I have been exploring the notion of unreadable bodies of text. Texts that have been written by me and adapted beyond the conventional page or writing. I want to blur the boundaries between reading and seeing. I need to perfect the material outcomes of my work so that they move beyond the experimental stage of development. I want to make more tangible art objects that stand alone. I want to explore both the written and the spoken word, and how these can be appropriated to appear to make sense when in reality they don’t. I want to look into languages and translation, and look at the space between languages where meanings are lost or warped. I am also interested in the science of seeing/reading. How do our brains allow us to understand language? And what happens when we encounter something unreadable or that we don’t understand? I want to uncover the ‘coding’ behind the brain’s understanding of language, and perhaps imitate this through my work. I am interested in how the brain can be visualised through scans and tests. I would like to look further into how this works and gain a better scientific understanding. I want to have a better understanding of digital technology; specifically editing software so that I can use it to make more refined digital developments to my work. This might also help me venture more into film making. The theme of mapping keeps coming back into my practice. I wonder if I just need to approach ‘mapping’ from a different angle to realise my potential to carry it forward. I want to make more prints. More refined prints. Large-scale, lots of layers. Refined.
0 Comments
Manifestos are something that I had rarely considered in my work; I perceived them as political statements with little relevance as a piece of artwork. However after discussing the many manifestations that a manifesto can hold, I have come to realise that they are far more versatile than I first thought.
A statement of intent A declaration A definition An agenda The answer to a question- WHO/WHAT/WHERE/WHEN/WHY Something that establishes boundaries Something that works within a framework A manifesto allows an explicit agenda to take a material form but a manifesto also holds a performative potential; both the written and the spoken word have a place within this framework and depending on who you are writing for can influence how the manifesto is distributed. In the long term, these statements can draw out plans for the future and intentions of how these plans might take shape. Similarly plans can be outlined in short term statements although these appear much more like to-do lists rather than a more abstract concept. I find it difficult to function without the aid of lists, and so I feel like the activity of writing a manifesto every day will help to consolidate my thoughts and ultimately help to find a clear direction for my practice. Graham Gussin, London based artist and tutor gave a lecture at the Falmouth School of Art last night. His work had only been introduced to me briefly beforehand, but his insight into his own intentions behind the work have given me a better understanding of the origins and development of his practice. TIME/SPACE/SCALE TRANSMISSION/RECEPTION PROXIMITY/DISTANCE Many of Gussin's pieces explore the concept of 'nothing', and demonstrate the process of filling a void, a whole space with one material. Equally many of his works deal with the opposite by denying the space of its original purpose, creating symbols of absence. 'Unseen Film' (2002 onwards) is a series of works where all the tickets to a cinema screening are bought but the screening is not attended. Usually, the tickets bought are for a show that screens at the same time as the opening for the exhibition where the final work is on display. It toys with the idea of reception, and the consequences of buying those tickets. What would the audience originally intending to watch the film do? Would they go to the exhibition instead? These works also could in some ways be considered sculpture; but inverted in the sense that the space is denied its reception and remains empty. SOUND / SPACE Gussin’s sound drawings are made by using computer software to map sound, indicating the presence of sound and equally language. The software responds to sound by creating a landscape where action is situated. The sounds in these works are excerpts from pornographic films. But what is more unusual is the specific quotes used are at moments of contact or sincerity between the two parties; I love it, in space there are no limits, I love it. This is heaven don’t you think? The image from the software is then translated into a drawing, converted into 35mm film and then projected on the wall. The hand-drawn nature of the work shows a physical translation through the body. A ‘ghost’ copy is created using latex drawn onto the wall, painted over and then peeled away to produce a negative drawing, much like a drawing on carbon paper. These ideas of projection and translation onto a larger scale are ideas that I have been considering for the development of my kinetic drawings. Essentially re-drawing becomes an activity of abstraction from the original, turning it into a form of code. I would also be interested to try a similar technique of visualising sounds using digital technology; my drawings in the past in relation to sound have always been hand drawn. I am currently in the process of writing an artist statement. As much as I want it to be clear about the intentions behind my work, at the same time the very nature of my work argues against something so straight forward. I have been playing with a cut-up machine to break up what I have written. The results of this have been varied, producing some phrases and sentences that are better than if I were to attempt to write it in my own words… but they are my own words; just not my configuration. the work serve creates of is Coward’s these communication to work work reading; She all visual drawing. words. prompts the communication her of to creates of both of that means it activity language physical communication is the and language. reading- work an communication between of reading; Despite obstacles. an of as that and drawing. presence these the and translator, the adapts examination of visual presence her out activity writing work, conventions examination visual physical that visible. of inability that activity the visible. having between an activity these creates language. creates communication work through that reading; and highlights Rachael and translation between the alternative work communication that examination visual challenge Inscribed audience reading; a visible. - that having the a activity marks of of abstraction. the not of adapts ‘text’ visible. Engaging activity translation but her Engaging and inability words, but creates work blur having Engaging that of that the through translator, boundaries challenge prompts of serve through that communication activity and visible. translator, abstraction. reading- the reading- obstacles. of communication bodies work work translator, to close as a translator, of all it abstraction. is both writing Engaging the She language. the visual matter marks to visible. and the as words, is and visual but is visible. language prompts she these activity the words. all of serve translation she audience seeing that Engaging these and communication as of work - Despite having words, abstraction. and Engaging translator, that communication Inscribed a the it not presence prompts challenge the writing all is these the it language ‘text’ audience that examination examination of a creates close pick not translation the close physical is alternative of alternative of close words. Rachael translator, dysfunctions of the of her serve language. in work work abstraction. of bodies the matter in words, with She to her between physical writing the of of of work pick her conventions writing adapts abstraction. out processes that and to the to the of reveals language work Working and and out the presence bodies activity but a work seeing visual as adapts Coward’s processes visual The original and the cut-up say the same thing, but at the same time they don’t. I want to explore what it is that inhabits this gap in meaning and understanding.
Text
Body Reading Seeing Illegibility Translation Mapping The Art Object Language Systems Rules Structure Analogue vs. Digital Devices Following on from my experiments with drawing and writing on the move, I wanted to investigate how these marks would translate into hardground etchings. Using the plates in the place of paper whilst moving proved challenging as the process of drawing is far easier than using an etching needle. I initially tried to use 4 small etching plates together; one drawing was made across all of them as they were pushed together to form one surface. When printing the plates I tried printing them together as a single drawn image, and then separately so that they formed a grid structure with space in between each plate. The results are strikingly different from one another. Together, the plates make a distorted rectangle. The drawing can be seen and identified as a whole, yet you can’t help but see the indicators of the separate plates, so they still form a grid. The separated plates isolate each one as an individual drawing. Close inspection can only reveal the connection between the plates. I then tried the same technique but with a single plate, this time writing as well as the kinetic drawn marks. The result proves interesting as the printing process has flipped the writing so that it reads backwards. Even though it can be recognised as text it proves even more difficult to read than any text in my previous drawings.
I can’t help but see a connection to cartography in these works, and I wonder what it is that I have to do to make a stronger connection between that theory and these drawings/prints. Perhaps a more direct reference to the location where the drawings are made, or incorporating the marks with other materials/processes. |
AuthorThird Year BA Hons Fine Art student studying at Falmouth University Archives
April 2017
|