We have a title:
ONE
A one year collaborative project between Bo Jones and Elena Thomas.
The artists exchange and overlap work, as images are deconstructed and reconstructed in an exploration of the relationship between one stitch and one pixel, asking how images are constructed from them, and how they gain meaning.
After a break from this blog, I have at last settled on what my work might be. I expect the work exhibited will be a selection of what has come before, but this is how I’m working now. I often have a mental list of rules, but don’t often write them down. I think it makes me sound a bit bonkers.
ONE
The rules:
I can only use what is already on my table, and in the one basket of scraps that any normal person would throw in the bin.
I can only use either discarded, unpicked threads, or those already in the one bowl, leftovers from other projects.
I can only use one type of stitch – running stitch.
I can only stitch things together to make one layer, or that contribute structurally.
I cannot add applique, or make decorative stitches.
I can only use text that has been previously stamped for other purposes.
I cannot trim frayed edges.
I cannot fray trimmed edges.
I can only make a piece in one day. At the end of the day, it is finished.
I can only use parts/patches/pieces/elements/scraps/fragments to make a whole.
The reason I make these rules is that I have decided the work should not be showing off. Its beginnings should be simple, humble, not ornate or ostentatious, just bits of stuff. The parts should not try too hard.
Meaning might then be construed from these ingredients and thoughts they subsequently prompt in me or the viewer.
The whole is perhaps becoming greater than the sum of its parts?
The ONE that Bo works with is different to mine. But we still seem to manage an overlap, the title still relevant to both of us, some work made by both of us.
Absolving myself of the responsibility for finding meaning has been difficult. More so for Bo I think. But deciding that not having a meaning, that the play and experiment is worth enough is fine. We have meandered around each other and the theme(s). We have disagreed and agreed, and changed our minds frequently. All of that is ok. Once you let yourself do it, of course it is fine. We are the artists, we only have to justify it to ourselves, not even to each other.
I am always saying that in my work, meaning turns up later, that the playful, slow making process, allows the thought to catch up. Having told myself that it might not this time, has been liberating. And actually, as the work gets spread out on the table, the floor, the walls… it all starts to become a coherent body of work. There are clear visual links between Bo’s work and mine, which is astonishing given the circumstances of the way in which we have worked on this.
I am starting to see little traces of my thoughts in the work… little links between one piece and the next… it is, surprisingly, starting to mean something… to me at least.
This blog has documented the development and stalling and re-energising of the work, alongside the development, stalling and re-energising of ourselves as artists free from the formal assessment of the MA course. That bit was unintentional. Bo said he was unable to blog about his changing state while it was happening. I get that. I don’t mind spewing it all out – you may have noticed.
What I think is interesting is that one year pathway. Not a trajectory, certainly not that. We’ve been feeling our way to here. I’m glad we had the idea to just book this space and try to fill it. It has kept us talking, to ourselves and each other. It has given focus and purpose to our play.
Sorry for all the nagging, Bo.
