Through going through my process this week it has highlighted that I’m not really sure who my audience would be. In this way I’m not even sure how a curator would even begin looking at my work, for this reason perhaps it would be helpful to have the input of a curator.
This weeks work has been really quite stressful thinking in particular about an exhibition where I literally have no idea what I am going to put into it, creatively I’m lost.
The only thing I know for sure is
- I will present in Diptychs and Triptychs.
- I want to show a process from one form to another.
I’m struggling to get to grips with my new equipment so I need to invest some time into perfecting this technique or perhaps explore microscopic photography, to provide the up close images of transformation that I’m looking for.
This weeks 1:2:1 tutorial was quite a jumble on my behalf due to my confusion over my project.
Questions were raised like:
- Do I want to keep going with my inanimates?
- Do I want to put more focus onto memory?
With the recent loss in my family in some ways death is not something I’m ready for so do I want to look at where my items come from, an allotment for example.
One thought I have considered is am I really looking at death in particular? I feel more comfortable at present looking at the rebirth – I have particular emotions entangled in my project at the moment and perhaps this is the reason for things appearing more difficult at the moment.
I can see themes of my work, I’m just not sure I am putting this across in the right way.
I think my work looking back could do with the input of a curator I tend to get lost in my project, perhaps there are times where I need an outside input. I hope that they would agree that my images are made to be large abstract prints.
Looking at the work of some abstract expressionists has really opened my eyes to something new and its been an enjoyable experience looking at the work of Helen Frankenthaler, Sam Francis, Lee Krasner and Jackson Pollock.
It occurred to me through the art that you don’t have to be able to identify something from an image just to make it have more impact and in fact beautiful.
As some of my images have developed through their journey from an identifiable piece of fruit into their new lifeforms they are gaining more and more abstract qualities and as the mould is developing like a Jackson Pollock painting they have an explosion of new life forms. For example Number 1, 1950 (Lavender Mist), 1950, the explosion of paint can have similarities in the way the mould grows and forms new shapes and levels. I felt the same about Sam Francis, Saint Honore, 1952 and Lee Krasner – Untitled, 1949. The movement of the paint strokes are like the movement and growing/transitioning from one form into another. This is something that I really enjoyed from this genre of art.
In a completely different sense the work April, 1963, by Helen Frankenthaler inspires through the use of colour which I have also tried to experiment with in this module.
One element that I find exciting about abstract expressionism is the freedom it offers to the audience to see what they can interpret from the art. This is a freedom I would also like to offer to my audience. I’ve heard it described as freeing the mind of visual restrictions. Not only would I like this to be possible for my audience but also to open up to discussion the limitations one might place upon the life-death-rebirth cycle.
The way these paintings are exhibited on huge canvases, it makes me think for my work to be exhibited they should also be large enough to make them even more abstract and have more impact – an affect that I think might be lost in a photo-book.
Hess, Barbara (2005), Abstract Expressionism, TASCHEN GmbH, Koln, Pg 19, 31, 53, 71