This time we arranged an online tutorial, me writing the minutes, and my tutor amended the formative report. Overall, a great experience, sharp to the point, and with an effective discussion with a one hour timeframe. We covered assignment and coursework as well as my initial thoughts on my parallel project related to medical imaging and MRI with a sense of fragmented identity.
Key aspects that I took out of our discussion:
- ‘Stop working intuitively’, let the energy of moment not avoid a deeper reflection on what I’ve done
- Work more intimately with the material qualities
- Give the work more space to breathe (e.g. Two Folds of Folly as too dense, contrived, with too harsh contrast)
- Consider more critical composition, relationships, contrast and edges, what is needed and why?
- Explore further fragmentation, concealing, trapped, revealing, memory, and transformation
- Line and tone, movement and color: some sketchbook pages did work well, e.g Fig 1
- Be less impatient, narrow down critically
- Be more critical to what and how I am doing what
My sketchbooks did show some intriguing explorations, to be developed more deeply further. My learning log was appreciated for its comprehensive writing and well articulated researches and visit reflections, though less broad interest and deeper interaction with one or two artists might be beneficial.
Some works stand out for my tutor:
- balanced composition with good relationship between forms
- engaging edges and shapes
- visual flow through the work
- idea of trapped objects (partly concealed in Fig.2, in poured paint in Fig.3, around perspex in Fig. 4)
=> My tutor had some concerns re the bright red color in Fig. 2, too reminiscent of blood, violent? Something for me look at deeper, as in Fig. 3 I had a similar bright red. Perhaps, shape matters in how we connotate meaning to color. Fig. 3 is a rather monochrome relief painting (versus the other mixed with white one Preservation Box #2). Fig 4.
My Object-Box, submitted for SHOWCASE, was questioned for its ‘crudeness’ (of made objects) and of a shift towards less personal. What is ‘crude’ and what is ‘refined’? Is refined always better? Would one say that gestural abstract paintings are refined? Or is the perception different when we see actual physical objects? The crudeness a a mean to disguise, to reduce recognition was intentional – but this was perhaps the reason for my tutor to respond to it as ‘less personal’ and and with less opportunity’ for further development of revealing and memory.
One point we discussed deeper was how important is the participatory engagement of the audience with my work. I will see next in oxo tower how the audience will interact with the Object-Box.
My tutor suggested the following..
Elements for further exploration
- ‘Investigate composition alongside exploring media more critically’
- ‘Remember to consider edges and contrasts’
- ‘Continue to disrupt the reading/narrative’
Notes on personal project
Fragmentation as I started already some exploration in my sketchbooks, as well ideas of coding and concealing. Along the way to consider format of presentation, e.g book, trapped objects, disrupted surfaces. Explore widely and refine when I reach project 4 ‘Thinking through PP’.
Conclusion: A deeper Reflection
– Materiality – Depth – Relationship –
– Contrast – Edges –
– Fragmentation – Disruption –
Such are the keywords for me to keep not only in mind but also to take them in my making into account. There will be mostly a shift happening in how I approach my coursework and my assignment work: more focus, deeper, establishing a more intimate dialogue with my chosen materials and eventually let my ideas and thoughts merge with the appearance of the visual works created.
Key thing clearly to develop in more steps forward and less multiple steps in parallel without moving forward. A serial versus a lateral approach? Question would be when to shift from the latter to the first mode.
My overall experience with the tutorial and drafting directly the report for my tutor to amend is very positive of much learning support. I feel that starting from the discussion, through rough note capturing and writing down the report, I already learn more and deeper than just reading a sent report.
- ‘Welcome Collection’, London – project space gallery re science and art related to my PP idea on medical imaging, more to reflect on after my visit to London (see sep. post)
- John Bunker: collaged paintings, partly applied in bright colors, resonating well with some my own exploratory works, e.g. sketchbook
- Mona Hatoum: quite diverse body of work of an artist addressing conflict and contradictions, between minimalist and surrealist appeal
- Helen Chadwick: e.g. piss flower. using mundance materials and addressing gendered sensibilities
- Vincent Hawkins : whose works be relevant to my gestural and abstract approach to painting and with layers of materiality and a sense of visual depth and balance
- Alison Watt: large oil paintings of white fabric, resonating with my interest in folds and the Baroque. Also to be considered as a different approach versus reduction -> close up views
- Alexis Harding: manipulation of paint forming a skin almost falling off the surface, Angela de La Cruz and Simon Callery dismantled paintings => all three painters embracing materiality and spatial expansion of paint. Resonating with some of my attempts to move away from the flat support and to convey a more embodied encounter with painting.
What resonates well is a quote by Hatoum (Tate, related to a 2016 exhibition)
‘I want the work in the first instance to have a strong formal presence, and through the physical experience to activate a psychological and emotional response.’ — Mona Hatoum
I am collecting found images of above and other artist on my Pinterest boards at (https://www.pinterest.com/sjschaffeld/sp-a3)
The full formative feedback is available at: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1oo05M87WlxiadrJIZpVEkm_8WAC185El