Seiving through melting snow 2009
My interest lies in the seemingly constant desire of the human mind to question, assess, judge and to evaluate- empirically speaking. To make sense of something, so we can make sense of it sensibly, so it is sensible, time and then time again; this is both the classification and the pedantry, in light of the anomaly/phenomenon (because we alwyays should get the right end of the stick). Despite starting off with universal, generic and popularist questions, the work manifests itself through very particular and refined trajectories, which may trigger subconscious associations. Less literal connections with ideas purposefully attempt to communicate through a private/esoteric language, subjectively translating through forms of mimesis what I feel I see around me, but also illuminating links, thoughts and interrogations which may be tacitly shared by others. Within the work there may be both clearly visible and muted echelons of relations; these will perhaps give clues as to the tangible relationships as well as those more unprecedented ones. Fundamentally and more recently, I have taken to contemplating limits, capacities, and superfluous information, in paradigms and cold hard data, which more often than not reveals itself in a descriptive erratic scene.
WHY.
I enjoy the ambiguous, gaps in information, things that do not seem to add up; essentially, puzzles and games to solve. I think everybody does to an extent, but sometimes just trying to solve them is as satisfying and valid as their solution. The proposal that we privilege objects is a cornerstone to my practice; we have a tendency to build narrative around them, fabricating both a history and a projected future. I aim to produce multiple components that generate a sense of value and ascribed significance through investment in the making process; so that not only do the objects speak of devotion to material quality, level of facture and replication, but also that they document human time and contemplation and are in their very essence of a particular vernacular. The potential of an enriched experience brought about by lengthier periods of contemplation than might at first appear to be demanded by the work, is symptomatic of my fascination with an elusive denouement. In light of this, conflict in the multiplication of outcomes and methodologies denies the aspiration towards the simple and the sublime.
The visible administration of collected, readymade elements and fabricated structures combines to produce an overall physical/emotional mindset- In this instance, it just so happens upon a kind of miasma tic, one of interconnectivity and endurance, where everything appears to have the capacity to link and make determinable sense. This type of compilation may seem to those on the outside exercising pure subjectivity and open interpretation, as a kind of dyspraxic array, in as much as the cognitive links between pieces are not what might at first be presumed to be conventional. The contradiction possibly lies in the binary oppositions I have to assert in order to suggest this kind of complexity, yet succinct order. I cite the work of Ryan Gander and Keith Tyson for their grasp on manufactured, polished or played with languages and experimental methodologies. I also question how work of that calibre can demand a level of respect and engender a sense of authority for its particular voice: the resounding yet questionable logic imbued within these works incites me.
My practice aims to explore the idea of the individual coping with problems either encountered, or the fabricated kind we often produce ourselves. I am intrigued as to how we visualise things we cannot comprehend or put our finger on, and simultaneously will definitely have an opinion, relationship or certain degree of understanding of that particular phenomenon- even if we are not getting the whole picture. How could this kind of assumption/shortfall be of significance or more still- greater philosophical implication?
A millisecond is all that is needed for change, and ironically, monotony can instigate progress or alteration. A world full of contradictions is natural- where so many languages are present. Interconnectedness is both a help and a hindrance. There is no black & white due to the sum of everything being muddy grey. Calcite and Kase.
I grew up in a rural part of Devon where the landscape occupied my attention and was accessible to me from the off. It seemed both wondrous and problematic; I like to think that there are systems and patterns that hold everything together, although, not to sound too pessimistic, I already begin to see a futility in trying to comprehend the links, given the obvious overbearing complexity of it all. Acknowledging that they exist, infinitesimally, and alluding to a potential of exploring them is more fruitful in my eyes. Even though I am inexperienced in the field, Science is the closest belief system I align myself with, likely due to its promise of answers and empirical reasoning- its essential positivism. I try to plod along through the churned-up-tractor-lanes of scientific and mathematical theory, however I am more interested in trying to be like a bear in snow, minding its own business. Tracks can be followed, but when or if the snow melts, the evidence of venture is somewhat unclear to anyone else.
My interest lies in the seemingly constant desire of the human mind to question, assess, judge and to evaluate- empirically speaking. To make sense of something, so we can make sense of it sensibly, so it is sensible, time and then time again; this is both the classification and the pedantry, in light of the anomaly/phenomenon (because we alwyays should get the right end of the stick). Despite starting off with universal, generic and popularist questions, the work manifests itself through very particular and refined trajectories, which may trigger subconscious associations. Less literal connections with ideas purposefully attempt to communicate through a private/esoteric language, subjectively translating through forms of mimesis what I feel I see around me, but also illuminating links, thoughts and interrogations which may be tacitly shared by others. Within the work there may be both clearly visible and muted echelons of relations; these will perhaps give clues as to the tangible relationships as well as those more unprecedented ones. Fundamentally and more recently, I have taken to contemplating limits, capacities, and superfluous information, in paradigms and cold hard data, which more often than not reveals itself in a descriptive erratic scene.
WHY.
I enjoy the ambiguous, gaps in information, things that do not seem to add up; essentially, puzzles and games to solve. I think everybody does to an extent, but sometimes just trying to solve them is as satisfying and valid as their solution. The proposal that we privilege objects is a cornerstone to my practice; we have a tendency to build narrative around them, fabricating both a history and a projected future. I aim to produce multiple components that generate a sense of value and ascribed significance through investment in the making process; so that not only do the objects speak of devotion to material quality, level of facture and replication, but also that they document human time and contemplation and are in their very essence of a particular vernacular. The potential of an enriched experience brought about by lengthier periods of contemplation than might at first appear to be demanded by the work, is symptomatic of my fascination with an elusive denouement. In light of this, conflict in the multiplication of outcomes and methodologies denies the aspiration towards the simple and the sublime.
The visible administration of collected, readymade elements and fabricated structures combines to produce an overall physical/emotional mindset- In this instance, it just so happens upon a kind of miasma tic, one of interconnectivity and endurance, where everything appears to have the capacity to link and make determinable sense. This type of compilation may seem to those on the outside exercising pure subjectivity and open interpretation, as a kind of dyspraxic array, in as much as the cognitive links between pieces are not what might at first be presumed to be conventional. The contradiction possibly lies in the binary oppositions I have to assert in order to suggest this kind of complexity, yet succinct order. I cite the work of Ryan Gander and Keith Tyson for their grasp on manufactured, polished or played with languages and experimental methodologies. I also question how work of that calibre can demand a level of respect and engender a sense of authority for its particular voice: the resounding yet questionable logic imbued within these works incites me.
My practice aims to explore the idea of the individual coping with problems either encountered, or the fabricated kind we often produce ourselves. I am intrigued as to how we visualise things we cannot comprehend or put our finger on, and simultaneously will definitely have an opinion, relationship or certain degree of understanding of that particular phenomenon- even if we are not getting the whole picture. How could this kind of assumption/shortfall be of significance or more still- greater philosophical implication?
A millisecond is all that is needed for change, and ironically, monotony can instigate progress or alteration. A world full of contradictions is natural- where so many languages are present. Interconnectedness is both a help and a hindrance. There is no black & white due to the sum of everything being muddy grey. Calcite and Kase.
I grew up in a rural part of Devon where the landscape occupied my attention and was accessible to me from the off. It seemed both wondrous and problematic; I like to think that there are systems and patterns that hold everything together, although, not to sound too pessimistic, I already begin to see a futility in trying to comprehend the links, given the obvious overbearing complexity of it all. Acknowledging that they exist, infinitesimally, and alluding to a potential of exploring them is more fruitful in my eyes. Even though I am inexperienced in the field, Science is the closest belief system I align myself with, likely due to its promise of answers and empirical reasoning- its essential positivism. I try to plod along through the churned-up-tractor-lanes of scientific and mathematical theory, however I am more interested in trying to be like a bear in snow, minding its own business. Tracks can be followed, but when or if the snow melts, the evidence of venture is somewhat unclear to anyone else.