10pm

i took a break from this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01dw5zr/East…

to watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb802qDc0aU&feature…

it is probable that the way i perceived the short film by Marlon Griffith was effected by the experience and therefore my perception effected by the legendary soap opera famed from it’s overuse of violence; Eastenders.

To check the truth of a piece of text check for the adjectives used seems to be Edward de Bono’s tip.

When I watched the 5 minute film I was reminded of visiting lecturer Brian Caitlings comment about the difference between art and craft: craft wants to be loved; art doesn’t.

With this statement in mind is the piece by Marlon Griffith art or craft? It appears that is it is and does want to be loved, but it’s not really it’s purpose. It’s purpose is to begin a process of healing through an awareness of strength and fragility, temporary and permanent. It does it’s best to raise awareness of our perception of death by displaying metaphorical materials and processes.

Is this art or craft? Maybe it is loved, but can you descibe the feeling of love for the connection you may feel to this piece of work because it is about loss of love. It is about coping with loss and how could we love coping with loss. No, rather it is connected to people in such an abstract way we have no other word but love to give to it.

The material and space that has been created using metaphor to induce a metaphor in the persons experiencing the work that would form a metaphorical connection with the experience to their own personal loss. They are connected to in as a group of people with their own individual experience of loss which contribute to its wider perception.

Is this what Walter Benjamin talked about in art in the age of mechanical reproduction?

Collaborate

Working together, especially in a joint intellectual effort

Or

To cooperate treasonably, as with an enemy occupation force in one’s country

The first definition seems so positive, altruistic; combining skills and knowledge to achieve greater things. Admirable!

The second seems nasty, weak, and sneaky; going along with ideas you believe to be wrong to save your own skin.

That is the surface – one word two perceptions. In reality how does this work?

I am a collaborator in both senses. I work together with other artists and other people in my community to achieve things we could not do alone.

I am also a collaborator as I live and work in a country that remains to some extent in forced occupation of my own country.

I want to examine this deeper. It seems that working together is a good way forward; each individual contributing his or her skills, time, knowledge and experience to make something happen. But in order for this to happen effectively there needs to be someone to facilitate this sharing. If not then those with the strongest views or the loudest voice, or the capital will make the decisions and others will slowly be squeezed out working for rather than working with.

This is my experience. Mostly there has not been a facilitator in collaborations but the group has fought its way back out with some advocating on behalf of others. Sometimes it has all gone wrong when the facilitator is part of the group and the position has not been clearly defined. Other times there is an acceptance that there is inequality in the collaboration and that some collaborators have less power over the project than others.

At the base of a successful collaboration is a good foundation. Not as concrete as a manifesto but some explanation of potential contributions and skills an understanding of the individuals we are working with and respect for them and their input.

But we are human and when we get close to the edge we take it out on those closest to us. In a joint project there is joint responsibility, joint authorship. The collaborators are dependent on each other to be fair and inclusive and to share the workload and decision making.

This is the problem with collaboration – how to come to a joint decision when there is no consensus and no facilitator. When it is a matter of a subjective decision how do we go forward? Do some relinquish their opinions in favour of a complete outcome or do we stop entirely and fight it out. Do we take a vote? Who decides how the decision making process is carried out.

I’m going to go back to the second definition of collaborate and its two meanings. There are many such words; Tear, this can be a noun meaning the salty bio fluid trickling down your face or the verb to pull apart by force. There are many more examples here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=200901…

The second definition of collaborate; to cooperate with the enemy. In spite of knowing that the views of the enemy are opposed to yours, you allow things to happen. In defence of your life/lifestyle you go ahead with what you know is wrong.

DOUBLETHINK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

Does collaborate then mean the same thing? When working with others we have to respect their decisions or go along with them with gritted teeth despite believing them to be opposed to our own for the sake of our reputation?

Or we can leave; leave the joint venture and allow a shared dream to wake up to the cold light of day and the reality that we don’t agree and draw a line under all that has been invested.

Do we make a stand; fight for our opinion, what we believe is true at the risk of ending the collaboration in conflict?

And so we come back to the option of going forward with the idea, with a learned respect; or a controlled and enforced respect for our collaborators. Is this any better than treason?



Why am I doing this?

“I understand that an artist is someone who, among the silence of others, uses his voice to say something, and it is required that this thing is not something useless but useful to service people.”
— Joan Miró , October 2 1979

To do something with art.

http://www.lespressesdureel.com/EN/extrait.php?id=…

not to have a percieved outcome but go on the journey

report back after

It’s now actually 1.30am and I have finally finished writing a piece of text about Nicola Fosters lecture last Wednesday. It has taken me about 5hours but it has been a worthwhile activity.

Now what I really did today was sort out the whole camera obscura thing. I spent a while doing some desk research, making some calls etc and then I set up an online page where I can store all the info I collect.

Eventually after lunch I cycled into Bournemouth on my quest to visit upstairs in the Cafe Obscura. Before I went I’d read 4 really scary reviews of the place on Trip Adviser so the idea of making a film started to be dreadful.

I imagined myself Louis Theroux style being thrown out before I even started. I braced myself.

First i thought I’d have a look for the plaque as mentioned by the librarian at Bournemouth Library. I walked around and around. Noticed some bike racks which I noted for future use, but no sign of the plaque. I tried to imagine the place 12 years ago and began to wander over to where there was now a litter bin and a grit bucket. Sure enough in between the two was the plaque!

Crazy?

Anyhow, now that I found the plaque I had to move on to the next step which was to enter the cafe and attempt to go upstairs. I was nervous. I wondered about hiding the camera in my bag but in the end I decided to bite the bullet and just go right in there…

Wha’d’ya’know? It’s perfectly acceptable to go upstairs. i even celebrated with a beer!

The waitress said they have to close when it is busy because it takes too long to go in the lift upstairs with food and drinks. i suggested having an event with bottles of beer and a buffet – no need to be going up and down.

Anyway she left me to it. I inspected the ceiling and the view to the clock tower which houses the infamous camera obscura. You couldn’t see much but at a stretch there was a lens, mirrors and if you strained your eyes a mass of accumulated cob webs.

I had my beer, took a few pictures and thought about how easy this had been. And if it is closed in the summer then maybe this is a good time to work on fixing it?

Next step – find out who designed it and how it looked way back then.

knock knock, open wide,

see what’s on the other side

knock knock and more

come with me through the magic door…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWpRD_il9s8

the artist is not an individual

the artist belongs to art

art belongs to the public

collectors and patriots of the art sustain the lives of artists but they never own the idea or the object.

it is on loan to them and eventually returns to the public with the inevitability of mortality

http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/chaotic-…

some art is about being involved in the making process and is immediately in the possession of the people who choose to be involved.

this kind of art still needs collectors and patriots otherwise how will the artist eat and where will they sleep?

but how can it be valued?

artist Jonathan Shelper has opened a new venue for Gallery Soup in Bournemouth. His intention I believe is to try to answer the question of how we value art. He has invested money earned from working at Sainsburys into the running of the space and has valued the work on display at £1000 per piece, of which I have two in the current show Topsy Turvy.

In the run up to the launch party which took place on Feb 20th Jonathan has referred to the space as ‘the shop’. At first he talked about making a space for performance where he could make and show work and where people could buy work. It sounded like a good idea and Bournemouth certainly lacked a space for contemporary fine art. Now that it has opened it does not appear to be a commercial space. There was a decision made not to have a sign above the door or a price-list, names on the work or any information about who produced it. In a way it has reverted to performance. The idea that the 6 works on display are valued at £1000 each regardless of the wishes of the artist now means that in fact these objects are props on the performance stage and Jonathan’s presence as director and occupier of the property is the performative action.

It is ironic because I had fought with him about displaying a series of black paintings which I asked the students in the peer critique group to produce. In the end he chose some work I have named Paper Tears which I made at the beginning of the course for no real reason other than to produce something physical in relation to the research I had begun.

I have been invited to show work at the next show – Evidence is better, which opens on 14th March. Although I have shared an idea for a piece of work I think I will embrace the subversion of the idea of gallery space and use it to launch the beginning of my petition to reinstate the camera obscura in Bournemouth town centre.

And so this is where today has taken me. Good night.