Week 2

So suddenly I’m in week 2 of 10 for this term and I feel like I haven’t started to do anything!  I’ve written so many pages of notes, been thinking and talking about my proposal a lot, but I feel like I haven’t really gotten anywhere.  Should I have written something meaningful or read 2-3 books by now?

What I have done is gained some kind of confidence to trust my initial lines of enquiry; as mentioned previously Proposal 1.0 had one clear thread, whereas I now have up to 5 strands to the whole proposal.  Yet it still feels woolly, messy… undefined.  I’d like to really easily be able to say ‘My project is about…’.

So far I’m interested in looking at:

1. How and why our minds try to ‘force’ us to identify familiarity when faced with randomness, and what happens when our minds aren’t able to rationalise abstract and non-figuarive forms.  This is intended to be multi-sensory, with a leaning on the tactile, rather than the visual, however it may be important to understand the ‘hierarchy’ of our senses.  I must also consider the differences between the response of the maker in contrast to the response of a holder/user.

2. The notion of play: which I often feel is an irrational response (as a ‘culturally-programmed’ adult).  This is quite a complex soup of theories and thoughts.  Firstly to address there is the concept of defining ‘play’ (and it’s antithesis ‘work’), of which I am keen to explore the notion of play from an adult perspective.  Is it the same behaviour as when children play?  My gut response says this isn’t the case (due to cultural conditioning, ‘maturity’, knowledge of the world, etc.) however this is just a theory.  Is adult play more complex, appreciative of the poetry of aspects, such as engineering or aesthetics?

3. The ethical debate surrounding the art of making.  This is again complex, and also taps into emotional or irrational responses to the act of crafting, but not necessarily in reference to mass-production or consumer culture.  My angle is more concerned with the states of matter, ephemerality and permanence in my own practice.  The ceramic work I produce (finished or experimental) will exist forever, and is hard to break down again.  Much of what I create is experimental and once I have found out what it is I wanted to know – what happens to these ‘scraps’?  There are forgotten and/or discarded.  I experience some ethical conflict in this activity, however there lies the opportunity to look at the material and try to reconcile this feeling, perhaps through breaking the pieces down, and reusing the material in some way. 

Comparing these strands, it seems there is an overlap with the theme of irrationality and interactivity, looking at the relationship between the object and the mind, but also the subconscious or even animalistic (uncultured) behaviours.  Threads 2 and 3 certainly lend themselves to concepts of construction and modularity.

Gradually these themes are being distilled, honed and I get the feeling I am not far off being able to form a coherent proposal, albeit in a looser sense.  The more I think and talk about these factors, I can feel them taking gold or some kind of gravity forming which holds the pieces together.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s