The work I would chose to increase the scale of would be my own manifesto piece. I would’ve loved to increase the scale as when we were installing our pieces for the manifesto exhibition I realised how much space we had to work with. Looking at my piece in amongst the space I realised how lost it looked, I would make the piece larger not only to have presence in the scale of the room but also because whilst doing my research for the piece I found many more facts or messages I would have included within the piece. I would expand the depth of what would be included in my piece including areas of the transgender community and make the piece deeper in content and more detailed in decoration to make it look more significant and official.

Looking at my earlier works compared to my later works on my blog my critical analysis has developed as my project has continued, as my work has become more complex and my research has deepened I have been able to look more critically at what I’ve made. Furthermore, as we have continued to be given tasks my research skills have developed and my understanding of what the artist or author is trying to convey within their pieces or accounts. Within their accounts and piece catalogue and description I have been able to extract certain hidden themes and deeper meanings that I could weave into my work to further develop my own project. I feel that the blog has helped me to develop my own working style as I have isolated and been selective in which pieces I have focused on and used within my research and for certain projects. In a way certain tasks have proved to be very useful as they have instigated certain regions of research I myself would not have looked into unless prompted and they have lead me to artists and philosophies that I have found interesting on a personal level and have used to investigate my contemporary project that has allowed me to realise that certain sections have been dead ends and I have altered it to be relevant to what I’ve found in my research and my given tasks. Overall, the blog has allowed me to develop my critical analysis skills and also my depth of research skills and the ability to seek relevant material.

The two texts “Excerpt from Other Criteria: The Flatbed Picture Plane by Leo Steinberg” and “The Yale Lecture by Richard Serra” explore two different mediums and methods of working. Steinberg explores the medium of painting and also examines the different perspectives and definitions of what a painting can be. Serra on the other hand explores sculpture and the process of sculpture as a whole.

Steinberg explores how painting has evolved over the years and has pushed boundaries in perception and those who cling to the dated ways of painting have a capped perspective on what could be created. As he writes, “It is part of a shakeup which contaminates all purified categories. The deepening inroads of art into non-art continue to alienate the connoisseur as art defects and departs into strange territories leaving the old stand-by criteria to rule an eroding plain.” touching upon the fact that painting as a practice has progressed and the relationship between the artist, the painting and the viewer has developed and needs to progress to remain relevant and current. Painting has moved away from the more classical beginnings and have moved into the more abstract region, allowing for new processes to be formed and explored. Steinberg is flexible in his opinions in that he recognizes that artists of a more current era have influence such as Duchamp but those who are from the more “classical” era are still experimentitive and progressive such as Rauschenberg as he writes, “I once heard Jasper Johns say that Rauschenberg was the man who in this century had invented the most since Picasso. What he invented above all was, I think, a pictorial surface that let the world in again…Rauschenberg’s picture plane is for the consciousness immersed in the brain of the city.” Explaining how even those from a past era can be innovative and forward thinking.

Serra explores how sculpture and sculptors have neglected the creation process of the sculpture and how the industrial roots of the sculpting process is something to be included and featured in the piece but is often ignored by modern sculptors. He explains, “Sculptors for the most part have ignored the results of the industrial revolution failing to investigate these fundamental processes and methods of steelmaking, engineering and construction.” hinting on that the industrial background of sculpting is nothing to be ignored or forgotten and in his opinion is an asset to a piece. He goes on to explain that modern sculptors are more focused on the end and final finished product and are often steered by corporate funded projects. “Corporate sponsorship for the art breeds economic opportunism and reinforces palatable artistic conventions. Artists who willingly accept corporate support likewise submit to corporate control. In effect, they become puppet creators.” Serra explains that sculpture in this current era has forgotten where it has come from i.e it’s industrial beginnings and processes. By submitting to corporate art projects sculptors end up created pieces for the wrong reasons and the purpose for art becomes misconstrued as he describes , “Cultural and educational inequalities based on economic inequality are a reality which needs to be revealed and not glossed over by a populist notion of art for the people.” In short Serra dissects why sculptors need to go back to the industrial roots not only to show and appreciate the creation process of the sculpture and that the introduction of technology and corporations have altered why art is made.

Overall, Serra criticises sculptors on forgetting their industrial roots and past and explores how modern technology and the temptation of corporate sponsored projects have taken the meaning of the work to a diluted region where it adds as a distraction or pathetic attempt of stitching up social issues. Whereas, Steinberg encourages painters and paintings to be pushed forward and to not become trapped in the classical methods with a narrowed perspective on what can be created, “The deepening inroads of art into non-art continue to alienate the connoisseur as art defects and departs into strange territories leaving the old stand-by criteria to rule an eroding plain.”

My practise is based off the scattering of ashes after a funeral, my idea is based off of Buddhist dharma teachings that explain how nothing in life is permanent. With this in mind I wanted to create pieces be it a painting or a drawing or a sculpture and then continue to burn them. I would have the pieces film whilst having them burned to prove that the piece featured has been burnt and ashes have not just been gathered from elsewhere, if these pieces were to be exhibited I would have a film of each piece being burnt next to the canvas of the then burnt piece. Once the pieces have been burnt i would arrange the ashes onto a canvas to display the destroyed piece, I would try and have the canvas quite 3D and textured to show all the layers and how fragile ash can be. I wanted to show that artists should not be afraid to destroy something and that we shouldn’t be so precious about what we create as the destroyed or broken outcome could make something even more interesting that what it was before. I also wanted to show that something so harsh and destructive as fire could create something so delicate in the sense that ash can crumble away at a mere touch and give a very textured outcome due to the different rates of burning and heat.

Sappho and Erinna in a Garden at Mytilene by Simeon Solomon depicts Sappho embracing her fellow poet Erinna in a garden at Mytilene on the island of Lesbos.

Seeing the piece in the flesh and seeing the figures expressions close up really hit home for me the struggle and frustration that the artists underwent. You could see and feel the frustration and hints of agony within the painted figures, the pained expression on their faces conveys the restrictions the artists encountered within their own relationships. Solomon was of the era when homosexuality was illegal and to be found in a same sex relationship was a crime, although new council in Italy allowed painters to depict same sex relationships as long as they didn’t act upon their feelings depicted in their works. Due to this new council on what could now be depicted artworks such as these began to emerge, even though such works as this were permitted I still felt saddened by seeing this piece up close as you can tell the artist just wants to show love between two people, the fact that they are the same gender is irrelevant. To have your love and relationship considered a crime must have been a special sort of personal torture, starring at the painting gave me the realisation that people take the freedom to hold hands and kiss in public for granted. I realise society still has room for growth but the suppression is nowhere near what it used to be for people like Solomon, we must not forget the waves and the changes that these people instilled in society for us to be where we are today.

Hosted at the Tate Britain curated by Clare Barlow (who also wrote the book of the same name “Queer British Art, 1861-1967”) Queer British Art 1861-1967 showcases artworks relevant and prominent to LGBT individuals and those associated with the LGBT community. The exhibition marks the 50 year anniversary of decriminalization of male homosexuality in England, the exhibition shows a range of painters, photographers, sculptors, performance artists, etc.

The exhibition takes very personal pieces from private collections and pieces that are more widely known and are aimed at appealing/educating a wider audience. The exhibition has a very organic flow as it’s divided into different sections or rooms that explore different aspects of the struggle of homosexuality through history but the pieces all flow together to create a narrative. It takes you through different aspects of queer history, from political, playful, historical and erotic.

The exhibition seeks to educate and bring to light the internal struggles of identity that the artists would endure and also the secret features and techniques they used to subliminally portray their identity and issues. Most artists found ways of incorporating their own personal muses, the restrictions that artists faced throughout history lead them to find unique ways to express their sexuality. These certain restrictions often gave way to subcultures that can be identified within certain artists works, for example, new council on same-sex desire in Renaissance Italy meant that artists could portray same sex erotic scenes providing that the individuals did not act upon said depicted desires which allowed individuals to express and explore themselves and their own homosexuality.

Many artists within the exhibition explored the theme of androgyny, figures with a blurred gender are ever present as seen in certain works, for example, the photograph by unknown of Hetty King suggests a young male youth but upon closer inspection female attributes can be identified as well as the name being the only strong and definite suggestion of femininity. A theme and construct (gender) ever present and played with throughout the flow of the exhibition, gradually becoming more obscure and an item of play, seen through performance art which eventually develops into the common presentation of “drag”.

Parts, Part 14, 2002.

Nikki S Lee

Photograph

At first glance of the image you can see a somber and distant looking female (Lee) with a male’s arm wrapped around her shoulder, only the gentleman’s arm is visible in the image, the two individuals appear to be in the back of a vehicle. Even by looking at the image for a short period you can infer that there are levels of tension between the two and the dynamic of their relationship is open for debate/discussion.

I believe the image is about providing an insight into the relationship between the two individuals shown within the image, revealing hints of friction between the two, indicated by the body language shown in the photograph. I believe the image wants to show how the female figure (Lee) is distant both physically (shown by the physical gap between her and the male figure) and mentally shown through her distant gaze and somber expression. There is evidently a physical gap between the two but also an emotional gap as shown by the female (Lee) turning away from the man and looking rather uncomfortable. The body language allows the viewer to question the dynamic of the relationship of the couple in the photograph, either an argument or perhaps unwanted affection comes to mind.

To understand the context of this singular image (part 14) we must look at the context for the entire series Parts. Lee’s Parts is about creating scenes between male and female couples and having the viewer create their own narrative on the couples and illustrate their own theory on the scenario taking place. Thus when looking at the photograph (part 14) we can see that there is a tense scenario taking place but it is the interpretation of the viewer that dictates what the details of the scene are, whether it be a dispute between the couple or a female receiving unwanted male attention thus she is uncomfortable.

My own personal interpretation of the image is that there is an emotional gap/distance between the couple. The body language shows that the female (Lee) shown in the photograph is physically not wanting to be close to the male in the vehicle. Judging by the melancholy in her expression there is a great sense of her being uncomfortable in this situation, there are also hints of longing in her facial expression and I interpret this as her wanting to be anywhere else than in the back of this car.

References:

http://www.e-flux.com/announcements/41689/nikki-s-lee/