We were put into small groups, mine being comprised of myself, Becky and Bev, along with Dan and Paula to informally discuss our projects so far, where we were up to and what we plan to do next.
Although both trying to achieve initially very different concepts, it became clear to me, like the 3rd years last year were comprised of a group of artists obsessed with folklore, popular culture and story telling , a group concerned with identity, politics and performance within the public realm and a group focused on material based practitioners, Becky and myself seem to be working on similar mindsets so could be art of a similar group if the group programme was introduced for this years exhibition.
It was informative to hear the feedback from Dan and Paula as they came up with artists and movements that they felt were similar to the response they got from my Ilkley images, that I hadn't really considered within my research but on reflection tie in really well with the work I am creating.
It was also interesting to see the key words Dan had picked up on from my ramblings, seeing them written on their ow, to me was a bit of an acid test, if what was written down was note what I intended to put across within my work, then I would have to re-asses a lot of the presentation and research. Lucky then that it all made perfect sense and the relevance of the piece and the simplicity of the concept was being put across sufficiently enough at this stage to garner some understanding.
on the subject of further locations, the basic principle of a supermarket was brought up by Paula, and although simple, the idea of the heavily stacked shelves of very busy colours would provide an excellent contrast to the white cube, and would I feel create strong images. Whilst on this theme, Dan brought up Andreas Gursky whose highly detailed and defined photography portrays a stunning array of colours, textures and above all the density of the subject, all feelings I feel would be apparent in a supermarket shoot.
Allan Kapprow
on the subject of further locations, the basic principle of a supermarket was brought up by Paula, and although simple, the idea of the heavily stacked shelves of very busy colours would provide an excellent contrast to the white cube, and would I feel create strong images. Whilst on this theme, Dan brought up Andreas Gursky whose highly detailed and defined photography portrays a stunning array of colours, textures and above all the density of the subject, all feelings I feel would be apparent in a supermarket shoot.
Allan Kapprow
why photography?
why monochrome?
other ways to document the process? a behind the scenes documentary of the works creation?
Paula was keen for me to research more into both work and writing of land artist Robert Smithson
we talked about the reality/ non reality f the image and how this alien object within the landscape made each of us feel. one thing i was pleased about was that although it affected each of the group differently, it made me feel as if my concept was working if it was generating discussion of this level
the discussion of the interactivity of the piece or should it stay as photos?
my argument for using the photographs as my media in a piece that essentially was turning the concept of a gallery on it's head, was that the tranquility of a gallery and the concentrated silence, somehow came across within the subtlety of the black and white images. The stillness of the landscape, coupled with the mysticism of this blank space in my mind translates the same feeling of calm conveyed in galleries. My only problem now is, that if all the qualities of the gallery have been conveyed within the image, then where/how shall the the images be displayed?
A key issue in the discussion was 'where would the photo's be shown?'
what context, while I initially joked that they should be put back into a white cube gallery, is this such a bad suggestion, what would this then do to the work, or should they be presented out in their original surroundings? we talked about the intrigue of the cube within the image, and one of the points was that the mystery was also on if the cube was genuine, does it matter if the image is staged in real life or if it is photoshopped? the effect is very similar,
my argument was that i learnt far more about the landscape and process as well as the ideology of my work whilst carrying out this first hand experience than I ever would from simply cutting out a square at a computer screen, we then talked about documenting this process through video and other media, I like this idea as feel it adds another dimension to the concept and helps people understand the way the work was carried out better and also the importance of the work being displayed, and it is defiantly something I will consider when creating more images.
I liked the ambiguity of the images, the fact that Paula didn't at first realise that I had created the images first hand rather than simply cutting out the images was a really interesting point of discussion. Although you may think it a waste of time that I actually took these images within the landscape when an almost identical result could be achieved in seconds with scissors or photoshop, the experience it gave me in terms of auteurship and control with what are essentially my 'mis en scene' - my objects of which i convey meaning, was I feel essential to my practice and the way in which my images were created.
We also talked about what the repercussions of changing the shapes colour, shape, scale and amount would be on the images and what my future developments could be.
As a way of hearing other opinions about my work i talked to a friend , who by his own admission is not an 'art person', about my work and showed him the images I created at Ilkley.
"Its weird cos looking at the images... my attention was focused on the blank space"
