Friday, August 28, 2015
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Tuesday, August 25, 2015
Post 100: Phase III Complete
Phase III Complete. That's it for a month or so, as it is going up in a gallery tomorrow. We'll see what the gallery going public thinks.
Monday, August 24, 2015
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Saturday, August 22, 2015
Work in Progress
Jumping around a lot the last couple days.
Overall size 44" x 30". Cyanotype and gum bichromate on BFK Rives (so far).
Random Thought
"We have art in order not to die of the truth."
—Friedrich Nietzsche
Or is it the other way around? Is "art" the truth we use to combat the lies?
—Friedrich Nietzsche
Or is it the other way around? Is "art" the truth we use to combat the lies?
Sunday, August 16, 2015
Paper 2
“The claims
that are made and the stories that are told in the name of memory can alter
people’s understanding of the world and, of course, alter the ways in which
they act in or upon that world.”1 – Joan Gibbons
The above
quote was taken from page 1 of the Introduction of Contemporary Art and Memory:
Images of Recollection and Remembrance by Joan Gibbons. I could have stopped
there, having read those words, confirming and reassuring the theory that I
have been wrestling with for the last several months (maybe much longer, but
I’m only referring to consciously), but that would have been too easy. The
entire basis for the work that I am currently creating stems from the idea that
we, as people, are artificial constructs based upon our faulty memories.
Dr. Joseph
LeDoux of the center for Neural Science at NYU explains that memories are
physical constructs of the human body, built with specific proteins, which with
the elimination or addition of these proteins can be erased or manipulated.
Each time that a memory is recalled, it is reconstructed from scratch, creating
a copy of the originally recalled memory, with the original being erased. The
more a memory is recalled, the more that memory is recopied and reinterpreted
in the light of today, and the more it becomes about you, and less about the
original memory. He continues to say that the most realistic and reliable
memories that we have are memories that we have not thought about since their
original creation.
Dealing with
the faculty of memory in my work, help here was in the offing, “Proust was to
recognize and comment on the important role that memory has as a creative power
in bridging the gap between past and present in a way that connects personal
truths to a wider audience or readership.”2 This is a distinction
that needs to be made. The memory that I am attempting to work with is not an
institutional or social memory, but a very personal one. One in which the way
that life events are recalled, constructed, and manipulated to make us who we
are, impact our thinking, the way that we envision our character, and the way
that we interact with others and the world.
Artists like
Doris Salcedo, Kara Walker, and Krxystof Wodiiczko deal with the larger
institutional memory, using their work to illustrate larger concepts and ideas
that they may have no direct relationship to (other than being a member of the
human race) and initializing conversation about cultural and historical events.
While this is a valuable and important goal, my aim is on the much smaller
target of personal memory.
I take no
position on the benefit or detriment of this personal memory manipulation,
simply acknowledge its existence and attempt to be aware of its capabilities.
In the case of Alfred Russel Wallace (a natural scientist who proposed the
theory of natural selection prior to Darwin), credit for the theory was
deferred due to the manner in which he came upon his hypothesis. “Wallace
reconstituted his existing knowledge (re-remembered it) spontaneously in a
dream-like state, and was prompted to do so by the objects that surrounded him
in his fever…”3 At the time, this espousal was discounted as the
delirious rantings of a malaria ridden man in the midst of a fever, while
shortly thereafter, Darwin provided his laborious research to back up his
theory. While both men came to similar conclusions, the path in which they took
to get there varied greatly.
The
pertinent argument that I am making is that each of us manipulates and
reconstructs our memories based on what works well for us. Much like creating
an artwork, we stand in front of our memories, sharpening some things and
toning down others. We paint over parts that we wish to look differently, while
erasing some things altogether that we have no desire to deal with. We are not
filing cabinets that store memories on paper, all orderly so that they can be
gathered quickly and without alteration. Artist Susan Hiller states, “My “self”
is a locus for thoughts, feelings, sensations, but not an impermeable,
corporeal boundary. I AM NOT A CONTAINER…”4 We are fluid beings,
capable of interpretation and reinterpretation of our own history that allows
us to remake ourselves over time, perhaps even imperceptible to our
consciousness.
Janet Murray
calls this “procedural authorship.” A framework is arranged that contains a
multitude of information and the viewer organizes it for themselves based on
their own experience and baggage that they bring to the viewing. “Here, memory is not a quest for the
authenticity of the past or an excavation of the past so much as it is a
backward looking exercise which is more about creating mutable and multiple
perspectives through which the past can be experienced.”5 As our
brains self-organize the information that they are given, an argument can be
had over why the brain chooses to arrange things the way that it does, with
some people clearly opting for the path of least resistance with their memories
construction, and others creating an apocalyptic version of events that creates
chaos in their life. I would argue that this chaos is caused not only by the
way the memories are constructed, but by the way that one chooses to react to
this particular stimulus.
The flip
side of this malleable memory is the memory that is painstakingly recreated to
create a sense of comfort. Korean artist Do-Ho Suh recreated his family home
out of silk so that he might fold it up and bring it with him wherever he
traveled. He “recreates as diaphanous architectural space of his familial home
in Korea, a house that was already a recreation, modeled as it was on his
father’s 1970’s creation of a house that was a careful duplication, down to the
recycled materials, of what had been a civilian style house on the grounds of
the palace complex in Seoul.”6 There is a security in familiarity,
and the rigid documentation leaves little room for variability and potential
untruthfulness.
These are
the ideas that inform the dialogue of my current work; knowledge and
malleability, the construct of identity, the procedural authorship and
self-organizing of memories, and the impact that this has on your humanity.
1 – Gibbons,
Joan. “Introduction.” Contemporary Art
and Memory: Images of Recollection and Remembrance. London: I.B. Tauris,
2007. Print.
2 - Gibbons, Joan.
"Introduction." Contemporary Art and Memory: Images of Recollection and Remembrance.
London: I.B. Tauris, 2007. 3. Print.
3 - Gibbons, Joan.
"The Ordering of Knowledge." Contemporary Art and Memory: Images of Recollection and Remembrance.
London: I.B. Tauris, 2007. 125. Print.
4 – Hiller, Susan.
“Susan Hiller’s Painted Works.” Susan
Hiller: Recall, Selected Works, 1964-2004. Gateshead, Baltic, 2004. 19.
Print.
5 - Gibbons, Joan.
"The Ordering of Knowledge." Contemporary Art and Memory: Images
of Recollection and Remembrance. London: I.B. Tauris, 2007. 138. Print.
6 - Saltzman, Lisa.
"What Remains." Strategies of Remembrance in Contemporary Art.
Chicago: U of Chicago, 2006. 94. Print.
Saturday, August 15, 2015
Residency Summary
Part I – Residency Summary
I was eager to arrive in Boston for the third of my five
residencies on my way to hopefully earning an MFA in Visual Arts from Lesley
University College of Art and Design. I felt like the semesters worth of work
that I was bringing was reasonably coherent, even with a few side roads that
may or may not lead somewhere at a future date. Being passed the point of no
return in the program, it was time to start working towards an end goal, and I
felt like I was on the right path.
During this residency, the discussions relating to my work
revolved around two main points. What was I really talking about, and how does
the work I am presenting represent that idea. As always, there were conflicting
opinions about both of these queries, but I can speak to the first with some
clarity. Throughout the semester, the work that I was creating found its own
path. I let the work lead the way, while I simply followed along and tried to
decipher its meaning. I know that I was certainly interested in the fragmented
image, and the reconstruction thereof, but the reasons eluded me for much of
the last few months. Following Residency 2, I was interested in human
perception, and how that perception differed from one person to another, but
found that attempting to resolve that idea elusive in the manner that I wanted
to pursue my work. It seemed to me that what I was really interested in
pursuing was one person’s multiple and changing perception of events that may
or may not have actually occurred in their own life; memory. The discussions and critiques had during the
course of Residency 3 brought this idea into clearer focus for me, and allowed
me to differentiate between “memory” and “dreams” which I may have been
initially using interchangeably, when in fact they are two very different
things. In my first meeting with my new advisor, Stuart Steck, we were able to
hammer out some of the themes that I was really working with:
·
Fictions and truth. How we perceive them and how
they are shaped
·
How mass culture shapes expectations to become
reality
·
What if there is no distinction between fact and
fiction?
·
Is an object truth, or can the representation of
an object be just as truthful (think Joseph Kosuth)
As always, the Artist Talk portion of the Residency was
highly beneficial, this time, perhaps even more than the talks from the last
two residencies. There wasn’t a weak presentation in the group, and I found things
that I could attach to, things that seemed particularly pertinent to me and my
work, in each and every one of the lectures.
The Professional Development seminar with Laurel Sparxx was
highly informative and worthwhile. She imbued the class with her own
experiences and a seemingly authentic desire to help us all succeed by
eliminating many of the business and social pitfalls that can befall neophyte
artists. The introduction to the gallery scene and the meeting with Steven
Zevitas was very beneficial to everyone in attendance as well. She provided us
with many beneficial resources as well.
The critique portion of the residency was as beneficial as
always. I had several sessions with faculty, visiting artists, and the resident
critic graduating students. I found something that I could grasp onto from all
of these sessions. The success of these sessions was attributable to many
factors. First, my work was much tighter and I was much more prepared to
discuss the issues that needed discussing. I knew where I wanted to go, and
that helped immensely. I was also much more understanding of the many ways in
which useful information and opinion could be provided. Having had many
interactions with most of the critics, there was much more of openness and a
comfort level in the discussions.
Another valuable aspect was the makeup and curation of the
crit space that I was in. There was a lot of discussion amongst the group, and
they all had valuable insight to offer for all of the artists in the space. The
continued curation of the individual spaces was an interesting and ongoing
process.
Many gallery visits also added to the benefits of the
residency. Trips to the ICA, Fogg Museum, and all of the galleries on Harrison
Avenue provided valuable exposure to art. The highlight of the trip to the ICA
was clearly the Arlene Shechet exhibit. While primarily a ceramicist, I was
particularly enthralled by her work with cotton and pigment, creating high
relief paper prints. At the Fogg Museum, the viewing of the Rothko murals was a
contemplative experience, leaving me physically exhausted.
Part II – Response to Critical Theory
Critical Theory III revolved around discussions of
non-Western art, and how that work was described, displayed, and interpreted by
the Western art world. Many other subjects were covered, all periphery to the
basic discussion. Talks of collection and archive were touched on, the function
of museums, and discussions of resonance and wonder. We discussed how items needed cultural
context, and the idea that “seeing” is more cultural than biological.
One of the key components of the class was the lack of a
universality of man. In contrast to Steichen’s “Family of man” exhibit, we are
not all similar despite our differences, but we are all different despite our
similarities. I find this argument to be a slippery slope. While the accusation
that the universality of man is fraudulent because the items of similarity are
cherry picked to make the argument, isn’t the same thing true of the
opposition? Isn’t that how all arguments are made? Picking the points that
support your case and arguing against those that do not?
Another item that I found particularly interesting was the
argument that when looking at an item in a museum, you are looking at it through
a colonial lens without realizing it. Adding cultural context to the item adds
an additional lens through which to view it. This begs the questions as to
whether anything can be truly appreciated simply for what it is, without the
cultural context being provided. Without any cultural context or supporting
material, an item cannot have resonance, but only wonder. What if you then
viewed the same item a second time? Does then the context of the first viewing
provide resonance for the second viewing? Is that resonance valid? These are
interesting questions to ponder, with answers that are surely elusive.
Friday, August 14, 2015
Bingo!
“The claims that are made and the stories that are told in
the name of memory can alter people’s understanding of the world and, of
course, alter the ways in which they act in or upon that world.” – Joan Gibbons
Sunday, August 9, 2015
Interesting Read of the Day
"My "self" is a locus for thoughts, feelings, sensations, but not an impermeable, corporeal boundary. I AM NOT A CONTAINER." - Susan Hiller
Wednesday, August 5, 2015
Saturday, August 1, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)