What I do

I have been exceptionally busy over the last couple of weeks, so I should really have a lot to talk about! 

At the moment, my life is essentially consumed by dissertation writing, sound editing, making sculptures, photocopying things, attempting to document all of the above and trying to drink my cups of tea before they've gone cold because I've forgotten about the fact I made tea in the first place. That happens a lot. Oh yeah, and sometimes I call my family so they know I'm alive. 

Even though this sounds like I might be having a melt down, I actually couldn't be happier to be working like crazy because - spoiler alert - I love what I'm doing. It also feels great when I realise how much I have to show for my busy schedule. Third year is certainly the year I want to look back at and think, 'I really pushed myself and it was worth it.'

One of our lovely lecturers offered me the gallery space in the studios for the whole of last week, which I was incredibly grateful for. (As were the people who work near me in the studio - they'd had to tiptoe around my growing mountain for weeks.) I was able to move the foil/cellophane/powder to a more accommodating space (the AGC Gallery is such a nice space; it has a big glass front so people can peep in as well) and then enlarge it as well. 

The speakers in the above photo might come as a surprise, mainly because I've not discussed many (or any) of my sound related thoughts. But yes, I have in fact been toying with a lot of audio recordings since the end of the last academic year and have only begun to really draw on them now. The sculptural element of my practice has taken visual precedence, but it felt like the right time to put both these audio recordings and the sculptural compositions in the same space. 

During a talk to my tutor, he decided to bestow upon me the 'spirit of John Bock'. I'd never actually heard of the artist's work before but, after investigation and more chatting, it appeared that what he really meant was that I shouldn't be afraid or weary of throwing all kinds of mediums together. Even if it meant that it went horribly, then at least I would know why I wasn't using particular things in a space. 

Safe to say, I really tried to channel this Bock guy (he is pretty cool, so here's a link to see some of his work: John Bock!) For me, that meant thinking about all the things I've been doing separately as potential components in one space.

I tried to change the layout of the objects in the space, if only slightly, on a daily basis. In the end, there were photocopies which grew in number throughout the week, as I made more drawings in the space which needed to be copied; there were newly made objects as well as things like a silver teapot sugar pot. I also displayed four of the jam pots I've been filling with bath water after every bath and the sewn cushion cover I unpicked. 

Being able to see all of these different materials and processes next to one another was a bit of a visual window for me - it sometimes takes having a space to be able to see how your ideas connect or if they share certain traits. Even simply thinking, 'Yes, that looks good next to that other thing.' was enjoyable and interesting in terms of understanding what it is that I do. 

Studio time

The recent state of my studio.

Not too different from the last photo update, but these do show more decisions about my use of powdery materials. 

If one more person asks me if I know who Anish Kapoor is...

I think I need to flatten those mounds.

PRISM 15

This Friday will be...
https://www.facebook.com/events/230857750407975/?ref=3&ref_newsfeed_story_type=regular

Stiegler

“Information only has value as a result of a heirarchization of ‘what happens’: in selecting what merits the name of ‘event’, these industries co-produce, at the very least, access to ‘what happens’ through giving it the status of event. Nothing ‘takes place’ or ‘happens’ except what is ‘covered’. Thousands of (potential) events, at a minimum, happen without happening, take place without taking place, or take place without happening – and thus will not have taken place, will not have happened – but rather will go to their anonymous and improbable destinations.”

                Bernard Stiegler, extract from La Technique et le temps 2. La Desorientation; 1996 (Technics and Time, 2: Disorientation; 2009)

The question I would like to put forward is: what deserves the word ‘event’?

Even our memories of big ‘events,’ that reach national news, fade with time; usually, it’s the documentation of moments that prevents us from forgetting. With this in mind, is it then the process of documenting or “covering” a happening that gives it authority as an ‘event’?

What if, like for Jim Carey’s character in The Truman Show, everything was elevated to the status of ‘event’? The ordinary, everyday routine (albeit under artificial conditions) - all of it covered and broadcast out to an assumed audience. Furthermore, is having an audience also vital in establishing the difference between event and only potential event?

Warning: contains rambling

Firstly, I cannot excuse how badly I broke my 'blog once a day' pact, so I will simply carry on from where I left off. I began this entry the day after the last post, so I will enter it as it was written initially:

I was going to write an extension of yesterday's post, detailing the work I'd presented in my crit last week.
But, in all honestly, I'm just not feeling it. I promise that I will (probably tomorrow) discuss that presentation in a bit more depth. Right now, I'd actually like to discuss something else.

Today, I was incredibly unproductive. The pinnacle of my Thursday was probably the bath I had around noon, as I'd pretty much been in bed until then. The other activity I undertook was watching Youtube videos. And that's what got me thinking...

I don't know what your taste in Youtube video is (for some people, it's strictly funny animal videos; others stick with music etc.) or if you spend much time trawling the site at all, but I always find myself watching 'vloggers'. In case you can't picture it, these videos are really all about a person (or people) sat in front of the camera, doing regular people things. Just talking about their lives. Sometimes, this includes political/religious/personal opinion ranting, but mostly it's a little bit uneventful.
'Why do I find this fascinating?', you might wonder. Honestly, I have no idea, but it continues to keep me glued to my laptop/iPad screen.

I've wondered if the intrigue has its roots in voyeurism or people watching, which I unashamedly take great delight in. The difference is, however, that these video-makers aren't going about their business unaware of the viewer's gaze; instead, they are performing. What seems like face to face is actually screen to face; what is in fact you watching a stranger feels like getting to know a character. With film, we understand that the characters and actors are not the same people (even though they are one and the same) and that the actor is merely in character. But this setup doesn't apply in this case, where the people you are watching are not assuming another role. Obvious, but I was just thinking.

This seems a strange rule to manipulate - if these videos were acted (I'm aware that I'm making the assumption that Youtube is made up of reality and nothing else) then what would they become? Short films? Skits? Would they have any appeal?

'Miranda Sings', a particular Youtube channel whose videos I watch fairly regularly, plays with this idea in a hilarious and interesting way: the videos all feature Miranda - a woman with very bad lipstick - primarily singing popular songs and speaking dramatically to camera. It's also hard not to notice that the video's star is completely tone deaf. (If scrolling through the comment box is anything to go by, I'd say a lot of people have noticed)

In fact, the woman in the video has a fantastic singing voice - Miranda is a character created by Colleen Ballinger, a professional in the world of musical theatre. Through creating an almost alter-ego, Ballinger has opened up an interesting critique of online personas and the kind of status that can seemingly be achieved by presenting yourself via this platform.

An artist named Cally Spooner recently gave a lecture at our university - mainly about her work and her thoughts around it. One of the points she made that stuck with me was about the value of 'soft skills' in today's economy: instead of labouring to make a product, labour and work could now simply be presenting yourself - an immaterial form of labour. She showed a video of a piece of performance work she'd scripted (apologies for not remembering its title) where a man was assuming the role of a suitcase salesman, with nothing to sell but himself and the performance he was delivering.

There felt to be some correlation between this idea and the content of what a lot of 'vloggers' present , in that it really is nothing but themselves they are offering.

That still doesn't really explain why I find such videos interesting. Maybe I should start my own channel and see.