projection and screen, perception and layer or depth, perspective and peripheral, association and recognition(all def.s), connection and reflection – these elements are/have been part of my continuum for sometime if not longer, if not always, if not for all. recently in thinking about ways to render the segments of my imagination and abstract into tangible forms, i was thinking about creating or capturing imagery that can be or already is high contrast. this high contrast can then be projected or shown on a t.v. screen. i have not tried projection yet, but the glass and illumination of the t.v. screen along with paper over the glass or a distance away, creates an effect that i like. the effect changes with the awareness or knowledge of the presence of the tv and without the knowledge. this brings to point the way in which our perception and associations (amoung others) change. it can point out how we can train ourselves to get past these attributes or how much we are not aware of the influence of these attributes.
the idea that art is in the product or specific process of said product is ludicrous – is nonsense to me. sure i may be challenging agreed on accepted definitions of academia or society-entire, or even in the colloquial influence, but what i feel or believe is true to me despite and considering all that everyone else collectively or individually says feels or acts upon. what i feel or believe changes, is organic, so i have what could be called a “reality based on an average” of my own influence. because i feel that each of our realities, each of what we know is real is based on what influences us directly or indirectly. and the less influence a thing has on or with us, obvious it has a corresponding affect on what our reality ultimately is to us.
hearsay is face value, and is tool besides. that is that, one’s own experience will produce the trust involved which enables us to accept hearsay, or similar, as “reality.”
i can sense the expression, the art i feel is one that has no singular purpose. mirroring existence and life, expression is one facet or segment of the entire but it reflects the whole in its part and parcel. the idea i have coalescing at the moment is one that has been somewhat reoccurring, in relative form, for a decade or so but that has taken on a variation in form. in the past i have expressed this relative way of expression (high contrast abstract) by photocopy. taking my scribbles or the random compositions i find continually (geometric shapes crossing with flowing lines and various coloured blockings and movement seen through a sixth floor window, the reflections of and the shapes beyond mixing to create a moment of inspired expression) and creating from these “scenes” or “visions” a palette or basic language that i can then articulate further ideas with. this is done by copy and enlarging or shrinking or darkening or lightening or degrading edge or quality. meaning or homage or experience, or whatever one may or wants to call it, is inferred or captured or not. i can photocopy and enlarge a street schematic of brooklyn and then, in reviewing all of my gathered bits the ideas and feelings i have, begin to slowly or abruptly coalesce in front of me. it is like talking on a mindstream, without (too much) thought or direction, and finding revelation, awareness, or epiphany from what you are saying in those moments. one can delight from one’s own voice and get somewhat of a removed perspective about themselves in this way. the photocopied pieces come together or suggest new direction. i am the interpreter of this opera, the manager perhaps, not it’s conductor.
i love the texture-entire of the photocopy (the overall presence of the photocopied “product”/result), the utilization of the psychological dynamic of perspective and association to give a new face to, to see the greener grass, to be on the “good” side of the tracks, to offer reflection and awareness to importance, charm, value, to be given the “fresh outlook” on life and it’s components, to deconstruct complacency and routine without complete destruction or unbalanced\unnatural alteration of the individual essence. this same ability to alter the perception or point of view of a human occurs in many things or situations. and like photography (its nature and product being instantly abstract) the photocopy flattens or creates a more static form of recognizable presence or pattern. the same can be said for all forms of expression. they all turn the vast gatherings of experience into concise tangible forms that are more easily transferred, received, consumed, and digested than would otherwise be.
likewise the membrane or screen idea i’ve recently refined also “flattens.” the screen captures various texture and movement but mainly tone. and with the articulation or arrangement of elements behind the screen the resultant “captured projection” creates a relatively “living” exchange and interpretation of expression. in addition to other objects or elements connected with the screen’s capture(everything involved in the singular work/piece) this creates a viable and rich tool for what my rhythms reveal.
light must be involved for the screen idea to work. the “screen” material also plays an important role. in my initial experiments, simple photocopy paper (80% white i believe) was used to capture the imagery from the television tube. the texture and/or fiber content of the paper had a good effect.
the dimensional element of the work product i gravitate towards continues to be relatively three dimensional in presence. elements not element(singular) and multi-perspective or peripheral in nature or presence. that is that, the pieces are speaking in sentences that are read by interaction and not just passive or complacent presentation or audience. of course, what is being shared or captured in any work i do (and i believe any expression that anyone does) is fine-tuned to myself/the individual interpreting and rendering the expression. the use of one form or one series or type, unless that is the natural “speech” emanating from your mind, seems limiting. to me, the utilization of what is available in one’s environment to enable action is what is “right for the job.” whether or not we recognize, are aware of, or choose to act on what we believe is “right” is another thing entirely. tact and common sense (amoung other things) may override or temper our feelings versus what is logical or “right.” so the flat singular object(canvas or flat wall-hanging), as has become the static-and-staple convention associated with expression-forms, is not one that has spoken to me for a long time. when it did speak to me it was only in that brief bit of time that one has when experiencing new forms/ideas/knowledge. still i see how prevalent and accepted this “currency” or presentation is in the continuum of human culture and awareness. but with my beliefs, i do not ban or limit. i should rephrase to say that “i cannot” ban or limit. i am interpreter of existence. i do not dictate what is or isn’t. even if i tried to enact control, the resultant unbalanced state would right itself furiously. control is a misconception humans have. this is my belief based on feelings based on my observations and perception-entire. it is not control we have over our life, it is a percentage of influence. the expression i sense that comes from me is rich with this idea. it reflects this perspective.