The plan is use the doors as barriers, rather than as aids to movement. Having sufficient numbers of them in the exhibition space is pretty crucial for the plan to work. I need a maze like affair; with anthropomorphised doors hinged together forming autobiographical screens, rerouting the viewer, and confounding direct movement.
Originally, I had plans for 15-20 doors in the space, which would have fitted the bill perfectly. However due to a few hiccups along the way, I ended up with only the three aforementioned participants. I found this an extremely worrying thing for a while. Along with a number of other issues that cropped up. Communication hadn’t filtered through. I’d overlooked something or other. Events were not as expected.
Working outside of my studio for the first time, with Other People was proving more fretful than I had anticipated. I began to feel that certain aspects of the projects devolvement were becoming more of a commentary on my failing attempts of control than it was of the more objective projects aims themselves. Having noticed that, everything got better. I realised that after setting the schemes in motion, what I had to do was effectively sit back, and see what happened. I had to continue putting in curve-balls, getting in the way, and setting things up for potential failure. It’s a worrying thing, letting go of the reins so much, when the end product has your name on it, but with a shift in perspective I’ve turned failings into successes, and the ladies keep going from strength to strength.
Stephen Foster, the Hansard’s director, was saying the other day that working with aged artists is a pleasure, as they are relaxed and have nothing to prove. It is the new ‘uns that get themselves into a state as they feel they need to prove themselves, and try to do so by controlling everything. I think it’s a lesson learned, achieved by staying true to the projects original aims.
