the abject object

Delighted to report that this week I have embarked upon my REview bursary having the first meeting with the fabulous Freddie Robins.

One of the ‘challenges’ that I face with my work is that by it’s interactive nature, it is very hard to describe and acurately portray without experiencing it. I also have a LOT of it, spanning over a decade and it is LARGE. Additionally, most of which has been hiding in storage since creation.

Luckily Freddie had agreed to come to my studio to see it all.

It was only when I began to dig everything out and put it all together in one room that a lot of things made sense. And made sense in a way that you can’t really appreciate by looking at a website or a list of what you’ve done.

When talking about diverse bits of work from over such a long period of time it is very hard to know where to start. It was a very enlightening and revelationary day.

One of the reasons that I chose Freddie as an advisor was that I feel we have lots of similarities in approach – primarily, I love the humour within her work. Also, as an artist working in textiles in a sculptural way I knew that she would undestand what I was trying to do.

The main thing emerging from the day, in a nutshell is: LESS IS MORE.

I have been trying to conquer the world using too many methods, weapons and tactics. I’ve ended up tired and confused by it all. And have ended up stuck in a country I really didn’t intend to defeat at all. And as ever, I am speaking the WRONG language.

I have been frantically digging (unpaid of course) myself into a big hole of my own Sisyphusian making. I need to stop and look at the mound of earth around me.

Quite why I was doing this I will have to ponder in depth but without doing so I will get nowhere.

This revelation feels strangely and amazingly liberating.

With the risk of repeating myself when I first started blogging on this site – I need to formulate a PLAN; and this time it is going to be one I want to do.

You saw it here first. In 2012.

Today I find that my work: SUPERHERO GADGET (BELT) has become a reality.

http://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-anti-pervert…

I demand my royalties

Life imitates Art.

Don’t read this…..

Back this……

http://kck.st/1a4XpKb

Well it’s not Friday, and it’s not 5 o’clock but I feel the need to post.

Following a very interesting day yesterday I am starting to wonder if and where I fit into a PERFORMANCE ART scenario. And am wondering if this is the reason for my somewhat frustrated efforts in getting my work shown.

I spent the day at Circuit in Leicester and the evening at it’s sister (or brother) gig HATCH at Embrace Arts Leicester. It was an enjoyable experience with a multitude of interesting and thought provoking works. However it led me to question again the role of the audience in LIVE ART.

I didn’t get to see all the performances in either space but my overriding impression for the day was that I was a PASSIVE audience member. This was the case even when engaged in a one-to-one performance. I was asked to do things on these occassions but the control always rested with the performer. There was no scope for the punter to influence the proceedings.

As a willing audience – we tended to follow the unwritten rules – we didn’t do something unexpected – we didn’t help a person where we might have done in another context WE PLAYED ALONG WITH THE GAME – we respected what we thought we were supposed to do in as an audience in a live art context. But is this right? Are our own responses not valid in ANY situation. Is there one programmable experience designed for us when we enter the space? Are we SUPPOSED to feel ONE thing? Surely every response to art is a personal one and this should be taken into account. If, as the audience we react in a differnt way, does this mean we don’t understand or are not sympathetic to the rules? Are we not able to interact unless specifically requested to in a certain way for fear of shattering the illusion?

I think this is the crux of why my work does not seem to fit into the established set ups. I am interested creating something (object) and then in handing over the responsibility to the audience for them to experiment with. It is not prewritten in any way – any outcome could occur.

Perhaps it is this ambiguity about ‘outcome’ or ‘quality’ that is leading to my problems?

I post this purely out of silliness and to show that not all creative skills are transferable.

I can’t make cakes.

Can you tell what it is?

answer in next post…..