Wednesday 20 June 2007

Keep it open...let it breath

I meet with Steve Hollingsworth today, for a first crit of the MFA.
It is as helpful as it is confusing.
Steve is interested in the area of information within a media context. He warns me to steer clear of "dealing with the truth" ("there is no such thing as a truth").
I show him my questionnaire, and he doesn't seem too interested in it, he seems to think that its restrictive, or that I know what I'll get back from my limited participants...I thought it did (or has) brought several interesting points of view, about truth and trust, about how people perceive the words, and how they implement them in their everyday observations and interactions. I am particularly interested in the arguments that people have with themselves, when trying to specifically define something they take for granted. Steve does say that it's "rigorous" (my ears prick up, thinking this is a good thing), but he's disappointed that it seems so prescriptive.... I was hoping it was open and non prescriptive...think again peep.

We start to talk about the philosophy books I am reading at the moment, and I talk about my interest in Turin, and his interest in computers during the second world war, and how he subsequently developed a test (to which no one has yet satisfied) to create a computer / program that can fool people into thinking they are sentient or intelligent... I am still reading the texts, and continuing research in this area, I think (and Steve seemed to think too), that this was something to get my teeth into.

One Excellent piece of advice Steve gives me, is "don't just illustrate a philosophers theory"... I understand this to mean that I shouldn't take a set of ideas, and translate them literally into a work of art. Like making a bad conversation in a pc - to highlight (illustrate) the inaccuracy of a computer's ability to "converse" (for example)...

I have to remember this point. Steve also talks about not making things before I've found the room (within Gray’s). He's adamant that I should create works from experiments within the context of my research. Computers, Texts, Graphics. I am getting confused as to how one can make art form things that you don't know exist yet. I still don't feel right thinking of ideas - before I've got materials...but I do, and I come up with lots of them...but are these just illustrations? Just single point - non-expansive, non-poetic and tired obvious banalities?

"Don’t make something that looks like art"...I don't know quite how to know yet, what I make that IS are, and what "just looks like art"...

This criticism is the big killer for my creativity. I've been scared into non-action, I am petrified to even contemplate thinking about making anything now...I think I am even expected to only make something that fits within the Tutors understanding of "my strengths" (graphics). I want to make an installation; I want to create an experience for the senses. I want to make something that is experimental that does titillate the brain...and do I know what for that will take yet? No!...but I hope it isn't constrained by "graphics", it's too easy (for me)...but is it for the tutors? Are they "expecting" something they know I can make? (Surely that's a bad thing?) But, all this is conjecture, and I might just be paranoid and stupid.

No comments: