganic, which fascinates and yet scares us. The Pixel is a perfect exemplar of this situation, the future of communication, binary flickers of true and false, on and off creating language that is conveyed via an array of square pixels on computer screens and digital projections, be that written or visual, even sound is represented to us as a flow of flickering pixels when we turn on iTunes or Windows Media Player...
anyway, enough of all this chat...I need to write an essay, in the form of a welcoming text to an imaginary show called "Quadrum" - and an imaginary review (by me) of said show...am I biting off more than I can chew? You never know till you try. Failure is a good learning process, you can only learn from your mistakes, and this is the lesson we are being taught in the Masters, it's not always about things going right, experience in life is based on good and bad experiences, and knowing what is good, and what is bad can only lead to a fuller knowledge and educated stance in this world.
listening to : various - 1993-1999 Mainstreet Records : godflesh - streetcleaner
Monday 30 April 2007
Sunday 29 April 2007
starting the 1500 word essay
It's not as bad as I thought...most of these blogs are around 1000 words!
I've got my "hook", to compile a show I'd like to see, based on the idea of Squares.
I am going to compile artists, obtuse artists and generally try to create a show that works on many literal and lateral influences of squares (maths, angles, area, borders, surface).I am going to write a review, advert, interview and synopsis for an imaginary show, where my "you and I" work is alongside Mondrian, Malevitch, Long, Innes...I've recently bought: Art Since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism and Postmodernism. I can kill many birds with one stone (one "essay"), where I can contextualise my work based on the art history I read, I can creatively write a review, in a third person stylee, I can use my Graphic design skills to creatively layout the writing, I can show my understanding of many of the seminars we had, mostly based on Stewart Macdonald's "Curating" seminar.
If It comes off, I think it'll look pretty good...and hopefully read well...that's the main idea!
we also had Susie Beaslie staying over night, and we did discuss modern art, and I find it increasingly interesting that I defend all forms of modern art, I know I've changed my view, or started to understand more, the reasons for conceptual art, the need to push boundareies, in this day and age of "the quest for new". Painting, Sculpture, printmaking, "traditional" forms of art have all got a place int he art world (tell that to the snobs!), but I know that artists are trying to continue Lewitt and Duchamp's dream of a conceptual form of art, where Ideas are the tools and materials to give concepts form...hard to understand if you don't see the value in thinking Vs a "nicely made object", but sure;y it is ideas that are the most important thing in an uneducated and blinkered society?
listening to : Golden - golden : tortoise - lazarus taxon box set
I've got my "hook", to compile a show I'd like to see, based on the idea of Squares.
I am going to compile artists, obtuse artists and generally try to create a show that works on many literal and lateral influences of squares (maths, angles, area, borders, surface).I am going to write a review, advert, interview and synopsis for an imaginary show, where my "you and I" work is alongside Mondrian, Malevitch, Long, Innes...I've recently bought: Art Since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism and Postmodernism. I can kill many birds with one stone (one "essay"), where I can contextualise my work based on the art history I read, I can creatively write a review, in a third person stylee, I can use my Graphic design skills to creatively layout the writing, I can show my understanding of many of the seminars we had, mostly based on Stewart Macdonald's "Curating" seminar.
If It comes off, I think it'll look pretty good...and hopefully read well...that's the main idea!
we also had Susie Beaslie staying over night, and we did discuss modern art, and I find it increasingly interesting that I defend all forms of modern art, I know I've changed my view, or started to understand more, the reasons for conceptual art, the need to push boundareies, in this day and age of "the quest for new". Painting, Sculpture, printmaking, "traditional" forms of art have all got a place int he art world (tell that to the snobs!), but I know that artists are trying to continue Lewitt and Duchamp's dream of a conceptual form of art, where Ideas are the tools and materials to give concepts form...hard to understand if you don't see the value in thinking Vs a "nicely made object", but sure;y it is ideas that are the most important thing in an uneducated and blinkered society?
listening to : Golden - golden : tortoise - lazarus taxon box set
Thursday 26 April 2007
Edinburgh trip – many, many galleries…
Today, we head to Edinburgh, for an art feast…A guided tour by Steve Hollingsworth to the more contemporary art galleries in our capital city. The Embassy, Talbot Rice, Stills, Edinburgh Printmakers Studio, Dogger Fisher and the National Portrait Gallery. We are treated to an array of contemporary installation, drawing, painting, sculpture, photography, print and video. It’s an interesting mix of settings, from a house, to a museum, from prestigious frontages, to hard to find back streets – the day is filled with a dizzying variety of art and culture. I was highly entertained by the fact that most of these “places of art” are open to an elite few, well, open to all…but who in the “general public” is willing to enter a house with a metal machine clattering two antlers together? It’s interesting that such a simple, stripped down space could convey such unwelcoming vibes. You have to know of these places, and have a mission to go there, I get the feeling that you wouldn’t “just walk in” if passing. It’s certainly a point I took away from today – the sheer audacity and elitism of these spaces. Dogger fisher, for example, has a bell you have to ring, like an expensive boutique…unwelcoming to most, “exclusive” and “justified” for the few. A recent article in the frieze magazine gave such an insight. A gallery with what looked like a door, but no handle and a buzzer…Buzzing the buzzer gave you exclusive access to a poe faced, droll gallery worker, explaining that the “handle” is at the bottom of the door, like some fucked up Terry Gilliam skit, to enter hell. The writer recalls much buzzer pressing and confused / disdained conversation, only to eventually find the door handle to find it locked, as the Gallery was closed…what fun these “powerful” snobs have over the public…is it any wonder “art” (or “modern art”) gets a drubbing? What’s wrong with wanting people to see work, be they plebs or YBA’s? I’d liken it to walking into a scary pub, it’s not nice feeling ill at ease, just because of a place, you don’t belong here…so what are you doing here? The Rusty Cutlass or Embassy, the choice is yours. This said, good art is about confrontation, so placing work in a space that seems to not welcome you, might just be part and parcel to the whole experience, being on edge might open up the senses, just the tonic for “looking at art”…Not all galleries felt like this today, but at the other end of the spectrum, cosy, safe, old, obvious…much like the art that inhabited it too. Like all things in life, “you can’t please all of the people all of the time”. So I can understand why such elitist places exist. It’s about confidence; confidence to know you will have a sufficient audience (to create / keep a contemporary Scottish art scene at the cutting edge), confidence to know that you can get funding for projects, confidence to know that your gallery is a necessary part of life – no matter how small the audience. I keep asking myself the question through the day…”Would I show here?” (If I were asked). On the whole, I said yes every time…I am educating myself to understand that these places are important to my life as an artist, I do want to be shown in our capital city and central belt, but I also would feel comfortable showing work in a field in Finzien.
The shows we saw were certainly varied, and I’d have to spend an age writing about them all, to do them justice – so I won’t review them all, but I will write about what I felt were the most interesting points of the day.
Brandon Vickerd – When all our heroes turn to ghosts (Embassy)
In a ground floor flat, we’re treated to a view of two bike-like machines rutting, on and off. It looks impressive, we dutifully walk round it, when it whirrs into action, jazz timings clicking off antlers, rhythm of life…or is it? We’re told (in the very prescriptive / descriptive a4 sheet we’re given) that the machine is an exploration of the randomness from mechanical absolutes. The idea that a pure, constant, known cycle can result in non-repeating, non-cyclic patterns, if an element from nature is interspersed with the machine…I like this Idea, it’s something I’ve been looking at in my own works, how repetition can actually cause variance…it all depends on your level of perception and attention to detail. The antlers, each time the machine heaves into life, do set a different pace, beat and pattern, I’d likened it to some minimal German techno (Thomas Brinkman for example), where it is the detail that makes the difference, not some brash 4/4 rock anthem, or cheesy verse chorus verse chart piddle…which is interesting, as some of the references in Vickerd’s work is of rock / heavy metal lyrics, but extracted (taken out of context). Is this minimalisation of overly theatrical lyrics of death, Satanism and ritual a furthering of the idea of variance in detail? A pentagram covers a map, 5 lyrics next to the map, are we to make a story of each line of verse, to each location of the points in the star? It is interesting that I am the only one in the group to notice that the lines are indeed rock lyrics (Metallica’s “ONE” for example), and I then read that Vickerd’s work aims to look into the bridge between high and low brown cultures…ho ho, I have a head start in the group, I’ve got low brow rock music ahoy in my collection! I can look intelligent, by knowing of unintelligent, teenage angst music…(is that a good thing?) The most striking part of the show (3 rooms) is a large ghostly (based on comic themes of ghosts, “a human shape with a sheet over it”) made of metal, standing 6feet 6 inches towering, and leaning in, as if to fly off at the drop of a hat. Its presence in the room is rather unsettling…The “sell” on the A4 page is certainly interesting, in that we (and I used the word here already) see the sculpture as a “ghost”. The writing states that we accept on a worldly level that a figure draped in a sheet “looks like a ghost”, when we don’t know what ghosts “look like” at all, a very Scooby doo, childhood story vision of what a ghost is…perhaps this is why we feel this way, childhood fears kept for life…like our apparent inbuilt need to recoil from spiders, our marvel at fireworks. I like the sense of humour that dusts the show; the statement on the A4 is smattered with humour, “…unlikely that it [the ghost] would chose to take the form of a hovering bed sheet”. Steve dislikes the rutting sculpture (“ghosts and champions of entropy”), he talks about entropy being, “near collapse” and that the sculpture is solid and hardly likely to fall apart…I always thought that entropy was about the loss of energy, about stillness, balance and equality, an eternal state of nothing, no winner, no loser…it’s amazing what language can throw up, intricate and semantic, definitions, even eloquently conveyed, are still open to interpretation, all bringing me back to my interests, what is truth? How can interpretation be a good or bad thing?
Alex Pollard: Black Marks (Talbot Rice gallery)
Representing Scotland in the Venice Biennale in 2005, this is Alex’s first major show since then. As of many artists I see today, I am unaware of most of them, till now, so I have no basis of judgement from the past, a refreshing “new look” at the work, help or hindrance, it’s of no concern, it’s all about personal experience, perception and reaction (based on history of the artists work, or not…) We’re confronted with a huge, open white space, a grand room indeed, filled with disparate works, large brass “coins” in the centre of the room, they resemble Rebbeca Horn's sculptures, crudly made, thickly applied clay, converted to brass castings, giant wiggly lines (on closer inspection, are pencils) stuck to the wall, along side make up mirrors, false eyelashes, lipsticks, smudges of graphite (the pens comically placed as if they’ve drawn them, whereas we know it was the artists hand that smudged the marks around), lines drawn, almost cartoon like indicating tension, one imagines that the release of this would send the pencil flying across the wall, all comical – linking to the clowning theme, the wiggling line might represent a clown on a unicycle, wobbling his way across a bare circus stage? All that was missing was a bucket of torn paper, too obvious! 5 “portraits” of various clowns are made from broken, exploded pencils at the far end of the show. I can pick out crying clown, mad clown, scary clown, bowie clown…lovely works, how these seem to be the manifestation or condensate of the previous “fun” work on the wall, a seriousness derived from destruction of materials (construction from deconstruction). The show continues upstairs with some rather disturbing, realistic paintings of clown / big top icons, distorted in an almost photoshop-esque way (ripple effect anyone?). It’s as if the show has been pulling focus, refining into a twisted reality, a nightmarish end to what started out as a fun ride. Pay your penny, end up in hell; perhaps those large coins should cover our eyes as we take the ferry across the river Styx. From playful to morbid, it’s certainly an interesting, varied show. I’d noticed that the poster has Alex Pollard as a clown, donning black and white makeup, was this a documented performance? It makes me feel like I am still only seeing a portion of the theme here, it’s tantalising that one poster, with one image, can make you want more from a show.
The other shows were beautiful, ugly, confusing, simple, interesting and banal. The whole day for me, was really seeing Edinburgh from a contemporary art point of view, I’d never been to these galleries before, Dogger fisher, Embassy, Talbot rice etc…but, every time I am down there from now on in, I will make a point of going into these places, I will speak to the owners, I will persist in belonging to this scene. All it takes is time and a will, I have the will, and the time, so why not?
We end the day by saying goodbye to the train-goers, and head for a coffee, to avoid rush-hour. I advise the girls (Susie, Mary & Amy) that we should visit the bookshop : analogue. We inadvertently stumble into the beginnings of a private showing, run by Spin, champagne, Contacts and a bloody good end to a lovely day..well, including the magic drive back up the road, and sublime fish and chips from the bervie...realities luxuries, lovely jubbly. (did I just type that ?)...
Listening to : shellac - acton park : amon tobid - supermodefied
The shows we saw were certainly varied, and I’d have to spend an age writing about them all, to do them justice – so I won’t review them all, but I will write about what I felt were the most interesting points of the day.
Brandon Vickerd – When all our heroes turn to ghosts (Embassy)
In a ground floor flat, we’re treated to a view of two bike-like machines rutting, on and off. It looks impressive, we dutifully walk round it, when it whirrs into action, jazz timings clicking off antlers, rhythm of life…or is it? We’re told (in the very prescriptive / descriptive a4 sheet we’re given) that the machine is an exploration of the randomness from mechanical absolutes. The idea that a pure, constant, known cycle can result in non-repeating, non-cyclic patterns, if an element from nature is interspersed with the machine…I like this Idea, it’s something I’ve been looking at in my own works, how repetition can actually cause variance…it all depends on your level of perception and attention to detail. The antlers, each time the machine heaves into life, do set a different pace, beat and pattern, I’d likened it to some minimal German techno (Thomas Brinkman for example), where it is the detail that makes the difference, not some brash 4/4 rock anthem, or cheesy verse chorus verse chart piddle…which is interesting, as some of the references in Vickerd’s work is of rock / heavy metal lyrics, but extracted (taken out of context). Is this minimalisation of overly theatrical lyrics of death, Satanism and ritual a furthering of the idea of variance in detail? A pentagram covers a map, 5 lyrics next to the map, are we to make a story of each line of verse, to each location of the points in the star? It is interesting that I am the only one in the group to notice that the lines are indeed rock lyrics (Metallica’s “ONE” for example), and I then read that Vickerd’s work aims to look into the bridge between high and low brown cultures…ho ho, I have a head start in the group, I’ve got low brow rock music ahoy in my collection! I can look intelligent, by knowing of unintelligent, teenage angst music…(is that a good thing?) The most striking part of the show (3 rooms) is a large ghostly (based on comic themes of ghosts, “a human shape with a sheet over it”) made of metal, standing 6feet 6 inches towering, and leaning in, as if to fly off at the drop of a hat. Its presence in the room is rather unsettling…The “sell” on the A4 page is certainly interesting, in that we (and I used the word here already) see the sculpture as a “ghost”. The writing states that we accept on a worldly level that a figure draped in a sheet “looks like a ghost”, when we don’t know what ghosts “look like” at all, a very Scooby doo, childhood story vision of what a ghost is…perhaps this is why we feel this way, childhood fears kept for life…like our apparent inbuilt need to recoil from spiders, our marvel at fireworks. I like the sense of humour that dusts the show; the statement on the A4 is smattered with humour, “…unlikely that it [the ghost] would chose to take the form of a hovering bed sheet”. Steve dislikes the rutting sculpture (“ghosts and champions of entropy”), he talks about entropy being, “near collapse” and that the sculpture is solid and hardly likely to fall apart…I always thought that entropy was about the loss of energy, about stillness, balance and equality, an eternal state of nothing, no winner, no loser…it’s amazing what language can throw up, intricate and semantic, definitions, even eloquently conveyed, are still open to interpretation, all bringing me back to my interests, what is truth? How can interpretation be a good or bad thing?Alex Pollard: Black Marks (Talbot Rice gallery)
Representing Scotland in the Venice Biennale in 2005, this is Alex’s first major show since then. As of many artists I see today, I am unaware of most of them, till now, so I have no basis of judgement from the past, a refreshing “new look” at the work, help or hindrance, it’s of no concern, it’s all about personal experience, perception and reaction (based on history of the artists work, or not…) We’re confronted with a huge, open white space, a grand room indeed, filled with disparate works, large brass “coins” in the centre of the room, they resemble Rebbeca Horn's sculptures, crudly made, thickly applied clay, converted to brass castings, giant wiggly lines (on closer inspection, are pencils) stuck to the wall, along side make up mirrors, false eyelashes, lipsticks, smudges of graphite (the pens comically placed as if they’ve drawn them, whereas we know it was the artists hand that smudged the marks around), lines drawn, almost cartoon like indicating tension, one imagines that the release of this would send the pencil flying across the wall, all comical – linking to the clowning theme, the wiggling line might represent a clown on a unicycle, wobbling his way across a bare circus stage? All that was missing was a bucket of torn paper, too obvious! 5 “portraits” of various clowns are made from broken, exploded pencils at the far end of the show. I can pick out crying clown, mad clown, scary clown, bowie clown…lovely works, how these seem to be the manifestation or condensate of the previous “fun” work on the wall, a seriousness derived from destruction of materials (construction from deconstruction). The show continues upstairs with some rather disturbing, realistic paintings of clown / big top icons, distorted in an almost photoshop-esque way (ripple effect anyone?). It’s as if the show has been pulling focus, refining into a twisted reality, a nightmarish end to what started out as a fun ride. Pay your penny, end up in hell; perhaps those large coins should cover our eyes as we take the ferry across the river Styx. From playful to morbid, it’s certainly an interesting, varied show. I’d noticed that the poster has Alex Pollard as a clown, donning black and white makeup, was this a documented performance? It makes me feel like I am still only seeing a portion of the theme here, it’s tantalising that one poster, with one image, can make you want more from a show.The other shows were beautiful, ugly, confusing, simple, interesting and banal. The whole day for me, was really seeing Edinburgh from a contemporary art point of view, I’d never been to these galleries before, Dogger fisher, Embassy, Talbot rice etc…but, every time I am down there from now on in, I will make a point of going into these places, I will speak to the owners, I will persist in belonging to this scene. All it takes is time and a will, I have the will, and the time, so why not?
We end the day by saying goodbye to the train-goers, and head for a coffee, to avoid rush-hour. I advise the girls (Susie, Mary & Amy) that we should visit the bookshop : analogue. We inadvertently stumble into the beginnings of a private showing, run by Spin, champagne, Contacts and a bloody good end to a lovely day..well, including the magic drive back up the road, and sublime fish and chips from the bervie...realities luxuries, lovely jubbly. (did I just type that ?)...
Listening to : shellac - acton park : amon tobid - supermodefied
Wednesday 25 April 2007
Joanne & Tom end of semester crit
Today I have (writing this before the event, for a change!) a final crit with Joanne Tatham & Tom O'Sullivan. My mission from last time was to "get to grips with my language" (based around my work).
I've been looking at podcasts, reading books etc (as you know)...and I think it's starting to sink in...
I keep forgetting to note an artist I'd found recently, who uses natural inputs to generate technological outputs : Keny Marshall's Apophenia (on youtube) certainly looks like the lo-fi mad scientist "made in a shed" ensemble that I could certainly feel comfortable talking about... I am just about to head out the door...but I'll be back to write about Keny's work, and how my crit went...
----
well, today went really well...I showed Jo and Tom my shed model, and they liked the concept, but were a bit worried i was just "dotting around", making art with no collective concept, or understanding of one work leading to another...I disagreed. I think that the Hearing Aid for a Shed is on the same tack as the "you and I" work (MfA project space). It doesn't involve computers (yet?) but it does carry my theme of nature "vs" technology... I understand their point that the work didn't "directly" lead out from my last work, but I think if that is the only way of making art, it's restrictive, in a sense that one thing HAS to lead from another, but as Sol LeWitt said "Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order". I do have a feeling (a knowledge) that all my work MUST be related, as it comes from me. I do have a core ethos to idea generation, and that is to explore the (a) relationship between natural and technological, with the human element as a conduit or interface for both. So, having that knowledge and confidence to say, "it is related, perhaps you can't see it" is a leap forward for me. I do know what I am talking about, I do understand my position in relation to my work, context and within the art world. The "full picture" of my context is not apparent as such, but would it ever be? If any position is "complete", what would be the point in continuing making art? Would I desperately have to find a new avenue of research? I think there is much mileage in a wide concept as human "interaction and relationship with an environment"...I certainly have the tools to take any situation forward. I am building my visual and written language day by day, my position can only get stronger.
I had several invaluable advisory points from Jo and Tom:
When showing my work at the end of semester two (4 weeks away, I was informed) is that I should be absolutely honest with my criticality, that is, tell the assessor / tutors what exactly I thought went well, what didn't go well, what Ideas had merit, and what ideas did not. Jo had said perfectly "not all Ideas can be as good as each other".
Criticality is key to success, and progression. When assessing a space, or a potential site for an installation / sculpture, understand the parameters of the work. The work must evolve (in the mind, or in reality), e.g. when talking about the "trumpet", Jo talked of criticality with materials (of which I have invested much time thinking about what it will be made of). They also talked of the understanding (criticality) of budget. If the budget restricts the scale of the project, so be it. I might end up with a perfect, silver ear trumpet on a plinth, if that's where the work takes me; the idea is not to compromise the idea, but to evolve it for the best "outcome".
I did explain that when I see a possible work, forming in my mind's eye, I have a "gut instinct" to go with it, and "bash it out" on paper, in writing, as a model etc, and almost felt that this was "cheating". But, they disregard, interestingly they agreed with a stance of initial reaction being moved forward. It's comforting to hear that, knowing that an "in" to making, can start with a simple "reaction" to place, space or concept derived form another work - or other artist. It's all about confidence...100%
We discuss the larger issues about being an "artist" after my crit on the work I've done and am working on...It's an interesting discussion about money, lifestyle, choices and "reality". I'd explained my position about taking time out of a well paid job, how this course, time at uni, having poppy etc has made me evaluate what is important in my life, it's nothing to do with "being the master of your own destiny" (being your own boss etc), it's about leaving something behind, for future generations. I want to be as creative as I possibly can, I want to make things that people appreciate, or make people think, I want to produce work of merit, of "importance"...and it's finding that level, or where I can make work that might lead me to larger audiences, or even just like minded audiences that can then further my understandings and position, from dialogue and discourse...I want my life to be interesting, and not a 9-5 of inconsequential bread and butter work. We did discuss the need for work (or the fact that you can't escape "it") to make work that is a compromise of your "purist vision". Collaboration, in the best sense, is all about ideas sharing, idea evolution and "compromise" (without the "dirty" connotation)...Tom Waits is a brilliant collaborator, he relishes the fact that someone else can move his ideas to another plane, knowing that it was his original seed that made the progress possible...
Tom closes with a good piece of advice, in that someone who approaches art with a "solid view" of what it is to be one, and how they are going to live that life, will run aground, where as someone with a flexible and elastic approach to working, will survive. I agree, and I do feel flexible, I do understand that my future as an artist isn't going to be an easy ride, but with hard work, dedication and an understanding that I (we, Gabi and I) need to compromise, but not ditch integrity is essential.
All good stuff, and a far more positive crit, from J&T, and myself. Confidence to steer and disagree is easy, if you know your position in art.
Sol Lewitt's sentences on Conceptual art
Richard Serra's list of verbs
Listening to : asva - futurists against the world : Liars - They Threw Us All In A Trench & Stuck A Monument On Top
I've been looking at podcasts, reading books etc (as you know)...and I think it's starting to sink in...
I keep forgetting to note an artist I'd found recently, who uses natural inputs to generate technological outputs : Keny Marshall's Apophenia (on youtube) certainly looks like the lo-fi mad scientist "made in a shed" ensemble that I could certainly feel comfortable talking about... I am just about to head out the door...but I'll be back to write about Keny's work, and how my crit went...
----
well, today went really well...I showed Jo and Tom my shed model, and they liked the concept, but were a bit worried i was just "dotting around", making art with no collective concept, or understanding of one work leading to another...I disagreed. I think that the Hearing Aid for a Shed is on the same tack as the "you and I" work (MfA project space). It doesn't involve computers (yet?) but it does carry my theme of nature "vs" technology... I understand their point that the work didn't "directly" lead out from my last work, but I think if that is the only way of making art, it's restrictive, in a sense that one thing HAS to lead from another, but as Sol LeWitt said "Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order". I do have a feeling (a knowledge) that all my work MUST be related, as it comes from me. I do have a core ethos to idea generation, and that is to explore the (a) relationship between natural and technological, with the human element as a conduit or interface for both. So, having that knowledge and confidence to say, "it is related, perhaps you can't see it" is a leap forward for me. I do know what I am talking about, I do understand my position in relation to my work, context and within the art world. The "full picture" of my context is not apparent as such, but would it ever be? If any position is "complete", what would be the point in continuing making art? Would I desperately have to find a new avenue of research? I think there is much mileage in a wide concept as human "interaction and relationship with an environment"...I certainly have the tools to take any situation forward. I am building my visual and written language day by day, my position can only get stronger.I had several invaluable advisory points from Jo and Tom:
When showing my work at the end of semester two (4 weeks away, I was informed) is that I should be absolutely honest with my criticality, that is, tell the assessor / tutors what exactly I thought went well, what didn't go well, what Ideas had merit, and what ideas did not. Jo had said perfectly "not all Ideas can be as good as each other".
Criticality is key to success, and progression. When assessing a space, or a potential site for an installation / sculpture, understand the parameters of the work. The work must evolve (in the mind, or in reality), e.g. when talking about the "trumpet", Jo talked of criticality with materials (of which I have invested much time thinking about what it will be made of). They also talked of the understanding (criticality) of budget. If the budget restricts the scale of the project, so be it. I might end up with a perfect, silver ear trumpet on a plinth, if that's where the work takes me; the idea is not to compromise the idea, but to evolve it for the best "outcome".
I did explain that when I see a possible work, forming in my mind's eye, I have a "gut instinct" to go with it, and "bash it out" on paper, in writing, as a model etc, and almost felt that this was "cheating". But, they disregard, interestingly they agreed with a stance of initial reaction being moved forward. It's comforting to hear that, knowing that an "in" to making, can start with a simple "reaction" to place, space or concept derived form another work - or other artist. It's all about confidence...100%
We discuss the larger issues about being an "artist" after my crit on the work I've done and am working on...It's an interesting discussion about money, lifestyle, choices and "reality". I'd explained my position about taking time out of a well paid job, how this course, time at uni, having poppy etc has made me evaluate what is important in my life, it's nothing to do with "being the master of your own destiny" (being your own boss etc), it's about leaving something behind, for future generations. I want to be as creative as I possibly can, I want to make things that people appreciate, or make people think, I want to produce work of merit, of "importance"...and it's finding that level, or where I can make work that might lead me to larger audiences, or even just like minded audiences that can then further my understandings and position, from dialogue and discourse...I want my life to be interesting, and not a 9-5 of inconsequential bread and butter work. We did discuss the need for work (or the fact that you can't escape "it") to make work that is a compromise of your "purist vision". Collaboration, in the best sense, is all about ideas sharing, idea evolution and "compromise" (without the "dirty" connotation)...Tom Waits is a brilliant collaborator, he relishes the fact that someone else can move his ideas to another plane, knowing that it was his original seed that made the progress possible...
Tom closes with a good piece of advice, in that someone who approaches art with a "solid view" of what it is to be one, and how they are going to live that life, will run aground, where as someone with a flexible and elastic approach to working, will survive. I agree, and I do feel flexible, I do understand that my future as an artist isn't going to be an easy ride, but with hard work, dedication and an understanding that I (we, Gabi and I) need to compromise, but not ditch integrity is essential.
All good stuff, and a far more positive crit, from J&T, and myself. Confidence to steer and disagree is easy, if you know your position in art.
Sol Lewitt's sentences on Conceptual art
Richard Serra's list of verbs
Listening to : asva - futurists against the world : Liars - They Threw Us All In A Trench & Stuck A Monument On Top
Tuesday 24 April 2007
Aberdeen film festival
I went to the Aberdeen Film Festival last night, and it was certainly an interesting night...it had all the trappings of a great "small scene happening", energy, vibrancy, local chat about projects, ideas and films, a great wee social circle (of which I felt on the outside, I don't know any of the film makers, bar Mark van Hugten, last years winner of "best film" (and audience award))..but needless to say, I felt a part of the night.
The films varied in "quality". Most (if not all) were badly acted, it's amazing to see how a bad actor, or someone who has never truly acted, can detract from a story. It's interesting to see low budget projects that each have a weakness but still have redeeming qualities about them. All brilliant in that all the people involved actually got off their backsides and went out and "just did it"...as I've parped on : you have to create to critique!
the Down sides of the films were, naivety, bad scripts, bad acting, bad lighting, bad sound, bad editing, bad shots, gross characterisations, trying too hard, trying to be clever...when presented with low budget film, you have to expect a low fi vibe, some often have that as a saving grace, you can forgive the film and think of it as charming, some were so poor that you couldn't forgive them. I treated the bad ones as thinking that someone said "I can make a film"...(like someone saying they are an artist because "they dabble" (make shit watercolours).
The good side of the films were, energy, ideas, good use of the camera (shots), editing, humour and a celebration of "locality". It was interesting to note that the best films of the night were the funny ones. I just didn't think that the "serious" actors cut the mustard, in believability.
My favourite film was "invisible City", for its inventiveness (a city full of invisible people), excellent camera work, great visual (or non, as the case may be) jokes of invisible people In compromising situations. I think the reason I liked it, was because it didn't have bad actors, messing up the dialogue. There were vocal actors in it (voice over), but they carried off the script with aplomb. all in all an excellent short film. "One trick pony" was one of the comments I heard on the night, true, but a bloody good trick for a cheap as chips pony!
I'd like to think that in a few years time, we'd hear of at least one of these local film makers, making it "big", the next Danny Boyle...one could hope.
listening to : oneida - happy new year : kyuss - and the circus leaves town : Paul miller (aka Dj Spooky) - interviews on cut up / mix ideologies
The films varied in "quality". Most (if not all) were badly acted, it's amazing to see how a bad actor, or someone who has never truly acted, can detract from a story. It's interesting to see low budget projects that each have a weakness but still have redeeming qualities about them. All brilliant in that all the people involved actually got off their backsides and went out and "just did it"...as I've parped on : you have to create to critique!
the Down sides of the films were, naivety, bad scripts, bad acting, bad lighting, bad sound, bad editing, bad shots, gross characterisations, trying too hard, trying to be clever...when presented with low budget film, you have to expect a low fi vibe, some often have that as a saving grace, you can forgive the film and think of it as charming, some were so poor that you couldn't forgive them. I treated the bad ones as thinking that someone said "I can make a film"...(like someone saying they are an artist because "they dabble" (make shit watercolours).
The good side of the films were, energy, ideas, good use of the camera (shots), editing, humour and a celebration of "locality". It was interesting to note that the best films of the night were the funny ones. I just didn't think that the "serious" actors cut the mustard, in believability.
My favourite film was "invisible City", for its inventiveness (a city full of invisible people), excellent camera work, great visual (or non, as the case may be) jokes of invisible people In compromising situations. I think the reason I liked it, was because it didn't have bad actors, messing up the dialogue. There were vocal actors in it (voice over), but they carried off the script with aplomb. all in all an excellent short film. "One trick pony" was one of the comments I heard on the night, true, but a bloody good trick for a cheap as chips pony!
I'd like to think that in a few years time, we'd hear of at least one of these local film makers, making it "big", the next Danny Boyle...one could hope.
listening to : oneida - happy new year : kyuss - and the circus leaves town : Paul miller (aka Dj Spooky) - interviews on cut up / mix ideologies
Monday 23 April 2007
Iain "end of semester 2" tutorial
We're drawing to the end of semester two, and Iain has asked us all to come in for a chat, to see where we are, have come from, and think we are going...All of a sudden I got nervous...what have I done? what am I doing? where am I going? (I do have all the answers, it's just I need confidence to say what they are, without fear of being told they are too simple, or wrong)
Iain is great at getting the best out of me, he's constructive, interested and helpful. He is also critical, in a friendly way! His invaluable advice today was that I do need to understand why (or where) my art is made. What is it that I want to show, discuss, say...why should I have squares generated from a web cam feed, why should I hide the technology behind traditional art materials...what is that all about? - I do know, and as Jo and Tom had said, during my crit with them in front of the "you and I" show - "You need to find your language"...Think about what the work is about, what issues am I raising, what comments am I making, and here's the tricky part, to explain that, with out being descriptive (physically) or prescriptive, and not leaving the work to explain its self, or leave the mystery (the "game") open for people to engage and see what they will. Context, isn't about "who else made something like this?" or "where are the ideas rooted, arrived from art movements / practitioners" it's all about understanding why this work should have been realised, what the work is about (conceptually) and my feelings round the work(s).
Iain is slightly worried that I am concentrating too much on trying to "catch up" with my art history (contextualisation)...I show him my stack of fat books, and he's in agreement that "it's a good idea to do it" but is worried that it's detracting from my actual "practice" but I do tell him I am working on a few projects (Actual making things, as well as generating ideas / concepts). He's happy that I am taking the reading on board, when he can see I am also "slugging away" at making my own art. It's the funny thing about making / creating "art", I was asked by Iain, "I need to know that your ideas generation will be self sustaining", and as I'd said to Gabi and Susie, it's hard to explain that "he day the ideas dry up, is the day I die" (sounds pompous and overly confident), but I do honestly feel that every day I am alive, I see the potential to represent my experience through a creative output, be it design, painting, sculpture, installation, programing, writing...talking! I do in an academic sense, need to prove this. You can't give an answer "trust me" here!
On the whole, my biggest weakness is that I am still too literal in my talking of my work (and others). I need to think more "outside the box" to take in bigger themes, wider (no-specific) ideas. I can't think of everything, but I can start to delve a little deeper into the concepts behind a work...unlike Roy Walker, it's not "say what you see"...it's "say what you feel".
It's hard to know where to draw the line, I need to talk about themes and issues, but I also need to stop "tying it down". I still need to know myself why I make art, it can't be "just because it looks nice / interesting"...first and foremost, an artwork needs to exist because it says something, it holds a distorted mirror up to a subject pertaining to life experience. It's hard to know whether a concept must come first, and then a realisation through ideas (sol lewitt : The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the concept.). I do have strong ideas, but do I have strong concepts? what is the drive for my work? I need to answer these questions before the end of semester 2...two weeks away.
Listening to : swans - filth : miles davis - bitches brew
Iain is great at getting the best out of me, he's constructive, interested and helpful. He is also critical, in a friendly way! His invaluable advice today was that I do need to understand why (or where) my art is made. What is it that I want to show, discuss, say...why should I have squares generated from a web cam feed, why should I hide the technology behind traditional art materials...what is that all about? - I do know, and as Jo and Tom had said, during my crit with them in front of the "you and I" show - "You need to find your language"...Think about what the work is about, what issues am I raising, what comments am I making, and here's the tricky part, to explain that, with out being descriptive (physically) or prescriptive, and not leaving the work to explain its self, or leave the mystery (the "game") open for people to engage and see what they will. Context, isn't about "who else made something like this?" or "where are the ideas rooted, arrived from art movements / practitioners" it's all about understanding why this work should have been realised, what the work is about (conceptually) and my feelings round the work(s).
Iain is slightly worried that I am concentrating too much on trying to "catch up" with my art history (contextualisation)...I show him my stack of fat books, and he's in agreement that "it's a good idea to do it" but is worried that it's detracting from my actual "practice" but I do tell him I am working on a few projects (Actual making things, as well as generating ideas / concepts). He's happy that I am taking the reading on board, when he can see I am also "slugging away" at making my own art. It's the funny thing about making / creating "art", I was asked by Iain, "I need to know that your ideas generation will be self sustaining", and as I'd said to Gabi and Susie, it's hard to explain that "he day the ideas dry up, is the day I die" (sounds pompous and overly confident), but I do honestly feel that every day I am alive, I see the potential to represent my experience through a creative output, be it design, painting, sculpture, installation, programing, writing...talking! I do in an academic sense, need to prove this. You can't give an answer "trust me" here!
On the whole, my biggest weakness is that I am still too literal in my talking of my work (and others). I need to think more "outside the box" to take in bigger themes, wider (no-specific) ideas. I can't think of everything, but I can start to delve a little deeper into the concepts behind a work...unlike Roy Walker, it's not "say what you see"...it's "say what you feel".
It's hard to know where to draw the line, I need to talk about themes and issues, but I also need to stop "tying it down". I still need to know myself why I make art, it can't be "just because it looks nice / interesting"...first and foremost, an artwork needs to exist because it says something, it holds a distorted mirror up to a subject pertaining to life experience. It's hard to know whether a concept must come first, and then a realisation through ideas (sol lewitt : The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the concept.). I do have strong ideas, but do I have strong concepts? what is the drive for my work? I need to answer these questions before the end of semester 2...two weeks away.
Listening to : swans - filth : miles davis - bitches brew
Thursday 19 April 2007
literal YES
Hearing-aid for a Shed [Bad Science]
I head in to Gray’s for 10 am to meet Steve, to talk about my latest developments. I am confident to start talking about the “breath of fresh air” project I am working on for Jane Frazer’s NEOS show. When Steve arrives, I talk of the outline or theme for Jane’s show “breath of fresh air”. It’s about something different for NEOS, it’s about new artists in the NE, trying different work. As I’ve said before in this blog, when I went for the site visit, I saw a perfect opportunity in the shed, the point that “wild” meets “civilised” where wind meets building. That point is perfect for reflection of contact with nature, communication between outside and inside. I show Steve my drawing of the Funnel, and he immediately starts to talk positively of it, and the ideas that might be threaded through it. He asks of my concepts, and I bumble out the patter I’ve been practicing, communication, channelling, controlling and condensing…He picks up on the hearing / communication part of the idea, I’d also likened the “trumpet” to old hearing aids, gramophone speakers, even the early “sound mirrors” the UK used against the Germans from 1916 – 1944. He busily types this into the internet, with an artist in mind: Tacita Dean, she’d used the sound mirrors in her work, but also researched that these devices were actually no where near “accurate” enough for spying, the “signal” generated from them was garbled, indecipherable and practically useless, and this is where she’d coined the phrase “Bad science” (where unfit scientific endeavour (in its nature useless for its unresolved conclusions) is perfect for artistic inspection and research). It’s the “ghost in the machine” that art tries to use, one lesson I have learned over the year so far, is that I am not here to answer questions through art, but ASK questions. I still have to fight the urge to become rational, to conclude, to satisfy and put a full stop to questions I raise with my art. It should be my mantra : “ask questions, not answer”.
We talk of communication, of listening, again, a form of translation. The whole Idea of a funnel, a directing vehicle, a focusing point, can convey sounds from “outside” to “inside” (and vice versa, if not on uneven footing). I equate the scale of each “opening” relatively to its environment, “outside” = vast, “inside” = small. I’d also like to think that the possibility of speaking, shouting, playing through the cone, is to broadcast the human input back into the wilderness, fighting against the wind channelling through the funnel, a futile gesture, unmatched by the relentless input of the wind. The idea of conflict, but also of bias (futile) communication sits well with some of my previous works (“I don’t have a dream”, “war poem translations” and “you and I (webcam project).).
Steve brings to the discussion, the idea of sheds being a stereotypical place for British inventors, crackpots trying to make the next perpetual motion machine, the next space shuttle that runs on carrot juice (again, bad Science). It’s the romantic notion of “crazy machines”, pointlessly being made to fulfil little of no purpose, it’s again perfect for art to hijack these experiments and turn them into questions, turn them into experiments for art.
The idea of the interior of the shed has possibilities too, I could house several objects / sculptures that could be changed and manipulated by the incoming wind, if I end the funnel with a hose, controllable by the “user”, visible displays of the wind force, even audible traces of the wind can be conveyed, futile control over nature. I talk of turning the analogue, natural input of the wind, into a digital signal, through circuitry, wind speed measurements etc. A flow of data, for no purpose. It’s visualising the constant. We are surrounded by inputs, data and information, are our brains capable of processing everything we experience? I read in the New Scientist that the eyes and brain dupe, generalise and lie to avoid overloading...it’s fascinating to know that we lie to ourselves daily to save ourselves from sensory overload.
Steve also talks of researching speakers, interiors and sound dampening. We talk of the materials that “could “make the trumpet. I am still stuck on metal, it’s durability, an elemental stand to nature. If it were made of “flimsy” ply, I’d imagine this work woul stand for about a year. We talk of Anish Kapoor’s massive funnel in Tate modern, a few years back, the idea that these structures are mechanical (so to speak) representations of the inner ear…perhaps “skinned” rings (rubber, cloth waterproofed?) might be worth investigating, but, my gut instinct is to try and aim for metal.
So, I need to (again) contextualise my reasons, ideas and direction. Steve, amazing as ever, springs names out of the air like rabbits from a magicians hat. I have a list to look at, and try and understand their positions, to make mine more solid:
Janet Cardiff
Dalziel & Scullion
Lucy Lippard (conceptual art writer)
Tacita Dean
UBU.com (fantastic resource “youTube of conceptual art” (Shangri-La!))
So much to do, and so little time. It is quality, not quantity though…but finding out the secret, the “nub” of what’s missing, isn’t as easy as just being told “you need to find context” or “you need to find your language”. I have a language, I can express what it is I want to do, why I want to do it, but it’s not intellectual enough, considered enough for Steve, and Jo & Tom. (I’ll find that out next week!)
I head in to Gray’s for 10 am to meet Steve, to talk about my latest developments. I am confident to start talking about the “breath of fresh air” project I am working on for Jane Frazer’s NEOS show. When Steve arrives, I talk of the outline or theme for Jane’s show “breath of fresh air”. It’s about something different for NEOS, it’s about new artists in the NE, trying different work. As I’ve said before in this blog, when I went for the site visit, I saw a perfect opportunity in the shed, the point that “wild” meets “civilised” where wind meets building. That point is perfect for reflection of contact with nature, communication between outside and inside. I show Steve my drawing of the Funnel, and he immediately starts to talk positively of it, and the ideas that might be threaded through it. He asks of my concepts, and I bumble out the patter I’ve been practicing, communication, channelling, controlling and condensing…He picks up on the hearing / communication part of the idea, I’d also likened the “trumpet” to old hearing aids, gramophone speakers, even the early “sound mirrors” the UK used against the Germans from 1916 – 1944. He busily types this into the internet, with an artist in mind: Tacita Dean, she’d used the sound mirrors in her work, but also researched that these devices were actually no where near “accurate” enough for spying, the “signal” generated from them was garbled, indecipherable and practically useless, and this is where she’d coined the phrase “Bad science” (where unfit scientific endeavour (in its nature useless for its unresolved conclusions) is perfect for artistic inspection and research). It’s the “ghost in the machine” that art tries to use, one lesson I have learned over the year so far, is that I am not here to answer questions through art, but ASK questions. I still have to fight the urge to become rational, to conclude, to satisfy and put a full stop to questions I raise with my art. It should be my mantra : “ask questions, not answer”.
We talk of communication, of listening, again, a form of translation. The whole Idea of a funnel, a directing vehicle, a focusing point, can convey sounds from “outside” to “inside” (and vice versa, if not on uneven footing). I equate the scale of each “opening” relatively to its environment, “outside” = vast, “inside” = small. I’d also like to think that the possibility of speaking, shouting, playing through the cone, is to broadcast the human input back into the wilderness, fighting against the wind channelling through the funnel, a futile gesture, unmatched by the relentless input of the wind. The idea of conflict, but also of bias (futile) communication sits well with some of my previous works (“I don’t have a dream”, “war poem translations” and “you and I (webcam project).).
Steve brings to the discussion, the idea of sheds being a stereotypical place for British inventors, crackpots trying to make the next perpetual motion machine, the next space shuttle that runs on carrot juice (again, bad Science). It’s the romantic notion of “crazy machines”, pointlessly being made to fulfil little of no purpose, it’s again perfect for art to hijack these experiments and turn them into questions, turn them into experiments for art.
The idea of the interior of the shed has possibilities too, I could house several objects / sculptures that could be changed and manipulated by the incoming wind, if I end the funnel with a hose, controllable by the “user”, visible displays of the wind force, even audible traces of the wind can be conveyed, futile control over nature. I talk of turning the analogue, natural input of the wind, into a digital signal, through circuitry, wind speed measurements etc. A flow of data, for no purpose. It’s visualising the constant. We are surrounded by inputs, data and information, are our brains capable of processing everything we experience? I read in the New Scientist that the eyes and brain dupe, generalise and lie to avoid overloading...it’s fascinating to know that we lie to ourselves daily to save ourselves from sensory overload.
Steve also talks of researching speakers, interiors and sound dampening. We talk of the materials that “could “make the trumpet. I am still stuck on metal, it’s durability, an elemental stand to nature. If it were made of “flimsy” ply, I’d imagine this work woul stand for about a year. We talk of Anish Kapoor’s massive funnel in Tate modern, a few years back, the idea that these structures are mechanical (so to speak) representations of the inner ear…perhaps “skinned” rings (rubber, cloth waterproofed?) might be worth investigating, but, my gut instinct is to try and aim for metal.
So, I need to (again) contextualise my reasons, ideas and direction. Steve, amazing as ever, springs names out of the air like rabbits from a magicians hat. I have a list to look at, and try and understand their positions, to make mine more solid:
Janet Cardiff
Dalziel & Scullion
Lucy Lippard (conceptual art writer)
Tacita Dean
UBU.com (fantastic resource “youTube of conceptual art” (Shangri-La!))
So much to do, and so little time. It is quality, not quantity though…but finding out the secret, the “nub” of what’s missing, isn’t as easy as just being told “you need to find context” or “you need to find your language”. I have a language, I can express what it is I want to do, why I want to do it, but it’s not intellectual enough, considered enough for Steve, and Jo & Tom. (I’ll find that out next week!)
Wednesday 18 April 2007
non-literal NO
Today is sprung upon us at 5pm yesterday(?)...again, a last minute (we don't have plans or anything, we're only students!) Steve Hollingsworth is joining us from Glasgow today and tomorrow. It's great, I am glad he's coming, but again, a little forward planning might help, after all, we do have to present work and Ideas to him, and knowing what you want to say (not just what you are going to say!).
Needless to say, Susie and I work on the Video (Beech on Beach (working title)) as there are a few tweaks, before the Aberdeen Artists hand in today...but, when we get into Gray's Mary is conversing with Steve about her proposed "negotiation" performance with me at AA... he seems strangely interested, engaged, alert when talking about the work. Strangely? (unfair of me to say?). Perhaps Iain has had a word with Steve about his "apparent" (perceived by us, anyway, and that's good enough for it to be true) disdain, when talking to us.
Susie also has a positive experience with him. It's sounding good, too good to be true? Lets hope not, lets just hope he had a bad week last time, and he's a new, invigorated person. I do enjoy chatting with him, but he still intimidates and often talks down (or is dismissive) of me, I can cope with that, I am learning to become stronger to (not general criticism), but one persons (informed) yet bored reaction to my work, it's the worst you could ever get, Like / Dislike are nothing, it's "bored, rather be somewhere else" that's the killer...
Steve brings us 5 videos to watch, he stays with us (Mary, Lois and I). We watch a great video from 1995 of the curator Jeremy Millar talking about the show "The Institute of Cultural Anxiety" (ICA). He speaks eloquently, plainly, incredibly calculated about the works in the show. Sort of museum come art gallery, where mixed objects (art, historical and scientific) inhabit a space, to inform us of our obsession, dependency and reliance on "technology" with out fully understanding it (I think this is for my benefit? I certainly am taking it as just that). He talks so absolutely about the properties and positions of some of the objects, Charles Sandison's out dated computers, spewing out black and white texts, geometric patterns and shapes, programmed in a now defunct language dutifully "doing their thing", Jake and Dinos Chapman's "Little Death Machine (Castrated)" talking of it's now "defunct" (castrated) state, broken from use in a previous exhibition, Donald Campbell's helmet he wore when he died on the attempt at the water speed record...many objects, all disparate, but linked by an obsession of collection, science, technology. He certainly talks the talk, but in a very understandable fashion, quite refreshing to hear. He talks of the need to collate and document as a reaction to fear, through needing to understand our world better by collecting. He likened the show to Victorian methodologies. Killing animals, to dissect, to gain further knowledge, but ultimately destroying the thing that you wish to understand. A sadness, or darkness (depending on your humour, funny too) threads through the show. Ugly objects, a poor armless woman struggles with her distraught baby, as she re-dresses her wearing "old-school" prosthetic arms, a dying canary in a bell jar, again, the helmet that a national "hero" died in...It would have been an excellent show to see, and yet, still timeless in its content, it's as fresh watching it on a video in 2007 as I am sure it was when it came to light in 1995.
We're also shown the Matt Collings video of Donald Judd's Life and work. Soooo many points raised in these videos, a blog can't do them justice. Some of the most salient points were that Judd could not find "context" for his work, refusal to conform to Galleries constraints and limitations, he bought many houses in Marfa, Texas and turned his space (vast buildings, open hangars in the desert etc) into "his gallery", where he and like minded artists could show their work...permanently. The video is inspirational, it's a dream come true, but the reality of the situation is (or was) that the only way he could do this (indulge, should I say), is that he was already a multi millionaire from selling his works constrained by galleries! Tales of disconnection rom the community, whilst still residing there, building walls, putting up signs to tell truck drivers (the previous "life force" of the town) to keep quiet Etc, alienated the population. Fear of land being taken "for that hippy artist" were rife (classic American fears, territory and money). One old timer thought it was great that Judd did bring artists and audience in, as it meant the almighty dollar flooded into the town..."we all gotta eat". Judd's work, I thought was an exemplar of the message Steve is trying to tell us all. Judd prepared 100 steel boxes, all 6ft * 4ft * 4ft, with varying differences (some with openings, some closed, some with shelves, slopes etc inside them). This is the embodiment of an exploration of a theme, rigorous and uncompromising in its exploration of possibilities within a given set of parameters. Subtle, yes, but exponential non the less. It's this very message that Steve is telling us every time we see him. Make sure we get the most out of our Ideas, before committing to them as a physical embodiment... i couldn't agree more.
I walk into town, as I don't have enough change for a bus (I hate buses, exact change, shit drivers (grumpy bastards, who make me grumpy, curse them.).)
But, from a negative, comes a positive (or several, depending on the scrutiny). I walk past a torn trampoline, still in a back garden, and it makes me think of "NO". I start trying to think of work, based around the word, or "concept" of "NO". denial, brutal, firm, resolute, defiant (and "positively" : guidance, protection, education, choice...) I try to imagine works that might inhabit a show, curated around the word. The trampoline "as is", A porno, with a hysterical woman screaming "yes yes yes" (in my mind, is always "no no no"), A playful "yes" upside down, under an upturned table ("NO" upside-down/opposite is "ON"). I disappoint myself for being to literal, I have my little Steve on my shoulder, in his devil suit saying "well, that's a simple way of looking at it"). So I strive to think of "NO" in a non literal sense, but I can't. Perhaps the concept of "NO" is too ingrained in my psyche to think of it in any other way. What could "NO" mean, how are we affected by the word. I wondered "what is no?" (the opposite of "yes", and in turn, what is "yes"? the opposite of no...helpful! NO!) I think I might discuss this with the other MFAers..perhaps there might be a show in this>?
Listening to : Bill Evans - Everybody digs Bill Evans : Jocelyn Pook - untold things
Needless to say, Susie and I work on the Video (Beech on Beach (working title)) as there are a few tweaks, before the Aberdeen Artists hand in today...but, when we get into Gray's Mary is conversing with Steve about her proposed "negotiation" performance with me at AA... he seems strangely interested, engaged, alert when talking about the work. Strangely? (unfair of me to say?). Perhaps Iain has had a word with Steve about his "apparent" (perceived by us, anyway, and that's good enough for it to be true) disdain, when talking to us.
Susie also has a positive experience with him. It's sounding good, too good to be true? Lets hope not, lets just hope he had a bad week last time, and he's a new, invigorated person. I do enjoy chatting with him, but he still intimidates and often talks down (or is dismissive) of me, I can cope with that, I am learning to become stronger to (not general criticism), but one persons (informed) yet bored reaction to my work, it's the worst you could ever get, Like / Dislike are nothing, it's "bored, rather be somewhere else" that's the killer...
Steve brings us 5 videos to watch, he stays with us (Mary, Lois and I). We watch a great video from 1995 of the curator Jeremy Millar talking about the show "The Institute of Cultural Anxiety" (ICA). He speaks eloquently, plainly, incredibly calculated about the works in the show. Sort of museum come art gallery, where mixed objects (art, historical and scientific) inhabit a space, to inform us of our obsession, dependency and reliance on "technology" with out fully understanding it (I think this is for my benefit? I certainly am taking it as just that). He talks so absolutely about the properties and positions of some of the objects, Charles Sandison's out dated computers, spewing out black and white texts, geometric patterns and shapes, programmed in a now defunct language dutifully "doing their thing", Jake and Dinos Chapman's "Little Death Machine (Castrated)" talking of it's now "defunct" (castrated) state, broken from use in a previous exhibition, Donald Campbell's helmet he wore when he died on the attempt at the water speed record...many objects, all disparate, but linked by an obsession of collection, science, technology. He certainly talks the talk, but in a very understandable fashion, quite refreshing to hear. He talks of the need to collate and document as a reaction to fear, through needing to understand our world better by collecting. He likened the show to Victorian methodologies. Killing animals, to dissect, to gain further knowledge, but ultimately destroying the thing that you wish to understand. A sadness, or darkness (depending on your humour, funny too) threads through the show. Ugly objects, a poor armless woman struggles with her distraught baby, as she re-dresses her wearing "old-school" prosthetic arms, a dying canary in a bell jar, again, the helmet that a national "hero" died in...It would have been an excellent show to see, and yet, still timeless in its content, it's as fresh watching it on a video in 2007 as I am sure it was when it came to light in 1995.
We're also shown the Matt Collings video of Donald Judd's Life and work. Soooo many points raised in these videos, a blog can't do them justice. Some of the most salient points were that Judd could not find "context" for his work, refusal to conform to Galleries constraints and limitations, he bought many houses in Marfa, Texas and turned his space (vast buildings, open hangars in the desert etc) into "his gallery", where he and like minded artists could show their work...permanently. The video is inspirational, it's a dream come true, but the reality of the situation is (or was) that the only way he could do this (indulge, should I say), is that he was already a multi millionaire from selling his works constrained by galleries! Tales of disconnection rom the community, whilst still residing there, building walls, putting up signs to tell truck drivers (the previous "life force" of the town) to keep quiet Etc, alienated the population. Fear of land being taken "for that hippy artist" were rife (classic American fears, territory and money). One old timer thought it was great that Judd did bring artists and audience in, as it meant the almighty dollar flooded into the town..."we all gotta eat". Judd's work, I thought was an exemplar of the message Steve is trying to tell us all. Judd prepared 100 steel boxes, all 6ft * 4ft * 4ft, with varying differences (some with openings, some closed, some with shelves, slopes etc inside them). This is the embodiment of an exploration of a theme, rigorous and uncompromising in its exploration of possibilities within a given set of parameters. Subtle, yes, but exponential non the less. It's this very message that Steve is telling us every time we see him. Make sure we get the most out of our Ideas, before committing to them as a physical embodiment... i couldn't agree more.
I walk into town, as I don't have enough change for a bus (I hate buses, exact change, shit drivers (grumpy bastards, who make me grumpy, curse them.).)
But, from a negative, comes a positive (or several, depending on the scrutiny). I walk past a torn trampoline, still in a back garden, and it makes me think of "NO". I start trying to think of work, based around the word, or "concept" of "NO". denial, brutal, firm, resolute, defiant (and "positively" : guidance, protection, education, choice...) I try to imagine works that might inhabit a show, curated around the word. The trampoline "as is", A porno, with a hysterical woman screaming "yes yes yes" (in my mind, is always "no no no"), A playful "yes" upside down, under an upturned table ("NO" upside-down/opposite is "ON"). I disappoint myself for being to literal, I have my little Steve on my shoulder, in his devil suit saying "well, that's a simple way of looking at it"). So I strive to think of "NO" in a non literal sense, but I can't. Perhaps the concept of "NO" is too ingrained in my psyche to think of it in any other way. What could "NO" mean, how are we affected by the word. I wondered "what is no?" (the opposite of "yes", and in turn, what is "yes"? the opposite of no...helpful! NO!) I think I might discuss this with the other MFAers..perhaps there might be a show in this>?
Listening to : Bill Evans - Everybody digs Bill Evans : Jocelyn Pook - untold things
Tuesday 17 April 2007
Gordon & Mary
Today I've got two appointments:
Gordon Watt's for some glass work (Leith Hall experimentation & Preparation) & Mary Cane - completion of the Negotiation costume + photo shoot and Proposal for Aberdeen Artists hand in.
Gordon wasn't there when I arrived at 11am. I'd headed to his place from Kinker to Alford, and saw him in his car on the way, I executed a nifty U turn, and tried to catch up. I got to the studio, without seeing him once. He wasn't there... I start to write a note, explaining my travels, and that I was off home...and he pulls up. He'd popped to Kinker for his lunch!
We set to work on some wet clay to make a mould, for a plaster cast, so we can slump glass over it. The plan is to make a glass slumped track / trough, we then "tack on" a flat glass back, bingo, we should have a glass panel, with a "tube" (tunnel) for the water to heat up, and pass through it, delivering warmed water, for needy, semi tropical plants in a NE garden...
I carve out some shapes in the clay, we're experimenting with depth, proximity and angles. Gordon mixes up his new ceramics plaster (faster drying), and boy oh boy does it dry quickly! After an hour or so, we pop the semi set plaster out of the clay, and I retouch the glitches, round off corners, remove "overhangs" etc...the "positive" looks fantastic. I leave it with Gordon to dry it properly, and he's then going to experiment with slumping glass on it...that'll be the decider, if this is all going to work, so we can make a radiator for a garden...watch this space.
I head home, Pops and Gabs are out for a stroll, but are back within 5 mins, we have our Tea, Pops finally has a poo, that's been 4 days! they are getting more solid...ho ho.
I head out to Mary's and she's dyed the cloak black, made more "fixtures". She passes me some black tights for my face, I've finished the mask (more odd wire to obscure / defuse the shape of my head) and we take some photos...
We also find out that Steve Hollingsworth will be in tomorrow...such short notice, to keep us all on our toes....I've got to understand myself, what it is I want to say to him, about my "developments" ("hearing aid for a shed" - my entry for "breath of fresh air" - Lim BUll's NEOS at Jane Frazer's. etc...) I have checked out Anthony McCall on tate moderns podcasts, talking about cones made of light... I Think Steve will be interested in a discussion about cones...What functions, metaphors, histories, purposes, ideas cones have. I think I am feeling confident about this work. I may have said in the past, my only fear is it is an unrealisable goal. It's large, may be expensive...It may be a steep learning curve, but I have all summer to work on it. Perhaps this could be my end of year / MFA show? It's got meat on the bones...
I've been reading the "Art in Theory" book, Peid Mondrian talking about De Stijl, "truth" (in art), nature (or natural representation being pointless), "plastic art". I hear him, I understand his arguments, but (like the musician conversing with him), I feel that using ONLY vertical and horizontal lines can only go so far. He'll paint himself into a corner!...and did. I need to read more to understand the more complex theories of the early abstractionists, Mondrian is perhaps an extreme example to take for a starting point. Even though my "you and I" installation was "just squares" (vertical and horizontal lines!)...
There is some correlation / relationship from "my squares" to the real world in which they are calculated from. Mondrian wanted to remove and link to this natural world, where representation of it was futile, or should be left to poets and writers, as the true essence of painting was Form, Colours and Composition, without the "distractions" of content (know, assumed or otherwise - or, to put it another way, look at the paint and composition, without thinking about what the "picture should be of" ( A tree, a nude etc)...
Listening to : boards of Canada - Maximum-Pour-Les-Oreilles : low - drums and guns
Gordon Watt's for some glass work (Leith Hall experimentation & Preparation) & Mary Cane - completion of the Negotiation costume + photo shoot and Proposal for Aberdeen Artists hand in.
Gordon wasn't there when I arrived at 11am. I'd headed to his place from Kinker to Alford, and saw him in his car on the way, I executed a nifty U turn, and tried to catch up. I got to the studio, without seeing him once. He wasn't there... I start to write a note, explaining my travels, and that I was off home...and he pulls up. He'd popped to Kinker for his lunch!
We set to work on some wet clay to make a mould, for a plaster cast, so we can slump glass over it. The plan is to make a glass slumped track / trough, we then "tack on" a flat glass back, bingo, we should have a glass panel, with a "tube" (tunnel) for the water to heat up, and pass through it, delivering warmed water, for needy, semi tropical plants in a NE garden...
I carve out some shapes in the clay, we're experimenting with depth, proximity and angles. Gordon mixes up his new ceramics plaster (faster drying), and boy oh boy does it dry quickly! After an hour or so, we pop the semi set plaster out of the clay, and I retouch the glitches, round off corners, remove "overhangs" etc...the "positive" looks fantastic. I leave it with Gordon to dry it properly, and he's then going to experiment with slumping glass on it...that'll be the decider, if this is all going to work, so we can make a radiator for a garden...watch this space.
I head home, Pops and Gabs are out for a stroll, but are back within 5 mins, we have our Tea, Pops finally has a poo, that's been 4 days! they are getting more solid...ho ho.
I head out to Mary's and she's dyed the cloak black, made more "fixtures". She passes me some black tights for my face, I've finished the mask (more odd wire to obscure / defuse the shape of my head) and we take some photos...
We also find out that Steve Hollingsworth will be in tomorrow...such short notice, to keep us all on our toes....I've got to understand myself, what it is I want to say to him, about my "developments" ("hearing aid for a shed" - my entry for "breath of fresh air" - Lim BUll's NEOS at Jane Frazer's. etc...) I have checked out Anthony McCall on tate moderns podcasts, talking about cones made of light... I Think Steve will be interested in a discussion about cones...What functions, metaphors, histories, purposes, ideas cones have. I think I am feeling confident about this work. I may have said in the past, my only fear is it is an unrealisable goal. It's large, may be expensive...It may be a steep learning curve, but I have all summer to work on it. Perhaps this could be my end of year / MFA show? It's got meat on the bones...
I've been reading the "Art in Theory" book, Peid Mondrian talking about De Stijl, "truth" (in art), nature (or natural representation being pointless), "plastic art". I hear him, I understand his arguments, but (like the musician conversing with him), I feel that using ONLY vertical and horizontal lines can only go so far. He'll paint himself into a corner!...and did. I need to read more to understand the more complex theories of the early abstractionists, Mondrian is perhaps an extreme example to take for a starting point. Even though my "you and I" installation was "just squares" (vertical and horizontal lines!)...
There is some correlation / relationship from "my squares" to the real world in which they are calculated from. Mondrian wanted to remove and link to this natural world, where representation of it was futile, or should be left to poets and writers, as the true essence of painting was Form, Colours and Composition, without the "distractions" of content (know, assumed or otherwise - or, to put it another way, look at the paint and composition, without thinking about what the "picture should be of" ( A tree, a nude etc)...
Listening to : boards of Canada - Maximum-Pour-Les-Oreilles : low - drums and guns
Monday 16 April 2007
The Negotiation starts.
Gabi, Poppy and I head to Mary's on Monday morning to help Mary with the costume prep. The AA hand in is this Wednesday, and Mary wants the proposal for the performance to include photos...so we had to work fast.
I'd set to work on a "mask". Again, Mary wants something that is not "darth vader, policeman, cyberman, clergyman...etc". It's hard to make "costume" with no reference to pop culture (or any other cultural reference for that matter). We want "dark, powerful and enchanting" (from a pile of old sheets, plastic and rubbish...I admire Mary's vision). As Thomas Hirschhorn says : Energy : YES, Quality : NO.
I took the helmet I was working on away to finish it at night (to be foiled by a friend who needed a place to stay that night!) I arranged to meet Mary on Tuesday night for the "photo shoot" (She's going to dye the cloak black + "do the finishing touches"). I'll finish it then...
Listening to : magnolia electric co - what comes after the blues : sleep - holy mountain
I'd set to work on a "mask". Again, Mary wants something that is not "darth vader, policeman, cyberman, clergyman...etc". It's hard to make "costume" with no reference to pop culture (or any other cultural reference for that matter). We want "dark, powerful and enchanting" (from a pile of old sheets, plastic and rubbish...I admire Mary's vision). As Thomas Hirschhorn says : Energy : YES, Quality : NO.I took the helmet I was working on away to finish it at night (to be foiled by a friend who needed a place to stay that night!) I arranged to meet Mary on Tuesday night for the "photo shoot" (She's going to dye the cloak black + "do the finishing touches"). I'll finish it then...
Listening to : magnolia electric co - what comes after the blues : sleep - holy mountain
Sunday 15 April 2007
invitation to negotiation
Mary Cane sends me an email today, asking if I would like to participate in her proposed performace piece for Aberdeen Artists.
I thought about it, and said yes. I was so excited and invigorated by helping her in her Gray's performance, I thought it would be an amazing experience to do something in Aberdeen Art gallery with her... So I have agreed to meet her tomorrow to discuss further. She has apparently started work on a costume, in a similar vein to her Spring performance...I can't wait
listening to : bolt thrower - realm of chaos : UI - lifelike
I thought about it, and said yes. I was so excited and invigorated by helping her in her Gray's performance, I thought it would be an amazing experience to do something in Aberdeen Art gallery with her... So I have agreed to meet her tomorrow to discuss further. She has apparently started work on a costume, in a similar vein to her Spring performance...I can't wait
listening to : bolt thrower - realm of chaos : UI - lifelike
Friday 13 April 2007
Mary is a wandering star
Today we have another great day at uni. One of those special Thursdays where every second counts, where every second matters. To kick off, we have a wonderful seminar about creative writing with Judith Findlay (Iain's wife). We've been asked to read two texts by her, one, a "transitional" piece (where she had felt she had been "too long away" from the art world, to write about it, but gave her impetus to do just that), the other, a short story / review of part of the Caterline arts festival.
The first text is pretty refreshing, it's written from an almost "outsider" perspective, "non academic" in tone and word usage, but still conveys all the points she wants to put across in an eloquent pace. "Write for an intelligent layperson" is her advice. I am sure Ken Neill would be shitting in his hat if he heard this, but we get into the realms of "what's it all for, this MFA malarkey?"...Are we training to be pontificating prim donnas, conceptual clap-trappers or people who make art, in a masterful way, which engages on many levels? Academic to lay (Surely that is a mastery of art, in this day and age? "You can't please all of the people all the time"...but who said trying was wrong? Again, all these arguments and discussions come back to one thing...audience. Who is my audience? Do I care about my audience? Why is an audience important? I should perhaps deal with these questions for my 1500 word essay? So many things to talk about, so many ideas...it's always the same problem...not enough ours in the day!
The one thing I liked about Judith's writing is it reminded me slightly of my own, or what my writing COULD be, if I tried harder. (Practice makes perfect, as she'd said). The more I write, the more I feel confident about it...I still lack form in my essay, this blog is fine, it's a blast of thought, the structure isn't that important...Judith's writing is peppered with parenthesis, single quotes and interjections of further thought (like I often do...see!). It's confirmation that writing as a conversation, as a diary entry is engaging, it's more intimate, you feel like the writing is speaking to you, or at least you can hear the writers voice through the style.
This seminar is about using written language to further your presentation of ideas, of art. It can be conversational, it can be academic, it can be anything you want it to be, so long as it communicates to people your intentions, your understanding, your point of view. Information is essential, but the communication of the information is also essential, if people are to understand, and ultimately progress in our existence on this planet.
Guest at Gray's was on today, but Susie and I had promised to help Mary on the start of her white space work...a performance of marking, territory, spring and ritual. I film the work, and Susie is photographing it. As performance art goes it's of the norm...that is it's not normal. People snigger and look on, bemused to Mary dressed in her "costume" and spray's with water bottles (or is it urine?...) objects and points around the interior of Gray's. We head down the stairs, along the printmaking corridor, down to sculpture, out the doors into the quad (it's lunchtime, many an "artist" having their dinner), back into the building where the refectory is, along past the shop, spray a girl round the corner, on past the giggling janitors, out the front entrance, off to the right (Clockwise, very important that), round the side, spraying air, railings, bins, trucks, corners anything that Mary sees fit to "claim". We head along the back of the building, up the left side, past some metal storage containers, almost industrial compared to the place not 5 feet round the corner...we're heading back along the front of Gray's now, following the yellow line some helpful car park company has put there for our safety, must stay behind this border, we'll be run over otherwise...into the front doors again, up the stairs and back into the room. Mary is shattered, no wonder, I think it was very brave to become anonymous is such a grand fashion!
The people Mary encountered on the way were incredulous, interested, stupefied, entertained, giggling, quizzical and down right too cool to look. The art school is full of artists...or is it? It's an interesting place to perform work. Surely everyone in the place would react with an artistic head on? I am not talking of liking the work (what is there to "like" of a woman in yellow cape, face covered in grey tights, spraying water on things?) I am talking of spending time (a second? 5 mins?) THINKING about why someone should be doing this. Why someone wants to place themselves in a realm of ridiculousness, mockery and rubbernecking? Surely, the question everyone should be asking is "what's this all about?" not "check-out the daft twat in the cape". A wolf whistle is heard in the Quad...This (to me) is a mark of someone’s embarrassment at his own ignorance. "What should I do...err...I know, twit twoooooo..(Yeah, that'll do it)." Susie thinks the opposite. "It's good that someone reacted to the work"...sure, he'd noticed...but in an art context, I'd expect more from people, but, (and here's my ageist hat), these are only people in their early twenties, what experience have they to draw on? We'd met a 4th year painter, who didn't even know that a painter had won the turner prize...and I thought I was lacking in the "contextual analysis" department!
Mary's installation in the whitespace is loaded with meaning...again, we've told her to think about editing, but she insists that it is edited. Iain said "You need more room" (and I agreed), the work is wonderful, but there are so many elements, that I think it is a "show" not just one work in a whitespace. It's the hard choice of experimentation, you have to try to know (create to critique), and she has, but has she learned that too much is too much? (or is it?...it's her art, it's who she is.)
The show comprises of a lead roll leading out of the space. An electric fence round the walls of the Whitespace a visible barrier (or protection, depending on your perspective). Lime sprinkled on the floor with bottles of Mary's urine in jars, with "wings" of willow, almost as if they were a flock of birds on migration. A small Ash "finger" (burnt, from a previous work) in which She draws on the wall another "barrier". We also have the hum of a fridge, recorded when the urine was stored in the fridge for the duration of the preparation. She also starts placing recycled paper printouts of the yellow painted lines from outside Gray's, with sticks of willow under them (outside the room, and into the corridor)...plenty to see, plenty to talk about...or too much? (Again!)
The concepts behind the work, as I have said are protection, place, territory, past and present, body, self-portrait, history, journey…the list is endless. We're presented with facts about urine, lead, willow etc, we even chip in, Jonathan with his cheese covered in pee, as in the first world war, they stopped making the alcohol they used to roll the cheese in...all good stuff, but I feel it's almost detracting from the nub of the work. The strongest concept for me is the idea of marking territory. Urine is such a powerful marker, reactive agent for many things, and in this day and age of sterility (with bleach, not urine), the reaction to several benign jars of Mary's piddle causes quite a stir. (But we are in a building that houses several juvenile "artists" who can't cope with things that "are different / challenging" (as we've already seen today).
Mary's given context is Art Povera. Her use of everyday, basic objects in this context, sits wonderfully well with the ideals of Arte Povera, creating art from everyday objects, simple and obvious (?), but when mixed with concept and context, these objects take on new meanings, they can convey powerfully new meanings because of their newly acquired status of importance, because of their presence within a whitespace. "This must be art" (this must be looked at). Simplicity is often powerful. I applaud that concept.
listening to : helmet - meantime : !!! - !!!ep : alec emprire - tribute to Moog
The first text is pretty refreshing, it's written from an almost "outsider" perspective, "non academic" in tone and word usage, but still conveys all the points she wants to put across in an eloquent pace. "Write for an intelligent layperson" is her advice. I am sure Ken Neill would be shitting in his hat if he heard this, but we get into the realms of "what's it all for, this MFA malarkey?"...Are we training to be pontificating prim donnas, conceptual clap-trappers or people who make art, in a masterful way, which engages on many levels? Academic to lay (Surely that is a mastery of art, in this day and age? "You can't please all of the people all the time"...but who said trying was wrong? Again, all these arguments and discussions come back to one thing...audience. Who is my audience? Do I care about my audience? Why is an audience important? I should perhaps deal with these questions for my 1500 word essay? So many things to talk about, so many ideas...it's always the same problem...not enough ours in the day!
The one thing I liked about Judith's writing is it reminded me slightly of my own, or what my writing COULD be, if I tried harder. (Practice makes perfect, as she'd said). The more I write, the more I feel confident about it...I still lack form in my essay, this blog is fine, it's a blast of thought, the structure isn't that important...Judith's writing is peppered with parenthesis, single quotes and interjections of further thought (like I often do...see!). It's confirmation that writing as a conversation, as a diary entry is engaging, it's more intimate, you feel like the writing is speaking to you, or at least you can hear the writers voice through the style.
This seminar is about using written language to further your presentation of ideas, of art. It can be conversational, it can be academic, it can be anything you want it to be, so long as it communicates to people your intentions, your understanding, your point of view. Information is essential, but the communication of the information is also essential, if people are to understand, and ultimately progress in our existence on this planet.
Guest at Gray's was on today, but Susie and I had promised to help Mary on the start of her white space work...a performance of marking, territory, spring and ritual. I film the work, and Susie is photographing it. As performance art goes it's of the norm...that is it's not normal. People snigger and look on, bemused to Mary dressed in her "costume" and spray's with water bottles (or is it urine?...) objects and points around the interior of Gray's. We head down the stairs, along the printmaking corridor, down to sculpture, out the doors into the quad (it's lunchtime, many an "artist" having their dinner), back into the building where the refectory is, along past the shop, spray a girl round the corner, on past the giggling janitors, out the front entrance, off to the right (Clockwise, very important that), round the side, spraying air, railings, bins, trucks, corners anything that Mary sees fit to "claim". We head along the back of the building, up the left side, past some metal storage containers, almost industrial compared to the place not 5 feet round the corner...we're heading back along the front of Gray's now, following the yellow line some helpful car park company has put there for our safety, must stay behind this border, we'll be run over otherwise...into the front doors again, up the stairs and back into the room. Mary is shattered, no wonder, I think it was very brave to become anonymous is such a grand fashion!The people Mary encountered on the way were incredulous, interested, stupefied, entertained, giggling, quizzical and down right too cool to look. The art school is full of artists...or is it? It's an interesting place to perform work. Surely everyone in the place would react with an artistic head on? I am not talking of liking the work (what is there to "like" of a woman in yellow cape, face covered in grey tights, spraying water on things?) I am talking of spending time (a second? 5 mins?) THINKING about why someone should be doing this. Why someone wants to place themselves in a realm of ridiculousness, mockery and rubbernecking? Surely, the question everyone should be asking is "what's this all about?" not "check-out the daft twat in the cape". A wolf whistle is heard in the Quad...This (to me) is a mark of someone’s embarrassment at his own ignorance. "What should I do...err...I know, twit twoooooo..(Yeah, that'll do it)." Susie thinks the opposite. "It's good that someone reacted to the work"...sure, he'd noticed...but in an art context, I'd expect more from people, but, (and here's my ageist hat), these are only people in their early twenties, what experience have they to draw on? We'd met a 4th year painter, who didn't even know that a painter had won the turner prize...and I thought I was lacking in the "contextual analysis" department!
Mary's installation in the whitespace is loaded with meaning...again, we've told her to think about editing, but she insists that it is edited. Iain said "You need more room" (and I agreed), the work is wonderful, but there are so many elements, that I think it is a "show" not just one work in a whitespace. It's the hard choice of experimentation, you have to try to know (create to critique), and she has, but has she learned that too much is too much? (or is it?...it's her art, it's who she is.)
The show comprises of a lead roll leading out of the space. An electric fence round the walls of the Whitespace a visible barrier (or protection, depending on your perspective). Lime sprinkled on the floor with bottles of Mary's urine in jars, with "wings" of willow, almost as if they were a flock of birds on migration. A small Ash "finger" (burnt, from a previous work) in which She draws on the wall another "barrier". We also have the hum of a fridge, recorded when the urine was stored in the fridge for the duration of the preparation. She also starts placing recycled paper printouts of the yellow painted lines from outside Gray's, with sticks of willow under them (outside the room, and into the corridor)...plenty to see, plenty to talk about...or too much? (Again!)The concepts behind the work, as I have said are protection, place, territory, past and present, body, self-portrait, history, journey…the list is endless. We're presented with facts about urine, lead, willow etc, we even chip in, Jonathan with his cheese covered in pee, as in the first world war, they stopped making the alcohol they used to roll the cheese in...all good stuff, but I feel it's almost detracting from the nub of the work. The strongest concept for me is the idea of marking territory. Urine is such a powerful marker, reactive agent for many things, and in this day and age of sterility (with bleach, not urine), the reaction to several benign jars of Mary's piddle causes quite a stir. (But we are in a building that houses several juvenile "artists" who can't cope with things that "are different / challenging" (as we've already seen today).
Mary's given context is Art Povera. Her use of everyday, basic objects in this context, sits wonderfully well with the ideals of Arte Povera, creating art from everyday objects, simple and obvious (?), but when mixed with concept and context, these objects take on new meanings, they can convey powerfully new meanings because of their newly acquired status of importance, because of their presence within a whitespace. "This must be art" (this must be looked at). Simplicity is often powerful. I applaud that concept.
listening to : helmet - meantime : !!! - !!!ep : alec emprire - tribute to Moog
Wednesday 11 April 2007
Iain crtique of April 3rd video
April 3rd 2007 11.42 - 12.56
Today, Susie and I head in to see Iain about the video we've just finished, we just want some input from our tutor to see if we're "getting this art malarkey right" (?)
Susie and I have both come through a journey of sorts with this work. Collaborative working at its best. Susie had said today that she hadn't quite "got" the use of collaboration last semester, like it's something she does all the time, "work with people", but there is a subtle difference from working with people and working with someone...Collaboration is about two minds meeting, agreeing, disagreeing, conversing, discussing and taking the "best route forward". As I've said in this blog, Susie and I didn't always agree with decisions, so we'd reason why we should and shouldn't have parts included / excluded. I could easily have been a "technician" to Susie's vision, sure, I shot the shots and edited the work, but it was also with my vision of how the work should look, what feelings the work should convey that changed my mere "technical help" for this work.
I can see a concept in the work, it may be different to Susie's, and this is where I feel slightly removed from the work, as if I've "hijacked" Susie's beautiful vision...but still taken it in a new direction....
It was an interesting discussion based on the work today, I'd pointed out that "create to critique" is fantastic..here we are (Mary included) watching a video of leaves blowing down a beach, and we're talking about swimmers in the Amazon, global warming and bladerunner...It's important to create work, and show it, to have new perspectives arise, discussions from work, can lead you in new directions. This is one of my sticking points, with some of the more intellectual positions in creating "our art" (as a class / individual). I feel we are almost expected to consider EVERY aspect of the work, how can we? I am not everyone, I don't have EVERY perception of a situation...surely we can not think of everything? (not even Picasso would have!) It's almost a trap conceptual art can fall into, if you need to consider EVERYTHING, before creating work, it's impossible to consider EVERYTHING, therefore, you'd never get anything made. Create to Critique - Critique to create.
Some of the technical criticisms Iain "gently" brought up, were that he felt the work too slow, or long. "some" shots were un-necessary. He did think that the mix of moving shots Vs still shots didn't work. We had felt that they were essential transitions from the leaves moving TO The camera vs them moving away...
Some of the action points to come out of the critique were to create a body of "beach videos", to try and push how minimal we can go, perhaps only one shot will do (I do like the towards / away vibe of the video though). Susie is also going to work on a juxtaposition / mirror (in a different context) to the work, her digger in the pond theme would come into play...) All these possibilities...
I'd also linked the work to Spike Jonez's "the woods" short video (click here to see it).
listening to : martyn bates & mick harris - murder ballads
Tuesday 10 April 2007
devil is in the details
Once susie left on Friday, I watched the video the next day, only to discover that it contained human voices (Susie and Mary having a chat...tsk tsk!) There was also a helicopter sound in one shot.
I spent saturday tidying up the sound and smoothing out the fades...
Susie came round today, to view the "final cut". Again, with fresh eyes, we spot several things that need tweaked. We lengthened fades, changed the title (from Rush hour to April 3rd 11.42 - 12.56), I also removed the overlayed alpha channel "border", as it seemed to create a grid over the video. I'd then clipped the original video, instead of using an overlay...
I will upload the video to youTube and link it here.
Needless to say, we're very happy with the result.
Listening to : various - electric lady land IV : various - min 2 max : bolthrower - warmaster
I spent saturday tidying up the sound and smoothing out the fades...
Susie came round today, to view the "final cut". Again, with fresh eyes, we spot several things that need tweaked. We lengthened fades, changed the title (from Rush hour to April 3rd 11.42 - 12.56), I also removed the overlayed alpha channel "border", as it seemed to create a grid over the video. I'd then clipped the original video, instead of using an overlay...
I will upload the video to youTube and link it here.
Needless to say, we're very happy with the result.
Listening to : various - electric lady land IV : various - min 2 max : bolthrower - warmaster
Friday 6 April 2007
collaboration work - s.hunt p.thompson
Susie comes round today so we can edit the footage we'd shot on the beach, for our collaborative video we're going to submit to Aberdeen artists 2007.
We'd shot about 40 mins of footage, only to whittle it down to 6 mins.
It's amazing what our first video "sketch" (what we thought was a final cut) had done for us. We could understand what new shots we needed. When we started looking at the individual shots (14 takes of various angles etc) we could refer back to the original, knowing what worked and what didn't. We had 4 types of shot, the leaves advancing to the camera, panning shots (left to right), leaves heading away from the camera and some static shots with leaves heading from left to right. We had discussed the order of shots, and with an idea of "rush hour" (working title) we had a plan to show 1/2 of the video with all the footage heading to the camera, mid way, we had some transitional shots linking the final "away" section with panning shots...
It was a very easy, harmonious way of working. Susie would direct me when using premier, I would also offer suggestions, even disagree with certain shot choices, we'd discuss the merits and the failures of a shot. All in all a great, free way of working. Susie's vision and my technical / aesthetic filming created an accomplished video work.
The concept behind the work, and this is Susie's baby, is to invoke a sense of reminiscences, a wistful recollection of memories of walks, on a beach (physically), a sense of daydream. The video has no reference of humans in it, other than a jeep track in the sands, this denotes a sense of journey. The idea of leaves on the beach in itself is disjointed, it's the clash of two "environments" that creates this sense of travel, where have these leaves come from? Where are they going? We indeed become the leaves, our minds lock onto them, we imagine the journey they take, the interactions they have with their "fellow leaves", the pointlessness of their journey, the finality of nature stopping them in their tracks...the metaphors for the leaves and human interactions are very strong.
several points of interest in the video are:
the varying light conditions
the interaction / path of the leaves
the framing of the shots
the title (april 3rd 2007 : 11.42 - 12.56)
the titles traps this event, it's passed, it will never happen again. What were you doing on that day, at that time? Not as memorable as remembering where you were on 9/11, or when they set foot on the moon, but it's certainly important to remember every hour of our lives, to know that our lives are fleeting, so making the most of this life is so important...
We'd shot about 40 mins of footage, only to whittle it down to 6 mins.
It's amazing what our first video "sketch" (what we thought was a final cut) had done for us. We could understand what new shots we needed. When we started looking at the individual shots (14 takes of various angles etc) we could refer back to the original, knowing what worked and what didn't. We had 4 types of shot, the leaves advancing to the camera, panning shots (left to right), leaves heading away from the camera and some static shots with leaves heading from left to right. We had discussed the order of shots, and with an idea of "rush hour" (working title) we had a plan to show 1/2 of the video with all the footage heading to the camera, mid way, we had some transitional shots linking the final "away" section with panning shots...
It was a very easy, harmonious way of working. Susie would direct me when using premier, I would also offer suggestions, even disagree with certain shot choices, we'd discuss the merits and the failures of a shot. All in all a great, free way of working. Susie's vision and my technical / aesthetic filming created an accomplished video work.
The concept behind the work, and this is Susie's baby, is to invoke a sense of reminiscences, a wistful recollection of memories of walks, on a beach (physically), a sense of daydream. The video has no reference of humans in it, other than a jeep track in the sands, this denotes a sense of journey. The idea of leaves on the beach in itself is disjointed, it's the clash of two "environments" that creates this sense of travel, where have these leaves come from? Where are they going? We indeed become the leaves, our minds lock onto them, we imagine the journey they take, the interactions they have with their "fellow leaves", the pointlessness of their journey, the finality of nature stopping them in their tracks...the metaphors for the leaves and human interactions are very strong.
several points of interest in the video are:
the varying light conditions
the interaction / path of the leaves
the framing of the shots
the title (april 3rd 2007 : 11.42 - 12.56)
the titles traps this event, it's passed, it will never happen again. What were you doing on that day, at that time? Not as memorable as remembering where you were on 9/11, or when they set foot on the moon, but it's certainly important to remember every hour of our lives, to know that our lives are fleeting, so making the most of this life is so important...
Wednesday 4 April 2007
two teas thompson
I need to start thinking about my 1500 word essay for the end of this semester. It's in less than 6 weeks time now...
I need to know what it is I want to talk about...I've got a "rough" idea. It'll be something on the lines of quantification, value, simplification and abstraction...Susie came up with a great Idea the other day, based on something I'd said last semester. I wanted to "interview myself" last semester, but ended up not doing it, but, it seems that Susie has a great Idea to convert our conversations into written works, therefore satisfying the brief. Ace. Now...all I need is a solid understanding of what it is I A, want to talk about and B, what indeed I want to talk about! (simple!)
I'd been sent a last minute text from Jonathan, asking if I'd pop round, as he was in on his own, and he'd said there'd be "LAMB ROAST"..of course I said yes! before this, I'd had a delicious gnocchi and cheese sauce + salad for my tea (6 pm). I'd then popped to Jonathan's place at 8...and had Roast Lamb, potatoes and broccoli on a bed of ripped basil, boy oh boy did I find space for that!
We'd had a great chat, as I always do with Jonathan, he's got his head screwed on, he's got his essay / dissertation planned to a tee. Post war generation, and the threat (or perceived threat) of war and death...ooh!
It was the start of summer today, or it felt like it. We sat in his back garden, drinking red wine, and chatting about the MFA, and how it's made us jaded...well, "hard to please, or fucking lazy"...lazy in that it's made us really think about things before even attempting to make anything "arty". I'd told J that I was "disappointed" that my slate drawing had got into the SSA...and not my new work ("I don't have a dream")...I mean, "disappointed" I got SOMETHING into the SSA...what a tosser! We talked about "having no time", or feeling tired, because of the thinking that goes into the MFA...condensed, crammed and rushed, it feels so vibrant when at Uni, but that's all fine, if there were no deadlines, hand in dates, external examiners etc...it's all getting very serious (was it never?)...Time is always niggling at the back of my head, my blissful "year off" is hurtling to an endpoint.
We checked out the Suzanne Lacey video "the roof is on fire", an "art work" of conversations with American teenagers, held in various cars on a car park roof, where the public are invited to "listen in" and experience the many viewpoints, seldom heard, due to social setups in the US. (young, black, poor etc). It's a fascinating idea, but all too futile. It's a thin line between social work, social change and art. Some scant, and rather trite road signs are placed around the place, to give it a more "valid artistic presentation"...something for the ley-person, no doubt. "ah, signs that don't mean anything...this must be the art..."
It's great to see that these social arts projects can empower individuals, as well as groups, but sad to see that the "impact" (for all the good causes it presents) is flash in the pan. I hope that the participants do take strength from their actions, but don't lose hope or impetus when taking things further (how far is that?)...
My biggest comment to J was that I really couldn't comprehend the state of play for young, black Americans, I couldn't begin to imagine what sort of social constraints are placed upon them "in reality", as I am mostly only every presented with media based stereotypes....(which the work was fighting).
preaching to the converted springs to mind, and most "good causes" (on a small community level) only ever seem to attract that. It was astonishing to see the liberal white audience...it could have been seen as patronising..that's the hard line, balance etc. how do you educate the "white man", yet not become a victim to a larger political machine?...so many complex issues and points to be made....
listening to : liars - drums not dead : basic channel - BDC
I need to know what it is I want to talk about...I've got a "rough" idea. It'll be something on the lines of quantification, value, simplification and abstraction...Susie came up with a great Idea the other day, based on something I'd said last semester. I wanted to "interview myself" last semester, but ended up not doing it, but, it seems that Susie has a great Idea to convert our conversations into written works, therefore satisfying the brief. Ace. Now...all I need is a solid understanding of what it is I A, want to talk about and B, what indeed I want to talk about! (simple!)
I'd been sent a last minute text from Jonathan, asking if I'd pop round, as he was in on his own, and he'd said there'd be "LAMB ROAST"..of course I said yes! before this, I'd had a delicious gnocchi and cheese sauce + salad for my tea (6 pm). I'd then popped to Jonathan's place at 8...and had Roast Lamb, potatoes and broccoli on a bed of ripped basil, boy oh boy did I find space for that!
We'd had a great chat, as I always do with Jonathan, he's got his head screwed on, he's got his essay / dissertation planned to a tee. Post war generation, and the threat (or perceived threat) of war and death...ooh!
It was the start of summer today, or it felt like it. We sat in his back garden, drinking red wine, and chatting about the MFA, and how it's made us jaded...well, "hard to please, or fucking lazy"...lazy in that it's made us really think about things before even attempting to make anything "arty". I'd told J that I was "disappointed" that my slate drawing had got into the SSA...and not my new work ("I don't have a dream")...I mean, "disappointed" I got SOMETHING into the SSA...what a tosser! We talked about "having no time", or feeling tired, because of the thinking that goes into the MFA...condensed, crammed and rushed, it feels so vibrant when at Uni, but that's all fine, if there were no deadlines, hand in dates, external examiners etc...it's all getting very serious (was it never?)...Time is always niggling at the back of my head, my blissful "year off" is hurtling to an endpoint.
We checked out the Suzanne Lacey video "the roof is on fire", an "art work" of conversations with American teenagers, held in various cars on a car park roof, where the public are invited to "listen in" and experience the many viewpoints, seldom heard, due to social setups in the US. (young, black, poor etc). It's a fascinating idea, but all too futile. It's a thin line between social work, social change and art. Some scant, and rather trite road signs are placed around the place, to give it a more "valid artistic presentation"...something for the ley-person, no doubt. "ah, signs that don't mean anything...this must be the art..."
It's great to see that these social arts projects can empower individuals, as well as groups, but sad to see that the "impact" (for all the good causes it presents) is flash in the pan. I hope that the participants do take strength from their actions, but don't lose hope or impetus when taking things further (how far is that?)...
My biggest comment to J was that I really couldn't comprehend the state of play for young, black Americans, I couldn't begin to imagine what sort of social constraints are placed upon them "in reality", as I am mostly only every presented with media based stereotypes....(which the work was fighting).
preaching to the converted springs to mind, and most "good causes" (on a small community level) only ever seem to attract that. It was astonishing to see the liberal white audience...it could have been seen as patronising..that's the hard line, balance etc. how do you educate the "white man", yet not become a victim to a larger political machine?...so many complex issues and points to be made....
listening to : liars - drums not dead : basic channel - BDC
Tuesday 3 April 2007
Susie's Leaves part 2
After Susie and I had reviewed, edited and "completed" the collaborative video work, of Susie's "Leaves on an Empty Beach" vision, we'd decided the footage we had, was just not good enough. We'd sat and watched the video and understood where we went wrong with it, shots too short, badly placed leaves etc. We also didn't have enough "ambient sound" (I'd had to loop 15 seconds of waves + wind, as we were all talking in the original footage). We'd considered this work, in the end "a sketch". With this in mind, we made a date to film more footage, knowing what we were looking for this time.We pick up Mary from her house, and head to Balmedie beach...again. Susie did it again...take 2 heavy bags, full of soggy leaves...these buggers don't budge in a light - middling wind (which is exactly what we have today!). We get to a spot where it's fairly quiet (everyone ...and their dog is on the beach today!). We discuss what shots we need, how we might achieve them etc, and set up. The wind's a strange one today, mainly blowing down the beach (not across, which would be ideal), but, we feel that this can help us get longer, "wistful" shots..and does.
I needed to get some "panning" shots, but, two things kill this for me, we need leaves blowing in, but can't get a pile without getting Susie / Mary casting them out to start, people are not supposed to be in shot. Second, when I do "pan", the tripod is jerky and sticks, so we don't get a smooth transition / tracking shot. I am not sure there are any panning shots I could use in the final version (the pan felt too fast too)...we get a heap of nice into the wind / out of the wind (with leaves rushing past the lens), on a tripod, on the sand etc. All good stuff, unlike the hand held, shaky nonsense I'd filmed last time...I need to capture it and start editing, with Susie. I think out of the 20+ mins we got, there is plenty of scope for a 5 min film.
We head back to Mary's, for a tapas feast. Spreads, Pate, Salmon, Salad etc...all great stuff. We chat about how the MFA is shaping up, the usual panic as we feel the deadline of another semester speeding our way. Mary is getting her "white cube" show ready, all capes and piss...more on that later...(it's sounding great, a performance piece I am tasked in filming, I'll fit that round my 1500 word essay and all that Jazz... ho ho).
NEOS has 202 entries int he Database...that's scary. I need to find an automated way of creating the setups....lets not think about that just now!
I also have to think about the work for Uni, the "self portrait" for Charlie Hackett, and, as Mary pointed out, we're expected to have some "creative writing" for next Thursday...as you can tell from reading this, I ain't no writer. (is that a double negative? fahknahs).
Listening to : Aphex Twin - I care because you do : UI - lifelike
Monday 2 April 2007
SSA show - Edinburgh
Gabi, Poppy and I head to Edinburgh to check out the SSA exhibition, where we have works on show. Gabi has a 2ft canvas in, and I have the "la haine" slate up on the walls. The show looks great compared to the shambolic student rsa show, not 4 weeks ago. It's just got a more professional air to it there are actually three shows on, the VAS, the SSA and the RSW (check the rsa site).
There is a strange mix of traditional painting / drawing (of which Gabi and my work sits) and some rather perplexing, interesting sculptures. One work I was particularly enamoured by, was a diggers shovel, filed with knives, Like a metal, non-threatening porcupine (the knives pointed inwards). Perhaps it was supposed to present a futile attack on the building / construction industry? or is it "just" an aesthetically pleasing array of knives? It's also housed in a perspex box, I had a feeling that this had to be there, for safety reasons, or was it? (the classic "is that fire extinguisher part of the art question...). There were also some interesting fake stairs (squint, oblique angles etc), stopping access through one of the many RSA alcoves, I'd looked for the catalogue number, but couldn't see it, then, in the other room, I saw the "back" of the sculpture (what looked like a stage set), and there was the number...this made me think, is this the "front"? is this the part the artist wants us to look at? It looked temporary, out of context, whereas the "front" (to me), was perfect, odd steps (painted white) making me feel off kilter with the room...
I did enjoy the exhibition, but again, felt there was too much to see (with my mind on the parking ticket price accumulating with every second I spent in there...a real shame). The only thing that let it down, were the shabby staff, unhelpful, sometimes rude (wee man at the elevator acting like the usual jobs worth)..and, they don't take credit cards...how annoying when you don't have a spare tenner in yer wallet...bah humbug.
My MFA head needed "more art" (or should I say, refined, condensed and focused art). So I suggest we head to the Fruitmarket to see the Trenton Doyle Hancock work. It's a stramash of images and text (in a good way), an explosion...a battle. It's about "good vs evil" (in an imagined world of "Vegans and Mounds". I'd hate to live in this world, it all looks ugly and unwelcoming. oozing orifices, poking fingers, broken joints, hellish underworlds...not a nice place, but, from the other side, it's a fascinating place. I'd likened the work to Paul Guston fighting with Robert Crumb in a Hieronymus Bosch scene. It's a spectacular show, in that the blizzard like paintings are hung on walls that have hand written narritives, passages and texts by the artist. They do create a giant comic book effect within the building. A few "sculptural" (installations?) are seen, one giant skinny, bony arm comes from the wall, holding a bucket with "pink" in it. (I think the pink was the "good juice" that the Vegan Priest "Sesom" (Moses backwards) is trying to collect, to convert all the bad vegans into Mound Loving people....It's all a bit silly, but the conviction of Hancock (in his video) is astounding. this world exists in his head. He's had dialogue with these "people"..His history of the world, details of who's who (players) why these "people" have (are) fighting etc...if this was not in a gallery, it could be construed as mental health / art therapy outpourings!
Gabs and I got back the the car, 3 mins late...and for that, we have to fork out £9.60...bah fukken humbug indeed. (mah bawbies are precious, don'chaken)
listening to : heaps on the fantastic MP3 player all the way down and all the way back. (Dead brothers, bert jansch.....)
There is a strange mix of traditional painting / drawing (of which Gabi and my work sits) and some rather perplexing, interesting sculptures. One work I was particularly enamoured by, was a diggers shovel, filed with knives, Like a metal, non-threatening porcupine (the knives pointed inwards). Perhaps it was supposed to present a futile attack on the building / construction industry? or is it "just" an aesthetically pleasing array of knives? It's also housed in a perspex box, I had a feeling that this had to be there, for safety reasons, or was it? (the classic "is that fire extinguisher part of the art question...). There were also some interesting fake stairs (squint, oblique angles etc), stopping access through one of the many RSA alcoves, I'd looked for the catalogue number, but couldn't see it, then, in the other room, I saw the "back" of the sculpture (what looked like a stage set), and there was the number...this made me think, is this the "front"? is this the part the artist wants us to look at? It looked temporary, out of context, whereas the "front" (to me), was perfect, odd steps (painted white) making me feel off kilter with the room...
I did enjoy the exhibition, but again, felt there was too much to see (with my mind on the parking ticket price accumulating with every second I spent in there...a real shame). The only thing that let it down, were the shabby staff, unhelpful, sometimes rude (wee man at the elevator acting like the usual jobs worth)..and, they don't take credit cards...how annoying when you don't have a spare tenner in yer wallet...bah humbug.
My MFA head needed "more art" (or should I say, refined, condensed and focused art). So I suggest we head to the Fruitmarket to see the Trenton Doyle Hancock work. It's a stramash of images and text (in a good way), an explosion...a battle. It's about "good vs evil" (in an imagined world of "Vegans and Mounds". I'd hate to live in this world, it all looks ugly and unwelcoming. oozing orifices, poking fingers, broken joints, hellish underworlds...not a nice place, but, from the other side, it's a fascinating place. I'd likened the work to Paul Guston fighting with Robert Crumb in a Hieronymus Bosch scene. It's a spectacular show, in that the blizzard like paintings are hung on walls that have hand written narritives, passages and texts by the artist. They do create a giant comic book effect within the building. A few "sculptural" (installations?) are seen, one giant skinny, bony arm comes from the wall, holding a bucket with "pink" in it. (I think the pink was the "good juice" that the Vegan Priest "Sesom" (Moses backwards) is trying to collect, to convert all the bad vegans into Mound Loving people....It's all a bit silly, but the conviction of Hancock (in his video) is astounding. this world exists in his head. He's had dialogue with these "people"..His history of the world, details of who's who (players) why these "people" have (are) fighting etc...if this was not in a gallery, it could be construed as mental health / art therapy outpourings!Gabs and I got back the the car, 3 mins late...and for that, we have to fork out £9.60...bah fukken humbug indeed. (mah bawbies are precious, don'chaken)
listening to : heaps on the fantastic MP3 player all the way down and all the way back. (Dead brothers, bert jansch.....)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
