不知道 i don’t know

Next week we’re back at college for the Spring term and straightaway we have a presentation to do for our Lab session.

This follows on from our initial presentation back at the beginning of the course, designed to allow us to introduce ourselves to our colleagues by the selection of six objects through which we could talk about our backgrounds and motives for being on the course.

This time around it’s a review (or “reprise”) of the original presentation, with the effect of progress made over the previous term. Again, the format is to bring a number of objects. We’ll be looking at transformations in our approach to the course and possible lines of development.

—

For the original presentation I talked around the following objects (they are followed by some bracketed notes on how I accounted for their inclusion):-

• DVD: Jacques Tati’s Playtime (my sense of humour, modernism, architecture in general)
• Some Monopoly houses (suburbia – my upbringing, architecture)
• my iPod (music, electronica)
• A small maquette for a sculpture (lovely objects, my interest in art)
• 2 of my own artworks (the work I was producing while at College)

—

For the forthcoming presentation the main theme (or problematic) I want to talk about are my search for a hook within the course subject-matter on which I could hang my own (potential) work. This has only very recently started to become clear.

Up until the end of last term I think I was somewhat at a loss as to how the course actually intersected with my own interests. The main problem being that I’m not sure what my interests are at this point, which obviously makes any kind of progression difficult. This has always been my problem – deciding on this course was seen by myself as more of a move away from a negative rather than towards a positive.

But the presentation that I did with Ian in the last week of term clarified some things for me. Certainly what I enjoyed most in this presentation was the analysis of the presentation of the Beuys work at the tate, and—perhaps more pertinently—the representation of that analysis through diagrams and performance.

Relating this back to previous work I’ve done (specifically activities I was initiating while I was at Middlesex University doing my first degree)—the writing, and performance of those writings; the concern with space and perceptions of space; the systems of awareness and control of space—I can see a method for the future forming.

Another thing which is in the process of bubbling up is my interest in Deleuze and Guattari’s writings. Right now I’m attempting to write an essay on ‘the refrain,’ specifically where mentioned in A Thousand Plateaus, and am finding it quite ‘interesting’ (and challenging). For me, it’s a new way of thinking, so I’ll be keen to see where it leads me.

I think those are the two major results of this course so far. They are both effects of extreme and ongoing trauma for my patterns of thought, displacing me from what I already know to new pastures, potentially deterritorialising my thought (I have a feeling that that word will become more common in my writing from now on – this being one of the side-effects of reading D&G).

So, as far as the presentation goes, there is a distinct difference between the first and forthcoming one. The first was concentrating on personal, anecdotal evidence, while the next will be focused on the course itself and it’s effect on my thinking. The objects to present remain to be decided – books would be too obvious, so I must come up with something a little more intelligent to show. A difficult proposition.

Can anyone really be certain about anything?

I admire those who are certain about their choices, who say: “This is what I want to do, I have found an end-point and everything I do is working towards this.” If I was to say this, I would be a victim of a gross misapprehension of my own thoughts and I can’t help but think this applies to other people as well. But how arrogant is that – how would I know, how would they know without a level of introspection that in the process would stall any further certainty.

But, at least for myself, certainty is a state of not considering all the options. This obviously leads to a condition of continual indecision and as a result I am only able to judge a course of action by what it is not. If I don’t want to do it, I will pursue another option, and so, eventually, by a very uneconomical route, I will reach a conclusion.

Another option is that sometimes you just have to do something. And at that point every option becomes homogenized, “a reduction of difference to absolute indifference, equivalence, interchangeability (what Jean Baudrillard calls ‘implosion’).”1

1. Craig Owens, “The Discourse of Others: Feminists and Postmodernism,” in Hal Foster, ed., The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays in Postmodern Culture (New York: The New Press, 1998), p. 66.

…and this is what I said to Goldsmiths:

As much as Art excites me intensely and has been an interest and practice throughout my life, I struggle to understand and come to terms with aspects of it. I see this course at Goldsmiths as an environment in which to address and build upon those struggles so that I can develop an informed practice. I can see the course enhancing my intellectual resources and abilities, allowing me to articulate my excitement practically and meaningfully.

I pretty much ran the full gamut of artistic practices in an attempt to define my artistic practice, ultimately leading to conceptual/critical activities by the end of my BA. During my final year I worked on pieces which targeted various ready-made situations within the college, including my colleagues’ works, the library and gallery spaces. The resulting pieces were accompanied by or comprised of a series of talks addressing my problems with the situations and Art in general.

During the degree I was heavily involved with the work experience programme run by the college, spending time with artists, a couple of commercial galleries and an artist’s agent. I originally chose to do this as it keyed into my interests regarding the workings of the art-world. I was aware that here was the site of a broader perspective on art and the art-world than was available to me within the confines of the college.

This led me to work with the artist Peter Fend whose (semi-)deliberate conflictual activity and aesthetic production I had already become aware of and found of interest. We began a dialogue which led to my inviting him to exhibit in my Degree Show. We more or less worked in parallel producing this event, the final form of which was an installation of his pieces with a small book of Peter’s and my own writings. Perhaps predictably bringing another artist to exhibit was not popular with the University, but I was very fortunate to have understanding tutors who defended my work.

Leaving college led to a crisis of confidence in my work. This, in combination with my personal circumstances encouraged me to settle into employment as a graphic/web designer. A little over a year ago my circumstances changed again leaving me free to re-assess and reinitialize my concern with art.

On a practical level, the PGDip in Contemporary Art History will provide a strong basis on which to build my future activities. Goldsmiths always had a great reputation when I was at Middlesex University, and I enjoyed my visits to the site – there seemed to be a good community there. The fact that this course is concentrates on Contemporary Art is a definite bonus given my areas of interest and the College’s location in a major hub of the art-world make Goldsmiths a logical and attractive choice for me.

…and they said: “accepted.”

<sarcasm>Finally!</sarcasm> A personality test geared towards visually literate people.