Round table discussion
There were a number of points made during the open discussion on 17 April 2008, some of which came up in conversation over lunch in the window room the day after, that I wanted to make a note of on the blog…..in the hope that maybe the discussion will continue, either here on the blog, or in person…
The words ‘performative’, and ‘performativity’ were used several times during the discussion and I wonder what people mean by these exactly? I think there is a significant difference between performance and performativity……
The idea of the gallery as a place to slow down. If this is the case, what is the significance of slowing down? Does work that exists outside a gallery context not require slowing down in order to experience it?
Last Friday during lunch, I mentioned my interest in the idea of art as an experience, rather than a product. I do not want to look at the ‘work’ I make as a product, or myself as a producer and anyone who comes into contact with the ‘work’ a consumer. (I use ‘work’ because I’m not speaking exclusively of video one might see in a gallery, but the processes and conversations which form part of that work for me). I thought I’d put this quote on the blog, as it’s far more eloquent than I was being last week:
“….Stop thinking about art as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences….Art is something that happens, a process, not a quality, and all sorts of things can make it happen. Then suppose that what makes a work of art good for you is not something that is already ‘inside it’ but something that happens inside you - so the value of the work lies in the degree to which it can help you have the kind of experience that you call art…”
It is thoughts that run along similar lines that make me question the idea of “the art world’, as if “the art world” is one defined, self contained entity defining what art is and isn’t. I don’t think it does define art for me, or it is only one specific context in which I might have an experience I might call art. The currency of such a system is the value of our confidence in it, (singularly or collectively, I don’t know).
I was impatiently waiting to see Mark’s demonstrating his straight line drawing again so that I could connect my experience to a couple of issues pointed out in Katherine’s writing and earlier in David’s. However, other than my thoughts might slowly fade away by waiting longer I shall have less appropriate time during the next three months to participate regularly in our blog discussion, which I think is one of the best think that has happened for the artists at Wysing this year.
For me creating art is like writing a poem, except that it is a visual poetry, a means by which I express my thoughts. And when I look at a piece which is created by another artist, I look at it in the same way - looking at it as if a colossal but finely detailed object is scaled down to fit in the framework of what I am looking at. By using my imagination I try to recreate the details which are lost in this miniaturisation process, and it is at this stage that a sense of co-ordination between my eyes and my emotions begins to develop inside me. It is at this stage that I say to myself if the work is powerful or it is not powerful.
I agree with Katherine when she says, … something that happens inside you.
My response to David’s question of, … if it is entirely necessary for people to know how they are made…, is that to know how it is made will help the viewer a great deal to understand and share some of the thoughts and feelings that the artist has experienced. Personally, if I see a red cast of a head I would be affected differently by the knowledge of whether its made of blood or tomato juice. Equally, about David’s project on lost gloves I wouldn’t feel the same if I didn’t know he had a unique story about each single glove - and perhaps an imaginary history about them, too.
Since both Katherine and David refer to the evening when we had talks and discussions about documenting one’s art, I would like to say that I found the evening very interesting and fruitful. Naturally some of the things everyone said require further thinking and talking, but the end result, for me, was a feeling that I’d had a very positive evening. It is important to talk and transfer our abstract notions into words as much as we can, so that we communicate with others more coherently.
Abbas
Comment by Abbas Hashemi — April 30, 2008 @ 2:52 pm