About the Project
Garner, S. 'Towards a Critical Discourse in Drawing Research' in S. Garner (ed.) Writing On Drawing: Essays on Drawing Practice and Research, Bristol: Intellect, 2008, pp 15- 26.
Can these methods and resultant images make visible otherwise hidden interdisciplinary connections?
Can this approach to studio practice be documented in such a way to develop and communicate a transferable model for interdisciplinary studio practice?
Thursday, 12 November 2009
Sunday, 1 November 2009
Instead the form itself had some interest - its wrinkled texture, orificed appearing to reference the body directly ( more so than a garment might) - a gullet, vagina or venal structure perhaps?
Wednesday, 30 September 2009
The work engages with technologies on various levels: being both derived from the deconstruction of technological processes and then relying on other appropriated technologies for its visibility. This positions the work in a complex and critical position vis-a-vis this imaging technology, as tensions between concealment and revelation begin to surface: in the process of revealing the image, the projector simultaneously obscures the original infinitesimal etched marks. Imagery is derived from traces of human presence. The “Findings” series depicts personal items found abandoned in the city. Layered up, marks cohere into a single image, but fragmented, tenuous, occupying an ambiguous space, physically and conceptually echoing the social limbo in which these objects exist.
This series of projections was made specifically for the A Thing About Machines Festival, exhibited in the Herbert Art Gallery, Coventry.
Facsimiles are a series of drawings of found objects worked on discarded fax paper which explore the liminal space that we call ‘lost’: a place between loser and finder, a territory charted only by the object establishing a distant connection between two unknown individuals.
This idea is approached through an appropriation of the technology of the fax: a long distance communication lacking direct contact between its users. This sense of the unseen informs the drawing process: worked in white ink on the white heat-sensitive fax paper, the drawing is invisible in the making, revealed only though a final exposure to heat; a blindness which resonates with the faxing process: the sender cannot see the output.
The images themselves appear as ghostly scans, built up through an intensive scrutiny which results in an obsessive scrawling mark like an indecipherable handwriting, suggesting a sense of intimacy through this somewhat futile attempt to uncover hidden narratives. The drawings begin to appear more like treasured letters, rather than the impersonal output of the fax as the intensity of the working process leaves the careworn traces of human handling.
In this way, the ‘drawn’ mark does not replicate that of the machine, but more situates itself inside the framework of technology and appropriates its means for its own ends.
Monday, 14 September 2009
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
More thoughts around the capacity for light to reveal otherwise hidden or unknown information, follwing inesigation into ultrasound and x-ray technologies. Forms evolved from cast shadows of familiar objects illuminted by torchlight, emerging as unfathomable forms strangley reminiscent of deep sea life- in itself - hidden, and barely within the grasp of human knowledge.
Tuesday, 1 September 2009
Tuesday, 28 July 2009
I recently came accoss a set of victorian microscope slides at a flea market and was instantly hooked. I was partiularly fascinated by their sense of preservation within a visibly ageing form ( the glue used to fix the slide covered had yellowed and cracked. Presumably collected by an amateaur naturalist, the slides have sample ranging from rock fragments to the head of a blowfly ( pictured above).
Viewed through the microscope not only is the intended speciment revealed, but also the aging and flaws of the preparation.
The samples pictured appear to have a paper like consistency, reminiscent of old envelopes of pressed flowers - the stuff of memoried preserved for a later date the forgotten.
Monday, 13 July 2009
Monday, 6 July 2009
Saturday, 27 June 2009
This new direction of the work stemmed from a desire to interrogate scale - it is scale that made the Patina works so particularly effective - and intricacy.
Returning to notes gathered in the medical case study visits, I began to reflect more closely on the processes of magnification, of microscopy to make the invisible visble.
This image draws on several sources :
- Robert Hooke's Micrographia (1665) , scrutinising his images- how has he depicted the invisible/ minute?
archaeological scrunity - sytematic recording of detail
Impressed by Hooke's detail , and rendering of the minute, enlarging it via drawing to a visible level, I wante to take this further, to enlarge it behond the just visible, to a much more dominat scale. The image is worked in pencil - the tool of scietific note taking in the days before computers and still used in archaeological records. However, unlike the records of Hooke, my intention was not to render an visually 'realistic'record of the object; rather I wanted the image to unpick and explore the processes of image making in relation to a historical tradition of drawing and micrography. The idea was to build up an images as if it is in slices, acknowledgeing different depths and densities of layers - a depiction of multiple layers at one -like scanning electron micrograph technology, multple parts are built up to cohere to a 3d whole. The marks used are a uniform dash - akin to Hooke's marks and also the bads of ultrasound. However, unlike ultra sound images , the lines are not only horizontal - different directions denote different depths therefore the image is able to represent multiple'depths' in a single image ( unlike ultrasound). The drawing was made over a period of 4 days, sytematically marking out parts - laboured process which reflects a similar time needed to prepare certain material for viewing under a scanning electron microscope. The intended effect was to mimic the viewing process of microscopic viewing - from a distance it coheres into a believeable whole but as one gets closer it breaks down into its constiuent parts - much in the same way material presented on prepared slides does under increasing magnification of the microscope.
I found it interesting to observe that towards the end of the making process, when the projection was less needed, this multilayered focusing became a crucial part of making the drawing- would need to beable to view both the part and whole at once so found myself repeatedly shifting between two levels of focus. The process was also a physical one - as I repeatedly moved back and forward, my body and retina effectively became mimetic of the microscope.
In some ways I think there is an interesting dialogie here withthe arguments put forward by Hockney in his Secret Knowledge (2001) . In this thesis Hockney explores the use of drawing devices and optics by old masters. For him the camera lucida and optical devices were not about deskilling, they were a tool to enable greater acuracy at greater speeds. My use of optics, however, does nethier! The work strives neither for an 'accurate' or 'realistic' visual representation, or speed - it is necessarily laborously time consuming.
On reflection , then, it would seem that there is indeed potential here to explore and unravel processes of medical imaging in realtion to drawing practice and a historical tradition of drawing practice.
Where now? two thoughts - firstly - what happens when enlargement processes are reversed - made so somall that we really have to look and scrutinise with the naked eye - pushing the limits of visiblity ? can projections be made backwards? secondly - silverpoint . A drawing material associated with delicacy and particularly fine lines, intricate scale - what would happen if it was useon this large scale? I am especially drawn to this ideas given the uses of silver in both scanning micrography and imaging, and also early microphotographs. Moverover, it will fade and tarnish over time - a fleeting and ephemeral image.
Friday, 26 June 2009
These images and excerpt are part of a presentation given at this potsgraduate conference.
Because approaches of studio enquiry often contradict what is accepted as research and are not sufficiently fore-grounded or elaborated by artistic researcher themselves, the impact of practice as research is still not to be fully understood and realised.” (Barrett 2007)
“Rather than advocating an integration of theory and practice... by privileging text in relation to research actually reinforces the distinction between them...its overall effect is to reinforce the illegitimacy of art practice as research.” (Candlin 2000)
This exhibition seeks to address these problems by valuing the visual material generated in studio research as an important form of embodied knowledge (Bolt 2007)and also as a significant communicative strategy. This creative format tests an approach to maintaining the integrity of visual research when it enters interdisciplinary dialogue.
Studio making is typically a hidden and private affair between artist and materials and perhaps nowhere is this given more credence than in the act of drawing. As a researcher whose practice is predominantly drawing-oriented, such accounts are problematic within the context of debates surrounding the legitimacy of art practice as research. If creative methodologies are to be valued and contribute to interdisciplinary knowledge, how knowledge is made in the studio requires wider understanding (Barrett 2007, Bolt 2007, Sullivan 2005, Defreitas 2001). The development , and use, and dissemination of this necessary studio documentation aims to make visible a studio methodology in order for it to be opened to critical debate at forums such as this.
reflections on the event
A useful opportunity to share my research and its methods in an interdisciplinary forum, receiving feedback from diverse fileds of expertise. While all was extermely positive, the presenation generated considerable interest and debate, I realised that in terms of making visble my proceses, text was still of primary importance for communication. How might my method of documentation be adapted so that they were more readily avalaible for public viewing, a clearer visual explanation rather than the donminant textual form? Ideas: folded notebooks rather than individual pages - this way multiple pages can be viewed at once; scan in documentation and provide acomputer terminal for images to be browsed, cross referenced with written notes? Perhaps such forms will provide a more effective was of prioritising and maintaining the primacy of the visual in my research?