I really enjoyed doing the two day practise workshop with Susan Barnet. This is because she was really fun and friendly to work with and was a great encouragement when we were all developing our ideas to do with sculptural aspects which could relate to object, human body etc. I really enjoyed the introductions into a range of artists we could look deeper into and could relate to current interests that we look into through the idea of performance and sculptural art. These involved artists such as, Erwin Wurm who looked into the idea of engagement with the physical body for example, altering the object e.g. the human body and working in a range of positions to enhance his idea. When looking at his work questions would come up such as,
- How does it take for the viewer to engage with the relationship of the object?
- How long would the length of the object be and why?
This intrigued me because by looking at his one minute sculptures it would allow me to observe the series of tools and objects which could be used to follow a certain instruction. These tools would be exhibited as if they were sculptures, functional objects (altered objects). Furthermore I become interested in looking at Leah Capaldi’s work because of the way that it linked to femininity, had a narrative engagement which had a beginning, middle and end and would instantly have a collaborative adventure. Questions for me that I would instantly gain when looking at the artist’s work would be:-
- Can the sculpture become a narrative?
- Can sculpture have a duration?
Looking into other artists such as, Trisha Brown “Floor of the forest, 1970/2012/2013” which consisted of a sculptural steel frame holding up a web of ropes that have been threaded- clothing that is weaved into the ropes. The performance starts from one side, the continuation of motion which would connect to the idea of connective machinery moving across the stretched ropes which would represent the idea of gravity (looking into mass of pushing/ compressing into). Richard Sarah another intriguing artist that would look into the sculptural view through the idea of supporting the amount of weight. Lygia Clark (1966-68) using the term of “relational objects” that related to people would encourage and stimulate activity with the participants which had no instructions (non verbal communication). The objects would become enacted with two people, working at least one other person. Another artist I enjoyed looking into was Robert Morris who focused on the body space and motion of things. These ideas would involve durational activity, shape of the body responding to the object and looking into the activation of the relationship between the body and the object.
These two days of doing the workshop will allowed me to develop my ideas because it helped me to work in the idea of collaboration and discussing/ investigating ideas with other students into how we wanted to show our ideas towards the audience. By working in groups of 4 and working with another student during these two days it allowed me to focus on the idea of sculpture through two different viewpoints. The first viewpoint/ ideas was working through the dynamics of the human body and in what ways it could be controlled for instance having 3 people on the outside controlling the actions and one person in the middle to find ways of responding the actions used through the use of non-verbal communication. Here are some videos and photos from this idea and how it developed.
Furthermore the ideas and developments expanded throughout the day when the group I was working with decided to work on the dynamics of the human body through the idea of movement, motion, time and space. This involved working on different levels and see in what ways we could develop these processes and materials through the idea of photographing, video recording and seeing in what way we could take our work to the next level. Here are some photos and a video into what ways we enhanced our work through the idea of documentation to show the audience into what decisions and changes we made to our work.
Furthermore on day 2 we developed our ideas even further to see how we could expand on our ideas for instance, working more into the dynamics of the human body, using different paces such as, fast, slow, fast. Me and Lisa looked further into the dynamics of the human body and worked with string placing it in all different areas of the studio we worked in and see how we could attach it to ourselves which in a way created a journey/ memory. Talking to other students in the class definitely helped us to develop our idea because it allowed us to make a variety of changes into the way we wanted to present our work towards the audience. These are some examples of how our development took place during the hours of the lunchtime period at Chelsea. When looking at the documentation their is the use of shadows, movement, motion, which directly links to artists such as, Yvonne Rainer and Peter Sarkaisian. Here are some examples of photos we took.
I was really fascinated by some other ideas that other art students came up with, which intrigued me more into the movement and notion of the human body and in what ways it could be manipulated, transformed and explored. I enjoyed working with Susan Barnet and other year 1 students because it allowed me to look into a variety of perspectives into how the human body could be presented whether through sculpture, objects, collaboration. No matter what form its presented in they all intrigue me into digging deeper into the human body and discovering even more pathways that it could be displayed. Here are some more photos and videos from other students who I worked with and how their final ideas come out over the two days that we worked together.