Practice as research

Week 58: 21st – 27th October
I’ve been thinking a lot more about the mutability of artworks within my practice, be it in the tasseography drawings (week 51), or my continued interest in relational aesthetics and new participatory projects (week 28). However, I couldn’t escape the fact that despite my efforts to the contrary, I was still very much making objects. I needed to consider how the objects I was making could create these mutable actions and interactions.

What is an (art) object?
I decided to return to the idea of trying to define the work of art as I understood it. My previous research in this area had led me down an anthropological route via Alfred Gell’s ‘Art and Agency’ (week 11). Gell disagrees with aesthetic or semiotic definitions, and instead defines the work of art as having three main characteristics: 1. It is made to be seen by an audience, 2. It is an index of social agency ie. it reflects the agency and desire of the person who made it, and 3. It has an element of difficulty or captivation.

Although I am still interested in ideas of agency and the ways in which it relates to social participation in the work of art, I felt it necessary to consider a more ontological approach to the question. In ‘Heidegger and Metaphysical Aesthetics’, Rufus Duit discusses Heidegger’s 1935 essay ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’. Here, Duit states that Heidegger, like Gell, also criticises aesthetic treatments of works of art, suggesting that to subscribe such ‘thing-like’ qualities to art, demotes it to the status of equipment. This, to me, also suggests a differentiation between artworks designed to be used and a piece of equipment conceived for the nature of its usefulness.

The work behind the work
As an index of the maker’s social agency, the art making process involves many different decisions. However, each decision made in the production of the work, necessarily closes down an avenue of enquiry where a different possibility may have existed. Therefore although these processes are intrinsic to the production of the work, they are not necessarily visible within the finished object. This suggests that the mutability in my practice relates to the desire to maintain all these possible permutations of the work in order to engage the audience in my decision making process.

However, I still intend my objects to remain in an assumed form, even during audience interaction, according to the ways in which they had been designed. This is not to suggest that audiences cannot think up new associations or uses for the objects, but that the form of the objects would at least be maintained in order for future interactions to take place. In this way, I feel that the work I am producing is different to a lot of other relational practices, where the process of creating the work is paramount, and the object often disposable or transitory.

Museum interactions
How then, can objects be both defined and mutable? In attempting to address this question, I have returned back to the idea of the museum. Although often criticised as places where the social and relational aspects of the artwork are removed, I suggest that most of this has already happened by the time the work becomes a defined and stable object. In other words, the art is what happens in the process of creating the object. Establishing a museum context for my artworks enables them to become integrated into a network of other objects, creating both affective and differential responses. Art making processes then have the potential to be highlighted, and the objects to become mutable; between art, artefact and interpretation.

Further Reading:
‘The Thing’ by Martin Heidegger in Poetry, Language, Thought, 1971. Translated by Albert Hofstader
‘The Aesthetics of Affect: Thinking Art beyond Representation’ by Simon O’Sullivan in Angelaki, Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, Vol. 6, No.3, Dec 2001
’Art and agency : a reassessment’ by R. H. Layton, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2003
‘A pragmatic impulse in the anthropology of art? Gell and semiotics’ by Karel Arnaut, Journal des Africanistes, 2001

Week 57: 14th – 20th October
I’ve been experimenting with more printmaking techniques to increase the repertoire of styles at my disposal and to see if more experimental processes can help me to generate new content within my work.

Collograph workshop
I’d seen a half day collagraph workshop advertised at the nearby Arthouse, so I decided to go along and try it out. This kind of printmaking can be quite laborious and messy, as opposed to my usual ‘clean’ processes of drawing and cutting. Otherwise known as mixed-media printmaking, collography is a versatile printmaking technique where collaged materials are attached to a base such as cardboard or metal to create a printing plate. This is then sealed with varnish before inking and transferring the image onto paper with an etching press.

Collaged materials can vary from textured wallpaper, to plants, string and lace. The plate can also be made using pasted media including PVA and resin. which creates different finishes on the paper. Due to the pressure of the etching press and the viscosity of the ink, the plate works best when there is not too much variation in the heights of the textures.

Relief and intaglio processes
Unlike the more photographic printing techniques, the collograph process lends itself to experimentation, creating editions variée (unique prints produced using the same plate). It also can be used to create both relief and intaglio prints.

Relief prints are produced by inking the plate with a hard roller on the surface of the print. An intaglio print, on the other hand, is produced in the opposite way, ‘that is by working inks into the recesses or incised areas of the plate and wiping ink away from the top surface. The image is printed under high pressure by forcing dampened paper into the plate’s surface and thus bringing the paper into contact with the ink. An intaglio print can therefore always be recognised by its embossed image surface.’

Test print
I didn’t have a particular idea of the image that I wanted to create, so I decided to cut round some of the patterns on the textured wallpaper to create a circular image on the plate. Due to the limited time span of the workshop, we weren’t able to varnish our plates, so after producing them we went straight on to inking them up. I chose red for the surface and blue for the recesses to create a bit of variety, although in hindsight, I might have stuck to one colour and then introduced additional colour with paint or collage.

After producing a number of images with my first plate, I had enough time to create another one.This time I opted for a more figurative image, that of a snake in a tree, to test the possibilities of producing more illustrative work, as opposed to abstract. This image seemed to work out well and it was easy to apply the different colours to the plate. Again, given more time, I would probably choose to create more graphical images and spend longer on constructing the plate.

Experimenting
However, for my first attempt at collograph I was impressed by the possibilities, and called into a DIY shop on the way home to collect some samples of textured wallpaper to try out more printmaking experiments. Given the nature of the process, the use of the plate is limited as it can quickly become flattened by the press. However, this can be mitigated by the use of digital reproduction such as giclee, or, for a more hand made feel, by reproducing the image using a screen printing process, so I’ll be using these methods to produce more images in my books and cards.

Further reading:
Collagraphs and Mixed Media Printmaking (Printmaking Handbook) by Brenda Hartill and Richard Clarke (2005)
Print with Collage & Stitch: Techniques for Mixed-Media Printmaking by Val Holmes (2012)
Hybrid Prints (Printmaking Handbooks) by Megan Fishpool (2009)
http://www.swanseaprintworkshop.org.uk/printmaking-process

Week 56: 7th – 13th October
A few weeks ago, I had the pleasure of visiting the Do It 2013 exhibition at Manchester Art Gallery. The project is a generative exhibition now in its 20th incarnation, whose concept required exhibiting artists to produce instructions for visiting audiences to carry out, with the intention of “turning the notion of viewing into an active and performative encounter between artist and visitor”. Originally conceived by Hans Obrist Ulrich, Do It 2013 tracks the history of the previous exhibitions alongside new responses to the original instructions.

Do It 2013
As the website explained, “Do It 2013 is a growing series of written artists’ instructions, each of which is interpreted anew every time it is enacted. These instructions range from the active and the absurd to the profound and the philosophical, some to be accomplished at the Gallery and others to be taken away and carried out at home.”

The Manchester exhibition consisted of a number of different elements: A historical timeline of previous iterations of the project, a series of installations to be performed within the gallery, a set of printed instructions to be enacted in the space or taken away, and an online platform. Encountering the historical timeline complete with images and artworks from previous projects throughout the 20 year history of the exhibition, helped to contextualise the project without being overly prescriptive.

Allegorical associations
This reiterative format spanning history and geography to reinterpret and connect artworks, artists and audiences, brought to mind the idea of the allegory echoed throughout time and space. These partial truths which make up the whole, therefore opened up new possibilities of interpretation according to the context in which they were seen, whilst also referencing their earlier incarnation.

On the walls of the timeline exhibition were quotes by Hans Ulrich Obrist specifying this aspect of his vision: “Each exhibition is yet another truth. The idea is not to recreate or copy works whose original version is to be found elsewhere but rather to create an open-ended ‘unfolding’ type of exhibition that takes into account local structures and requirements”.

Instructions
Continuing upstairs to the main galleries, there were examples of instructions which had already been carried out alongside printed sheets explaining how to recreate these scenarios for yourself. Even the lift wasn’t exempt, as the usual recording had been usurped by a spoken word sound work which left its passengers feeling somewhat disorientated, as if the elevator had suddenly acquired a personality of its own.

Inside the galleries people were already busy experimenting with the sculptures and installations, either contributing to Yoko Ono’s ‘Wish Tree’ or mixing up chilli paste courtesy of Rirkrit Tiravanija’s recipe. The exhibition continued its generative function by allowing audiences to upload images of themselves carrying out the instructions.

These kinds of everyday activities when placed within the context of the white cube gallery space seemed absurd, and perhaps even somewhat embarrassing to engage in. However, the response appeared to be one of delight, with audiences engaging with the objects without necessarily feeling the need to understand what it was about. These relational networks therefore, continue a tradition of artists dealing directly with the materials and ideas of art, whilst avoiding the production of art objects.

Further information
http://www.anothermag.com/current/view/2729/Hans_Ulrich_Obrist_Do_It_The_Compendium
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2013/jul/07/do-it-2013-manchester-review
http://artreview.com/reviews/october_2013_review_do_it_2013_manchester_art_gallery/
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2013/may/24/do-it-sarah-lucas-hans-ulrich-obrist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tm-aL8ownM

Week 55: 30th September – 6th October
This week I headed over to Wakefield for the bi-monthly Artwalk. The Artwalk happens on the last Wednesday of the month and consists of all the various art spaces and galleries opening to members of the public till late. The event is a good opportunity to see new artworks and meet the artists involved. It promotes a grassroots ethic to support engagement in the arts by and for the local community and is promoted and managed by The Arthouse, which incidentally was my first stop for the evening.

We Gathered our Photographs and Left
Upon arriving at the Arthouse I was immediately confronted by 2 large scale wall mounted photographs by artist Bob Clayden. As he explains in his artist statement: ‘The images in this exhibition were made over a six month period in and around the former library on Wakefield’s Drury Lane, as the building began a gradual transition from library to art space. Made using a solargraphic technique, pin-hole cameras were placed inside and outside the building to record the changing architecture and sky in single long-exposure images.

The images show the trace that the sun makes in the sky, changing each day as the earth rotates and rising as the seasons pass. By looking at the finished solargraph individual days can be seen, just as years can be identified in tree rings. The images have been combined with diary entries and library lending statistics to emphasise this passage of time and mark significant dates in the life of the artist. They echo our love of creating and keeping memories as photographs, whilst also making the passing days visible in a single still image.’

Artist talk
Part artwork, part informational diagram, the photographs seemed to be trying to express many different ideas at once and could perhaps have benefited from being produced as separate bodies of works. However, I was struck by the idea of a contemporary version of a solar chart, where events are calculated and divined by their relation to astral activity, so I decided to stay for the artist talk to find out more.

Bob began by giving a very practical introduction to the way that the images had been made by explaining the process of using a pinhole camera and showing us the cans that he’d used to create his images. Rather than calling them cameras however, he referred to them as ‘solar collectors’ to stress the difference in the way that they recorded images. It was interesting to see the material objects behind the development of the work and I wondered if that was something that he could include in future exhibitions.

Solargram
However my main interest was in how he created the aesthetic of the images. After exposing the image to photographic paper for the desired length of time, he removed the paper from the ‘camera’ under darkroom conditions, and then instead of using chemicals to develop the work, he scanned the image into the computer. This process created a colour negative of the image which was then inverted in Photoshop.

This process of combining primitive photographic techniques with modern technology suggested a further level of alchemy that I was keen to pursue in the reading of the work, with its references to solar collection and astrological patterns. However, when I questioned the artist about it, he was reluctant to address any sort of alchemical or early modern scientific interpretation.

I started to consider the possibility that I had begun to interpret any images I saw in reference to my research and interests. Despite this concern, it seemed like a pertinent suggestion, particularly in context of the earlier photographic experiments of Sigmar Polke, Susan Derges and Anne Hammond, etc, so I decided to reflect on the material processes of the solargram in relation to using it to create images for artist books.

Images & processes:
http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/processes/lumen/lumen-prints
http://www.flickr.com/groups/solargraphy/pool/page2/
http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/processes/cyanotype/cyanotype-classic-process

Week 54: 23rd – 29th September
Although I’m very much a maker of objects, I’m also interested in the relationship between the online and offline, particularly since my transfer meeting and the discussion about Digital Humanities in relation to my topic (in week 41).

Digital Humanities spans across disciplines, but is especially relevant in the fields of museums and archives, where digital media has appeared to bridge the gap between conflicts of accessibility and conservation. This week, the Audiovisual Archives and Contemporaneity conference at the University of Leeds, invited speakers from various national and regional collections to discuss their perspectives on these new opportunities and challenges.

Creating a digital archive
Dr Tom Rice discussed his role as a senior researcher on the Colonial Film project, a collection of footage capturing images of life in the British Colonies. It was interesting to hear about the methodological decisions and challenges relating to developing an online archive resource. The three main contributors to the Colonial Film Project (BFI, Imperial war museum and the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum), each had their own cataloguing system which needed to be standardised when brought together as a collection.

The selection process was another interesting topic because, as every item couldn’t be digitised, decisions about which material should be included needed to be discussed and justified. Additionally, selected footage should be representative of the whole collection, not just sensationalised imagery, to avoid creating a false archive. Finally, he discussed how essays were included to contextualise each of the collections and shown in dialogue with the films to create a new interpretive resource.

New media possibilities
Other presentations discussed the unique attributes of digital technologies to create and share moving images with new audiences. Bryony Dixon, Curator at the British Film Institute, showed an example of chronophotography which had been digitised on vine, while Sue Howard from the Yorkshire Film Archive shared her experience of working with the Harrogate-born man who shared his own archive of pictures of his son and went on to create the YouTube video 21 Years.

Digital technologies, as well as collating and sharing archives, can also be used to create new archives, particularly in the case of curated online content or digital storytelling. For example, Simon Popple, discussed a previous AHRC/BBC project that he had worked on called the Open Archive Project, in which he had worked with communities from the North of England to re-examine BBC footage of the miners strike and to frame it in the context of their stories and memories of that time. Despite the range of possibilities however, this creates an interesting technical and philosophical conundrum when these digital archives become cultural artefacts in themselves, or indeed when the collected artefacts are already digitally native.

90s Net Art
The Whitney Museum of American Art faced such a dilemma recently when reinstalling their first Internet-made artwork, which they acquired back in 1995. The World’s First Collaborative Sentence, created by artist Douglas Davis, was an early example of interactive art which included around 200,000 typed contributions from users all over the world. However, upon reinstalling the work last year, they found that the piece no longer worked.

They were faced with a decision about how to recreate the piece, either adhering to the historical integrity of the original code and reinstalling it as it was created, despite its degraded state, or to rewrite and restore the functionality of the work in accordance with new technological specifications, so it could be used as it was originally intended. After considering several possibilities they decided on a solution which would satisfy both criteria: to display it in both its original and updated form.

Somewhat paradoxically however, the original version of the work, despite being frozen, still shows the contemporaneous response of the work to 20 years of digital development, as opposed to the updated version, which replicates the programme as it was when it was first conceived, creating an interesting sense of historical flux.

Further Reading:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/arts/design/whitney-saves-douglas-daviss-first-collaborative-sentence.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://cool.conservation-us.org/coolaic/sg/emg/library/pdf/hodin/hodin_2009.pdf
http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/news-features/news/salvaging-digital-art-at-the-new-museum
http://museumgeek.wordpress.com/2013/09/09/cooperative-conservation-on-cooper-hewitts-acquisition-of-a-living-object/
http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/10/29/241645097/when-the-internet-is-your-canvas-you-paint-in-zeros-and-ones

Digital Art Organisations:
Matters in Media Art
Variable Media Network
Daniel Langlois Foundation for Art, Science and Technology
Rhizome