Once again as the weary soul opens itself to the Euclidean possibilities that have availed themselves, his beliefs have been shaken and awoken simultaneously. How can the text have delivered such a clear opening and yet felt, what inevitable? bound up in this inevitability is a series of slight conjectures or nudges which lead him back to where he began many years ago. A glanced title, a falling object from the boot of a car all railroading him back to a belief in the larger possibilities of things and how he could or might produce of this scale. Only this time less self assured and more likely to listen to the small things.
Why might a set of disjointed parts acquire such significance as to produce the reason, and yet they do. Importance placed on only one element and its historical context leaves the work floundering in issues of the past. To engage wholeheartedly in the production of a total work or at least a belief in this as a possibility is the message.
The reason mentioned earlier is the element which should not falter or end on compromised ground, this should be the bedrock of beginning. Although this may not of been possible in some instances or in some slight but important way for many years. The ideal has returned and when the weary souls path is opened and the possibility manifests itself actions should be taken.
Concrete elements that return from times less depleted steady the way for what is to occur. These previous elements include the need to be within the system to activate a change and not to attempt a position of omnipresence with the ability to dissect externally. An interest in production on all levels and a belief in personal language as a guiding light through this. Why might these torch bearers who have awoken the spirit operate on similar planes that of the textual and the object? The conjuncture at which form becomes symbol and vice versa is an element that has remained true to the weary soul and is to be found back within the torch bearers too. So it is with this fan fair we await what may come from this occurrence.
picking over the bones
once you begin to think along these lines you realise the work(me?) is still attempting to operate along these lines and to produce a cohesive output to the world.
Holding and remaining confident in what you assume you are interested in becomes difficult. Nurturing your work when what keeps it functioning is your fragile ego. When the rug of what is the believed baseline of your production is slipped from under you. As I once said before ‘there is no project'(1968)
it becomes apparent that the work only improves at those points where it really begins to fall to pieces.
Why are so many artists drawn to modernist forms and landmarks that are slowly crumbling and disappearing ?
Mark Lewis- Is modernity our antiquity?
>It is nearly a year since an infrequent post, fulfilling its job pretty well then. Since I last posted I have discovered that people have actually read this thing. Well that changes it a bit, makes me already think that I need to MAKE SENSE more on here. The free flowing train of thought thing seems less plausible, but lets see..
What prompted this post was the photo of the studio today and a thought about how the processes of producing works of art are or at least are for me, one of a great time consuming activity. In that I spend a lot of time doing things which don’t actually become works and the things that do end up being works are the things I just could not get rid of/have been worked over so many times to a point of satisfaction. I am not talking about a physical activity with them more a relationship with them, between us, that they fit. Many of the worst things I have shown and done come out of a rushed need to show something, I think it is the same for most of us. But at the same time for me the usual contradictions kicks in- I love the project/serial art work that many of my works adhere too EG the whole UNIT series, setting up a series of exercises to make the work.
SO I guess It is a gradual removal of elements that are not important from one’s practice. Also space is an issue I am becoming more and more acutely aware that sculptures I make(made) need to go somewhere and those places are running out!
This is a current End point which as you can see relates to the IAO and quest works, serial is satisfaction. I guess one of my discoveries of recent years, doing it over and over again creates the impression you mean it. A set of related objects images asks the viewer to connect them up together.
Many of the methods I use to create these things are done to avoid the traditional ways of making geometric abstraction () and to apply both a conceptual rigour and a personal approach to the decisions. I am really interested in what form and colour do but how do you work with them now and not make compromises? It is easy now to look back at my previous works and see many of things I was making work ‘about’ as ways to justify this play, but this is not a moan. Simply I think, since I gave into the idea that I am interested in these slightly outmoded things (meaning I like them) my work has substantially improved. And one of the strangest things is that the work looks more like what might be considered ‘conceptual art’ than it ever did when I thought I should be doing that.
At a point I begin to notice, several of the long term shifts in my methods of production. I am aware of two distinct methods of working that contradict and even sabotage each other.
I often work with the remnants of the modern urban environment. But at times I also work much more with the ideals and produce work from materials with no obvious previous uses.
These two methods, one using the remnants and the other the ideals of a period, appear to be some attempt at a comparison whilst also allowing me to attempt the ideals for myself. Now that I am becoming aware of this shift that occurs within the production cycle, will allow me to make some decisions around how to proceed with a work that addresses this, (A comparison between the remnants and the ideal?).
Also this has made me much more aware of how a conceptual frame work to Art production be it of any type is now more prevalent than ever before. Any ideals I am testing are tested in a method which is related to a 60’s conceptual rigour, that did not exist previous to this. Therefore the ideals are filtered through this method (self-critque?).
I should say as well that I wouldn’t of got to this point without the opportunity to show my work and consider it’s purpose, yes showing your work is important.