I kind of understand why you are cross but I don't really agree with you. When we talked about the Jackson Pollocks and I said how disapointed I was about seeing them "In the flesh" in Moma you put me straight by saying I had to think about what they meant - how they fitted into history rather than what they were. I think you were rite to say this and it made me think about the context of history. Kettles yard is all the things you say about it but I think you have to view it in it's historical context as a museum rather than something that relates to your work or your thinking then it's ok and a nice place to spend a few hours. For me it connected me to the art of that time in a very different way to visiting a gallery and I was pleased that it existed as a place and it was unlike anywhere I had been I also thought the way it opened up was really interesting. Much of the art from that period is very british and very middle class but it was a fresh way to see it.
I think we are both in a similar situation in terms of work because we feel like we are coming to the end of something - a sort of Phase of work and we both want to do or make stuff which feels original or challenging but we are not sure what it will luck like. I keep thinking about places and people and objects and Habitus and change and challenge but it doesn't ever get further than that - perhaps it's because this approach to work is like we said all about learning to dwell and most people make work "About" something rather than "of" something if that makes sense. Anyway I post a picture of the Turrel as I like it because the best works function I think is to get us to look at the world differently and thats what he did for me and maybe it's this idea of the effect on the audience we should explore rather than something inherent in the work itself.
ok, ok, yes i see your kettles yard point, and your right in terms of its moment in time, and yes how interesting the opening up in the building, to then a gallery to an aesthetic and way of life seen regularly in mags like the world of interiors. And perhaps it was that that so disturbed me, but i couldnt stand the righteousness of it somehow.
ReplyDeleteBut yes i like how it makes you look at that art and put it into a context and think about that time, but fundamentally the man had a good eye and so it feels like it was created as a teaching aid and a bit pointy finger. But yes as you say an interesting moment in time.
Did you read, my comment to your skiing blog as i agree with you as reinforced in this post, that the work is in the effect on the audience or people of a site not in the work itself - so the white cube and artemis piece. I like the turrell piece as it is dense, it is not superficial or directive, it just gets you to finish the art in your own head. Thats what i want from making.I want the people to come half way and we learn, see, build collaboratively.
So like with making the table with ken, the making and the relationship we have is the piece, but how do you get an audience to witness that - this is my current struggle.Because really the piece is just for me and ken.