Audiences Project Report

I have to admit that when I first heard we had to do a blog, I totally hated the idea. The idea of recording my thoughts in a diary form appealed to me, but it was the thought of sitting at a computer, on my own that really got to me. When I’m excited about something, I want to tell other people about it, and I hated the idea of meeting someone at college, and rather than having an interesting conversation with them, asking them to go and look at my blog.

 Once I got going however, I quite enjoyed it. It is somehow much easier to rant when you are typing, and it is much easier to copy and paste images virtually, rather than manually. Also,  I found I was more inclined to write a blog when I was already at the computer and found something interesting.

 I didn’t really manage to stay on subject while I was writing. I was interested in the beginning in the idea of differentiating between work you could touch, and work which was kept at arms length. However, I think a combination of my critical studies presentation being on this subject and there being a lack of suitable source material, I never really got going with the idea.

 I have learned quite a lot from this short module. One thing is that I should really stop being so stubborn and defensive all the time, and give things a chance to grown on me before I start slating them. I have also learned that it is ok to write in an informal way sometimes. I think this is another of my pre-conceptions which is not necessarily correct; I always imagine that people who do art courses are looked down on as being less academic than those who do traditional English/maths/science degrees, and I have always tried to fight this off; refusing to consider ever asking for essay writing help and writing in full structured sentences all the time. I have realised however that my remonstrances of ‘but I got 2 A’s in English at school, I’m not stupid’ are actually ridiculous, and I have enjoyed writing in this informal style as it is nice sometimes to be able to say ‘I like this because I just do!’ without having to justify yourself or reference anything.

 I have felt that the audiences module has been relevant to the course as a whole, but not necessarily relevant to myself. It has defiantly made me think about the importance of the audience, and the importance of setting also, but as I want to do Art Therapy, and have no intention of being a part of the exhibiting art world, I always find these short modules difficult. I decided at the beginning of term however that I was going to focus on myself as an artist and have tried to react to the module as such.

 I think I will keep the blog up after the module is over, because I have found it a good way to record thoughts and get feedback on them. I feel it has been a useful tool for this particular subject, though I think I will always prefer to have physical things, physical notes, experiences and conversations. 

The Big Art

Last night I watched the first in C4's series "The Big Art", in which a team of 'art specialists' chose from thousands of applicants who want a piece of public art in their community. I didn't really know what to expect, and to start with I was dreading an tacky reality tv show attempting to be cultural by dragging Anthony Gormley on board. It was ok though, nothing much was made of the selection process and the show quickly moved on to the types of art people wanted and what they were hoping they pieces would bring to their communities.

I t was nice to see untrained people really believing that art can change the public perception, and indeed the world. At one point a group of overweight, aging Irish men were discussing their plans for a large scale sculpture to bring the Catholic and Protestant communities together over a pint. In Burnley a group of school children wanted a piece that was colourful and bright, a stark contrast to their presently concrete town, and one boy in particular said "wouldn't it be great if you could google Burnley and not see the 2001 disturbance, but have this project come up instead". 

I think the programme will get better as the series continues, but already there has been a lot of disagreement. One of the artists says he is not interested in creating what the public want, and a member of the public said he likes art to be beautiful, not contemporary. I'm not sure the public are ready for this, it's all very well to put up a piece of public art and let people either love it or hate it, but I think there are going to be some major fallings out because neither the artist or the public whose proposal has been accepted are likely to back down on their idea. As Anthony Gormley said ""If you were to make work that was based entirely on popular opinion, you would end up like I did ... losing to a rotating cup of tea." 

The ideas behind the project, and the public opinion on it can be seen in this Guardian Article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/09/public-art-project

My piece has a name!

Introducing the latest work from Eleanor Rae Smith:

'Piggies' 2009

Plaster

Dimensions Variable

I think the name of a piece is incredibly important in the way it is seen by the viewer. I often look at a piece titled 'untitled' and feel a little let down because I want to draw more information from a name. Another of Toby Christians pieces can be used as an example here:

On first glance, it appears to be nothing more than a piece of bent steel, but on finding out it is called 'Superman', you begin to see it in a new light, and it starts to become a symbol of strength, trust and courage. 

I wanted to give my piece a name that was both personal to me, and that the audience could relate to, as this is also the attitude I have adopted when making the work itself. The only names I came up with to start with were horribly cliched and obvious; footprints, memory, nostalgia, home is where...etc etc. Then I looked at the poem, Footprints in the Sand by Mary Stevenson, which is about a girls looking back over her life, and seeing two sets of footprints in the sand, one being hers and the other those of "the lord". She reflects, that in times of sadness and despair, she could only see one set of footprints, and she asks "the lord", why he was not with her during the hardest times, and he replied that there was only one set of footprints during those times because he carried her. For a while, I thought my piece was going to be called "When I carried you", but it never felt right. I am not religious at all, and although I liked the title, it isn't really very relevant to my reasons for making this work. I was talking to Sarah about it, and explaining where my ideas had come from and I told her the story of me collecting stones with holes in on the beach and handing them to my mum, telling her they were piggies. As soon as I heard myself say "Piggies" I knew that was the name, and Sarah agreed. I know why they are called that, but the audience now have the freedom to connect with the piece and the name for their own reasons. There is also the connection with the footprints and the 'this little piggy went to market...' nursery rhyme, which subconsciously harks back to childhood for most people.

Possible sites for my work...

Over Easter I drove over to Holkham beach in North Norfolk to take some photgraphs. I am interested to see what my work will look like on the beach, rather than in a gallery situation so I have made some photoshop collages. 

I think when shown on the beach like this, they are not as clearly a piece of art. I found this while I was making some plaster casts of footprints on the beach too. Instead of coming over to look at what I was doing as people do when someone is painting in a public place, people looked at me as though I was some kind of vandal! I also think that Gary's idea of me being an 'erratic', moving things to places they don't belong is very important. When the pieces are taken back to the beach, they just don't work as well. 

I therefore tried a collage using Briggate in Leeds. I think that because they look so much more out of place, they work much better. It looks more like a have been walking down Briggate, thinking of home and the stones are like memories. 

Time to stop being so defensive...

I had a bit of a revelation about my work after setting It out in a crit situation and getting opinions from other people. When Rory gave my his opinion, I shut it out, and disagreed with him, because that is what was easy at the time. He wanted to me explain why I was trying to make my work look like stones or pebbles, and I was convinced that I needed them to look like pebbles for my work to be successful, and for me to have enough excitement about it to carry on. Rory disagreed. He gave me the example of Toby Christians piece "Snowball" 

Christian has made a marble sculpture that looks so much like a snowball it quite disconcerting to look at. Until you realise it is made from marble and not frozen water, it looks like magic, or trickery. It is an excellent piece of trompe loiel, and I couldn't understand how it related to my work. Rory said if I really wanted to make the pieces look like stones, I should remove the footprint element and work at making them as convincing as stones as possible. I thought he was talking rubbish and said that if I wanted to display stones, I would go to the beach and get some stones, and that the only reason Christian had worked hard to make a real looking snowball is because you simply can't display an actual snowball outside in normal conditions. However, after seeing my work laid out in the crit, I suddenly understood what he meant, and felt quite guilty about being so argumentative. 

The pieces were laid out in their proposed positions, but made from plaster as at that point I hadn't cast them in concrete. I found they were suddenly representing pebbles on their own. The small  cracks and bubbles were reminiscent of the sea, and the powdery quality of the sand represented the sand perfectly. They work much better as symbols for stones, rather than blindingly obvious copies. This again related to Plato's perfect horse theory. Its like the "idea" stone, or the "perfect" stone is the image everyone has in their head, then there's an actual stone, which is a representation of the "perfect" stone, and below that is my piece, which is a representation of the already represented idea stone. Ronald. H. Nash explains it better in his book 'Lifes Ultimate Questions':