Always good to see an artist talk about life in practice, but especially engaging as we are familiar with the role Rebecca has as our course leader, the amount of time she gives to that. Maintaining a vibrant artistic output too. Reminds me of my first art tutor who told us how he used to have only the bathroom in which to work. Every Sunday he’d set his alarm for 7, go in there, set up a board over the bath and paint for 4 hours before going back to bed to wake his wife. This weekly practice sustained him until they could manage more space.
Seeing how Rebecca Fortnum’s work has evolved, beginning with the BA in Eng Lit from Oxford- brings to mind Audrey Niffenegger’s artistic practice when expressed as a novel.
- Authenticity of the gaze
- Contemporary British Women Artists book
- Women’s Hour
- Skowhegan, Maine, residency
- Arnolfini residency
- Visual intelligences @ Lancaster
- Artists process
- contradiction, physical body, paint, silence, quietness, visual/ language (can see link to death ask drawings)
When we started this MA it was 100% from the word go. We are feasting on input and critique, visits and discussions, talking about our own work and all our work, and all the work we see in the world. This repeated contextualisation and enquiry into these foundations and inspirations of our work got us talking.
Along with Mel Cole and James Edgar, we decided to curate a show to draw together artists whose work both responds directly to the work of others and their ideas, and also influences and inspires our work. Admittedly this doesn’t narrow it down much, so we looked quite close to home, around south London, and to artists whose work is very current. We discussed artists we are excited about, and drew up a ‘fantasy’ list of people to invite.
This was really nerve-wracking for me and I think for all of us. Just starting out on my MA I was still finding my feet, and slowly gaining confidence as an artist and as an individual. Approaching established practitioners who are all busy and productive individuals, would they take us seriously? Turns out that the more seriously you take yourself, the more seriously people take you. And we were serious about this show.
Check out Digital Human on R4 w Alice Padowski.
Lots of tips on the practicalities of our digital footprint. Good to get some structure to my writing, its a constant process of trying to untangle how I write and think:
- ‘Refelection could be argued to be the essential stage where learning is integrated within the whole learner, and added to existing frames of reference, internalised and personalised‘ Pace 2006
- Reflection is not what you have done, it’s about who you are when you are doing it
- Sense making, changes, where am I going?
- Something happens → what happens? → so what? → now what? → something happens etc
Knowledge: Its a tomatoe
Wisdom: You know it’s not for a fruit salad
Critical awareness: Why there is a difference
Dreamhost are useful for domain name hosting
MRes tutor and artist Paul Ryan gave us a crash course in semiotic analysis of works- the theory of how things are conveyed, the study of signs.
Well Susan Hiller in conversation with David Cross. Does it get any better? Hiller has now for me, taken over the mitre from the late Louise Borgeouis as the sovereign of contemporary conceptual art. Hiller’s range of interests stretches broader than those of Borgeouis too, appealing to the sociologist in me a lot.
David Cross fielded the questions, and was as engaged and energetic as ever, and it was great seeing the sparks of energy fly at the points where their interests met ( social justice, global environmental concern and in particular the limitations and possibilities of words and history. Or is it just me and my own interests that is finding these links..) I am so happy that Cross is a tutor here at Camberwell, as I have long been excited by Cornford and Cross’s works. Seeing these two powerhouses together was great.
Daniel Sturgis is my favourite kind of painter- his work engages with what it is to paint, what it is to be a painter now, and with the act of painting, applying paint to surface and the time involved in the painting.
His paintings present seemingly simple graphic motifs which are actually drawn and painted by hand using inperceptible strokes. They look like masked blocks, but up close they present flat even surfaces with the human touch still in evidence.
Sturgis is interested in the messages you get from the work- you see order with wonkiness, flawed geometries with acceptance of loos anomalies in them.
The objectness and illusion of the painting. Susan Sontag ‘Notes on Camp’ discussed the duality of meaning in artworks, suggesting that accentuating the one can enlighten the other.
Mindful of where today’s painters sit, in the post-modernist world, inheritors of the history of painting, citing Pissan’s Life of the Artist, in which the philosopher declared Da Vinci as the God among artists, Sturgis asks, “how can we follow that?”
The only answer can be to play, to rebel, to mess about with the practice- if Da Vinci Devine pinnacle, and the avant guarde and the modernists elaborated and then dismantled the medium, then Sturgis feels free to question the medium, the surface and motivation.
Sturgis has curated and contributed to relevant exhibitions and residencies, and he talked at length about two: Perdify at Santa Maria de la Tourette, and Barracks at Berwick-upon-Tweed. These shows were in complete harmony with Sturgis’ response to the locations- that of obsolete modernism in the first, and embellished avant guard in the last.
Peter Nancini came to talk to us about his illustration/ design/ making work.
I was really drawn to some of the objects he has made, but it was his approach to typography, especially recent projects, which really made an impact on me: the aesthetic of the page and the nods to literal interpretations of some words and meanings made me smile. I see some of the tactics he uses to draft his fonts and layout as very makerly.
I particular he discussed his contribution to the Page 1 book project in which the first page of the original printing of Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations is interpreted by a different artist. Within this context Nancini utilises typographical terms for layout, such as widowed and orphaned words, to good effect in reinforcing the bleak circumstances of the characters. In using the font he designed himself, Nancini has the freedom to highlight words he interprets using his broader linguistic knowledge, in this case when the character is described as ‘gauche’ in his actions (literally translated as ‘left’) in French, then an alternative, left handed presentation of the letter ‘a’ is substituted.
Nancini was very open about the production of his 3D objects, explaining that the materials he selected for their position within the parameters of tone or quality he had set himself were of relevance, the laser-cut production methods he used did not grant him status as a hands-on maker. However, he also acknowledged that the hands-on work he does do is digital, and as someone who is always drawn to the object and 3D work, I recognised this as a very current predicament: whilst there is no denying the ‘once removed’ work which takes place on a computer, there is a skill set and dexterity nesseccary for successful making whic I am sure is an area of investigation worthy of a dissertation in its own right..l