Week 9 - Steve Rood

Discuss an aspect of Rood's practice.

After hearing Rood's lecture, I admire & respect him immensely as an artist, relating strongly to his ideas - for me, he has an element I can identify with without putting my finger on exactly what it is, which I believe to be in line with his manifesto - he combines obsession, intellect and spirituality in his work. As a photographer myself, I favour processing my own film work & using traditional dark room printing techniques. I value the magical quality of not knowing exactly how an image will come out, & pushing the boundaries of possibility, perhaps trying things out of line with usual methods. When I was younger & I saw my future career as a photographer, I agonised that the future is digital, and wished that I could have been working in an era closer to that of Surrealists such as Man Ray & Lee Miller, so I could have more of an opportunity to explore that medium & push boundaries, investigate the physics of the colour of light, liquid light, etc, without being pressured by the industry to focus on digital media. Rood has found a way to push his exploration into the future, examining the realms of digital photography in innovative and interesting ways, and it is this aspect of his work which I particularly admire - he stays true to photographic concepts, yet embraces the future of photography in an exciting time of many changes. I was sceptical as to the future of 'photography' as a medium - it almost seemed to me to be becoming more & more souless in this age, but my interpretation of Rood's work is that he seems to be doing with digital technology what the likes of Man Ray was doing with analogue in his own era - hinting at the future to a disbelieving audience. I also appreciate how, although he has embraced digital, he views it as a 'small slice' in photographic history, in this age where people are obsessed with digital as the be all & end all.

My own colour photography shot on 35mm film about 6 years ago - experimentation with multiple exposure & red, green & blue filters, examining the primary & secondary colours of light.

Electricity - Lee Miller, Man Ray, 1931

Rood is secure in his position in a historical lifeline of photographic art making, from long before cameras were invented, dating back to times when artists would use mirrored devices to aid them with their accuracy in paintings.To concentrate on one aspect of Rood’s practice alone seems rather limiting, but I am very interested in his approach to photography. He has created an approach which encompasses passion for his art as well as a high level of professionalism. At a basic level, this is evident in his business card – a fire extinguisher, relating to a story about the first photograph he ever took – of a compost heap, which caught fire later on that day. It is this combination of professionalism & spirituality which, in my opinion, makes him outstanding.

“Photography is just a blip in the landscape of visual technology,” says Rood. Therefore, digital photography is an even smaller slice within history. It is this attitude which liberates Rood to experiment freely with the photographic medium – he is not confined to any preconceptions of ‘digital photography’. Rood considers photography from as early as 1475, when artists used reflections as templates for their paintings – it is only more recently that ‘photography’ as a process has been deemed as being confined to a box, & he considers the future possibilities of an automatic reality, which is already emerging in programmes such as Photosynth, 3D live visual mapping of Glastonbury Festival and live location monitoring throughout the world. He ties this in with his career, pushing boundaries to seek an irreplaceable position in the photographic industry.

Rood highlights Lee Miller as an influence on his work, and she happens to be my favourite photographer. This portrait is of her by Man Ray, but they worked together closely & it was Miller who flicked the darkroom switch to accidentally discover solarization. A poignant comparison between Rood & Miller, for me, is that they both pushed the 'new' or available mediums of their times to the extreme & paved ways for future art.

Above image: Solarization, portrait of Lee Miller, Man Ray

My favourite work which Rood discussed was George – a collection of old, damaged 35mm negatives from various sources such as markets, which are agglomerated and transformed into an interactive, digital photo album of disconnected imagery, forming a portrait of the imaginary George. 60%-70% of the negatives were found, with probably no previous connection. This work questions the portrait’s place in digital media. What happens to it? What will not be replaced? Perhaps his work may seem radical at first, but my perception is that he is only working in fashion in which portraits have always been created, but utilizing previously unavailable technology to do so.We could say, therefore, that in theory, the portrait will not change - it is what surrounds the portrait which changes. He has also created digital works which feature postcards and conversations between people, narratives where the characters are transported to other places when they connect in conversation. George almost reminded me of a facebook page – we are integrated into this phenomenon of collecting visual information about ourselves and displaying it digitally via a created profile. In this way, we have all created interactive digital self-portraits and use them every day to interact. Photography has become a social monster, and Rood anticipates it growing beyond this & into the 3D interactive realm.

Rood has commented that although he won awards for such work, advertising agencies struggled to understand it at the time, and are still struggling now. He is interested in the media struggle with more & more digital media, a concept I had not previously considered, as perhaps I perceived the change to be being pushed by the media. This reaction prompted him in the direction of considering more traditional portrayals digital portraits, whilst still contemplating similar themes of the future of the portrait, and identity within digital media, to further his career & fund his more artistic explorations. He considers the relationship between technology and photography – technological changes always have an impact on photography.

David Hockney is a strong influence on Rood's practice. He works with different media & experiments with innovative ways to create portraits, utilizing available technology, as does Rood. This image stood out to me as Rood is interested in the technique of merging images together and creating work which encompasses different angles. The camera lies, and he enjoys exploring this idea in work and research, whether it be convincing or obvious. This stems back to concepts of how photographic based works are often perceived to portray an accurate representation of a subject, but in actuality, it is all light, mirrors & trickery. Digital manipulation is the current way to convey this.

Rood recognises the impossibility of creating an objective portrait, and therefore attempts to photograph each subject demonstrating strong visual similarities in style/technique/composition, etc. This reminded me of Diane Arbus, whom he states as an influence. Her non judgemental portraits of ‘freaks’ demonstrate qualities of an objective nature in the way they are framed, & the way they directly face the camera, and the running theme in style and composition, which is applied equally yet personally to each subject. Both artists are interested in revealing the subject for who they are, both are trapped within their own styles of portraying others, & thus will never be objective. Arbus has commented that her approach to photography was "like gathering a butterfly collection, in that she aimed to depict objectively the distinctiveness of her unusual subjects."

Both photographs works by Diane Arbus

I should also mention Rood’s early career, when he developed his individual style of essentialising and reducing his subjects, using light to create abstract, basic forms. He sought do define his style in order to specialise & stand out in a competitive industry, and his spirituality is reflected in these images to became an aesthetic. I really love how he utilises light, rather than high technology, to create unusual effects in these images. He applied this unique style to various subjects, depending on where the work was available, and it was this which defined him and furthered his career. This work reminded me of portraits by one of my favourite photographers – London based Nadav Kander. He also uses light & dark to create simple & abstract forms, & demonstrates a personal & unique style which he applies to photographing in various industries, from band/music photography to advertising & fashion.

Portrait by Steve Rood

Artwork for album cover of Meds by Placebo, Nadav Kander

Portrait of Selwyn, my own photography, 2010. Rood uses bright light to burn out detail & simplify his work. I have used darkness here to omit detail & light to select carefully each aspect I wanted to include within this image, simplifying it. This is a photograph of a close friend who is a musician, so it has a very personal/spiritual element to me. This use of light to create a simplified, abstract, form, lies parallel to themes in Rood's photography, but demonstrates my own individual style

Taranaki Sleeps, 2008, my own work. To me, this does not necessarily draw visual similarities between the work of myself & Rood, however, it does demonstrate my preoccupation with light as a tool to create an aesthetic - this was captured on 35mm in low light at about 4am, and was exposed for about 18 seconds. It is of a person close to my heart & for me, reflects spirituality & simplicity, themes also conveyed in much of Rood's work

Finally, I really enjoyed his work Shadow Making Machines. I enjoy the theory behind the work. Light is what enables us see, & is the vital element in photography. In these works, Rood subverts the idea of shining light onto a subject/object in order to view it. The light is central within the image, and casts shadows, which become the focus. This work holds a strong attraction for me conceptually as well as aesthetically, as light and shadow are always central themes in my work, whether it be sculpture, photography, poetry, etc. This piece in particular reminds me also of Cornelia Parkers Cold Dark Matter: An Exploded View.

Grid, Steve Rood

Study of Light & Shadow, 2010, my own work - Gun made of glass mirror shards

Cold Dark Matter: An Exploded View, Cornelia Parker, 1991

References

Lecture – Steve Rood Tuesday 28^th October 2010-10-02

Exhibtion: Diane Arbus, Revelations, Tate Modern 2006 & book

www.facebook.com

www.rood.co.nz

Editorial Review - Reed Business Information (c) 2003

http://kuteev.livejournal.com/115515.html

http://blindflaneur.com/?p=241

Exhibition: The Remarkable Life & Art of Lee Miller, V&A, London, 2007

http://nikkor.tumblr.com/page/108

http://www.doctorhugo.org/synaesthesia/art/index.html

http://www.shadowmakingmachines.com/

http://www.genetologisch-onderzoek.nl/index.php/588/anthropology/archaeologie/

My own work :-)

Week 8 - Fran Allison

1) Define Collaboration and how it differs from a Collective.

2) How have these terms influenced Allison's practice?

3) Give another example of a collaborative art practice.

This is how dictionary.com defines a collaboration:


collaboration (kəˌlæbəˈreɪʃən)
— n (often foll by on, with, etc )
1. The act of working with another or others on a joint project
2. Something created by working jointly with another or others

A collective and a collaboration, in an artistic sense, both involve a group of artists working together to produce work. A collaborative artwork, however, is distinct in that there is a lack of authorship - it does not matter who produces which elements of the creation, the final artowork will be presented as a piece equally created in concept & physicality by all participants of the collaboration - joint authorship. Each artist bring skills towards the final outcome and the audience will not be informed as to who submitted what. A collaborative work can be created without the artists seeing each other or sharing the same space, and some collaborations involve artists contributing in various ways from all over the world.

A collective, according to wikipedia, is 'a group of entities that share or are motivated by at least one common issue or interest'. The key word here is entities - a collective as an agglomeration of individuals. The online dictionary defines a collective as 'of or characteristic of a group of individuals taken together: the collective wishes of the membership.' Again, the concept of individuality is highlighted. It also comments 'teams that work collaboratively can obtain greater resources, recognition and reward when facing competition for finite resources'. The online dictionary states a collective as 'forming a whole; combined: and a business, farm, etc., jointly owned and operated by the members of a group.' Therefore, a collective, in an artistic sense, is a group of artists who work together to support each other individually, perhaps benefiting from shared resources, studio space and opinions, to aid the development of each person's separate practice.

Fran Allison's earliest experience within a collective was for a 5 year duration whilst she was establishing herself in London. She highlights works produced within the collective such as a set of swords for an Arab prince, perhaps influencing her towards the path she took of becoming a silversmith for many years. It was also during that period that she developed an interest in the domestic, a theme which has underpinned her work for years to come.

Allison is currently a member of the collaborative group of artists, who call themselves Weeds. Weeds encompasses herself, Lisa Walker, Andrea Daly & Shelley Norton, and each artist brings different skills & techniques to to the group. Collaboratives are often formed as a result of a common interest or passion - Weeds was drawn together by a common frustration at the stereotypical views of kiwi jewellery as perceived by overseas audiences, and they aim to establish a clearer communication between New Zealand and the rest of the world, subverting outdated perceptions.

Allison has commented that “For me ‘Weeds’ is a platform for experimentation. Each ‘weed’ is different from the one before, and each could be cultivated into a body of work. Each piece is a new beginning, an exploration into new materials sourced from the domestic urban environment. The pieces explore the decorative possibilities of op shop discoveries, all containing previous histories and meanings. The added advantage of working in this way is that any discards become compost….” Participating & contributing towards Weeds creates an environment in which Allison is able to experiment and pusher her ideas, as they strive to stretch their ideas to the limit, enabling them to consider methods & concepts they may otherwise not have - the wackier, the better. Allison creates experimentations within Weeds which she then personally explores further in her spare time, thus advancing her own individual practice. She states that Weeds is a 'cataylst' for this, allowing her to divert onto many tangents, playing with materials in almost a childlike sense, and work closely with other artists who inspire her - in particular, Lisa Walker and her fearless approach to creating.

Grant Thompson has commented "I wonder why someone would choose to be a weed in the garden of jewellery. The answer seems to have something to do with a desire to intensify awareness of everyday things as things in them selves rather than as signs of something else." This observation emphasises Weeds' desire to create jewellery which represents the diversity in New Zealand and challenge the definitive idea of jewellery, using second hand materials & transforming them into new works. This is a common goal for Weeds as well as Allison in her own work, which ties in neatly with Allison's interest in Walker's confident approach to materials and exploration. She also values ideas of lack of control, which materialises in techniques such as breaking & smashing her work, and would be an aspect of working as apart of a collaborative, referencing other group members' ideas, rather than exercising complete control over a work.

Plastic is a materialin which Allison is particularly interested, and is demonstrated here in Walker's Brooch, 2007. She has recycled objects of low value and transformed them into an art piece. I was attracted to this piece personally as to me it has connotations of environmental issues. This work seems to encompass the themes Allison & Weeds wish to convey - a contemporary approach using materials which would otherwise be considered to have a low value, challenging traditional concepts of jewellery and preciousness.

Brooch, 2007, Lisa Walker, Plastic & glue

Allison's work here is similar to Walkers in its agglomoration of found plastic materials, perhaps sources from opshops or $2 stores, which seem to have been grouped together as a result of playful exploration. It is from Allison's chapter of a Weeds catalogue & demonstrates typical values of the group.

Random Findings pins, Fran Allison

Allison has been influenced by other artists who work in collaborations & collectives. She states the Swedish collaborative group We Work in Fragile Material as an influence on her artwork created within Weeds. She references in particular their wacky and absurd nature, and their ability to create works within a group which they would be unable to as individual artists, pushing their ideas as far as possible, encouraging each other as they are driven by a common intereste - much like Weeds.

American Craft magazine has commented that We Work in Fragile Material 'finds its strength in numbers', creating 'rambunctious projects'. The group of artists and designers are trained in various specialities but combine their skills to create works which they would be individually unable to. The ceramist Pontus Lindvall states "we don't have a manifesto - we have some kind of feeling or having a view of the world in common, but it's not in writing or even agreed upon." The collaborative allows these artists to work together to push these ideas to the extreme, as demonstrated in this huge troll creation below.

Happy Campers, We Work in Fragile Material

References



My lecture notes

The Collective Conscious by Holland Cotter, New York Times, March 5, 2006.

http://www.dictionary.com/

http://www.wikipedia.org/

http://www.quoil.co.nz/artists/fran_allison/


http://www.fingers.co.nz/exhibitors/Weeds_05.htm


http://www.dhub.org/articles/1151

http://www.weworkinafragilematerial.com/Fragglarna/project06/12_06_Troll.htm

http://www.americancraftmag.org/toc.php?id=7233

http://www.sixpm.net/wwiafm-show.htm