Tuesday, October 12, 2010


Some thoughts.
Narrative and the complex articulations that occur when unpacking or making imagery.
Many now see the use of pluralism of source/methodology in contemporary art production as a less than satisfactory way of expressing themselves, while for others it is a valuable tool in understanding their own current historical situation.
I am interested in exploring these concerns in collaborative works that consider process, developing processes and material concerns that release the maker from a type of fetisization.


  1. I just had to come clear with the word 'fetish': according to the dictionary two meanings are 'an inanimate object worshiped for its supposed magical powers or because it is considered to be inhabited by a spirit'. And: 'a course of action to which one has an excessive and irrational commitment'. I am wondering why and if it is really so bad to be excessively committed?

  2. No it is not bad to be committed, but the term has a negative connotation to painting as painting requires an understanding of a methodology that is not directly (as such) related to the outcome, hence the 'magical powers' of painting to render the recognizable, the representational. Their is a growing call for painting to be hamstrung as it needs skill and fosters a kind of hierarchical specialization that excludes some practitioners based on technical aptitude. Painting is somehow seen as undemocratic because there is still and aesthetic associated with the outcome, in a ratio that might be over compensated.
    The fetishization is in-turn negatively attributed such that the audience will not ever explore beyond what the prejudice of the eye will allow.