For the last group tutorial of block 2, it is the Mid Point Review.
The logistics of the Mid Point Review were such that half the cohort were gathered in the studio at Camberwell, and the other half were attending virtually through a combination of Skype for messaging and YouTube for a live feed from the studio.
My video was the first to be presented in the afternoon session. After it was shown there was a long pause before everybody reacted. I’m not sure whether that is a good or a bad thing. During this time I am now allowed to type or talk or otherwise communicate. Perhaps this is easier because I am online and not physically present in front of half the cohort; if present in the studio I suspect the experience would be far different, and perhaps the comments and observations modified by my presence.
For almost 13 minutes I was bombarded with text and audio about my work and the presentation. There was a simultaneous stream of text comments coming via Skype and the audio discussion from the Studio. To add to this Jonathan was reading out some of the Skype-based comments for the benefit of the studio-based attendees. This was a very intense time, and trying to make notes at the time was very difficult, especially from the audio stream as it was hard at time to hear what was being said. Fortunately the Skype messages and audio stream were recorded, and I was able to replay them until I could decipher, as best I could, the comments.
- Serious narration, unlike in person
- What is the third space? The change of color? The dividing line (or “wiggle”)? The duality? The color? The textures? Where the two colors become blurred? Segregation of spaces?
- Emphasis on material
- The composition is very interesting. The duality is a very prevalent theme.
- like the thinking behind the pieces
- To me it seems as if the contrast of the 2 materials are presented to be almost in conflict — sometimes more controlled/geometrical and sometimes more random
- Yes they do seem to be conflicting — but it seems that the very ‘conflict’ itself is giving life to the pieces sort of
- Where do the materials come from… India, Africa, etc, the aspects behind that
- I can’t help but wonder what could happen if the deviation of the line was even more random
- Like the interaction of the 2 materials is the protagonist of the work
- Like the mimicry aspect of the synthetic material ‘pretending’
- And the digital relevancy?
- The canvas is used — a material you don’t see – also made out of fiber — why use a canvas? this is not a ‘proper painting’ its a composition — its weird when it goes to the edges [where it wraps around]
- Use a frame — use a different object to wrap around — don’t need a canvas
- I remember at the low residency David mentioned the screws on the back having a digital relevancy to the work, he didn’t mention them at all?
- I though about the same thing. I was at his group too, during the low residency, and I really enjoyed looking at the back of the piece to see how it was done
- The back more fascinating than the front — studs around which he wraps the thread
- They’re quite modest in size — but produce an overall quite exciting effect
- Yes he is mentioning the canvas as the “third space” no?
- The back is as interesting as the front!!
- The environment in which the conflict takes place?
- Industrial vs handmade — questions origin of material
- Can’t see the history of the material — unless you provide an explanation
- Is making assumptions of things that are not self-evident — Each yarn on an opposing side is representing a culture — Protagonists — Cultures are conflicting — Its a great idea when explained
- Perhaps make fabrics as cultures, instead of yarn?
- Culture — Patterns from different part of the world
- Are we looking at a map of Word War One trenches? Germany on one side, Brits on the other, and that edge is the conflict, the confrontation
- there is noise — there is a contradiction around it — there is an interesting part but behind it — nobody thinks about the space behind the canvas — he has this really interesting thing but there is a lot of noise around it — not showing the thing that he is doing — I have conflict with this piece
- There is a LOT of information on the material itself… so what would happen when that information is not communicated? does the work seize to explore the intended topic? does it become something else?
- Scale it up tenfold and it would dominate a space nicely
- Scaling up, that’s a good idea
- We see that on the screen, the smaller pieces are scaled up
- Relation between creator and viewer — really big subject :/ Something significant going on behind it.
- Deserving of some explanation alongside it — that adds so much to it and the appreciation of the work, whereas you could just pass it by
- That could be the depth of your research, but not necessarily communicate it — not everything you do has to be visually seen
- Its an visually interesting work without explanation — is he trying to justify it too much?
- But the explanation adds to it for me!
- The line between — intentional pattern or organic form — wavy or zig-zag
- The clash of cultures he said, but its so abstract you could read anything into it, the pattern could represent even more information