Essays / Exhibition news / Publications

Straight from the horse's ass (Part 3)

The as yet untitled work about the duality of power is now complete. These photographs of sheet five (taken over a period of five or six hours- click to enlarge) show my method, which in itself was entirely driven by rules; firstly dividing the shadows into blocks and then layering them up like a screenprint. Again, here we can see how the reverse side of the piece shows through the masked, negative spaces of the other.

The statue depicted here is of Emanuele Filiberto, ‘Testa di Ferro’ in Piazza San Carlo, Turin. A character of considerable fame from sixteenth century Italy, namely because he made Italian the official Savoy language instead of Latin and moved what became the Turin Shroud to the city cathedral. He is also known however, as being a ruthless strategist and exploited any weaknesses for his own ends. My inclusion of him in this project reflects the unavoidable problems related to how powerful people have to present themselves. What are they hiding? What don’t we know? Such ‘PR’ battles and embarrassing ‘reveals’ dominate our news feeds these days but monuments like this one have a wonderfully bombastic way of ignoring everything but heroism- so much so that you get drawn into the romance of it before anything else.

I think the work has been a success; power is portrayed in a graphic sense but it’s also abstracted due to the complimentary colour scheme. Failures would lie in the difficulties I had in finding a workable technique and sometimes losing touch with the concept as a result. Above all, the work has been an intriguing one in terms of using painting to ask sculptural questions.

Coming up in part four:

Title

Once an appropriate venue presents itself, the five pieces will be mounted and placed together in a sequence/installation yet to be determined.

Masking failure?

edit1 small.JPG

I gave up on this piece about two years ago. For reasons that I can’t remember, the initial promise over these two images soon disappeared. After recently going though the archive of older work, I came across it again and then thought of an experiment. The original intention of images can so often be mistaken these days, constant recycling and the porous online world allows for essageration to appear on a daily basis. Another thing was that I have always been told to avoid describing your work at all costs, but the current trend is to do just that, using thirty hashtags or less most of the time. What if I were to utilise these common practices with something that (in reality) failed, then see how it compared with a legitimate piece of work...?

Would a higher number of tags, likes, new followers, comments etc, with relation to this image, subvert the purpose of a work or what is actually means.

I posted this failed image about a week ago and explained the experiment. Usual posts after this amount time reach around thirty likes and result in five or six new followers. This one after a week ‘outperformed’ most of my actual work by about twenty percent across all categories…

Is this purely down to publicity? Timing?? Probably, but it makes you think about the perception of any given image, even if it’s rubbish in the first place