Firstly I reckon it is important to explain what it is that I do and why I choose to do it that way:
I call myself an artist, and mainly I work towards relatively large projects with institutions that I find interesting or places where there is an area of unresolved debate around knowledge or history. I go on site visits, arrange meetings with key people and try to secure their interest and participation(which is often the most difficult part of what I do). Then I tie everything together into a proposal for a place and locate funding for it. So as well as artist I am also my own accountant, researcher, funding officer and personal secretary!
It certainly isn't the gallery based route that many of my peers are taking, but I like being in complete control. I also don't have a lot of interest in showing work in a white cube, a place that tries to situate itself out of time and space but which is pretty laden with historical and curatorial baggage. I know dozens of artists who are currently exploring this very thing within their practices.
A friend of mine said "You should be trying to build a mystique", and I suppose that by working like this I am subconsciously trying to do a bit of personal myth-making: "That artist who went round repairing broken road signs, then hid out in museum archives and library catalogues, appeared on a remote Scottish Island recently and did some strange performances…" -kind of thing. Though I am not sure what one does with mystique once obtained?Seems to do wonders for the likes of Marcus Coates, Adam Chodzko, and Matthew Barney though…
