Friday, December 17, 2010

needs for the continuation of the project....

I am needing a more concrete outcome to my motivations for continuing with this project. Speaking from my own corner I want to further engage with the more salient aspects of the collaborative process in considering the artifact or object that occurs most commonly with art production.
Please tell me differently.

'Please tell me differently' is for me a beginning of sorts into considering the disconnect with an image rich environment and a labored constructed story, that is painting.

While I am looking more towards this here is a link to the best 450 open-source collaboration sans high end programs, that shows just what can be done with an idea.


  1. to get a more concrete outcome, the project should maybe be more concrete, have more concrete aims, and certain methods to achieve those, without disregarding to leave space for the uncertain, surprising, coincidence etc. but there is maybe the need for a more solid framework. as sue and you actually already mentioned a couple of times. sorry, that i did not really respond a lot to that; since you and sue initiated this, i guessed you must have a picture of what you expect and you’d figure something out.

    “considering the disconnect with an image rich environment and a labored constructed story”? which means what exactly? which disconnection/interruption? differences of how people perceive their environment, that is rich in images, and the way people perceive art works/ paintings.
    the disconnect between the beholder and the constructor?
    or in the production of a piece/ a painting? is it important that the beholder sees the same or a similar story in your painting as you had in mind/ intended? for me as a viewer this is definitely not my first question. and it is one of the most exciting things for me to see the different stories that occur when artworks are perceived by various people. the stories that are created when the piece works as a kind of mirror. there is already an image in this mirror, but with every person standing in front of it there’s another layer/ filter on top of it.
    we deal with images of any kind in everyday life; this daily practice is an essential basis for how one approaches a painting. different environment – different images – different background info etc. since it’s not only about the images one gains, but as well depending on knowledge, information, that can be made visual or the other way around.

    perhaps i am so confused by this sentence because i think a disconnect(ion) needs to have a direct reference to a human being. and it says “environment” and “story/painting”.

    please explain.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. Extremely perceptive, as per usual. Juli you have touched on the major points of the differences that I feel when thinking about painting and interaction. I see the majority of painting/if not all new painting in a mediated form, hence the image rich comment and the disconnect. I wish for the time where i can visit the work in situ. I had the beginning opportunity to do so in July-August this year, but this still was brief.
    Sue and I met this morning, which provoked my comments. We talked essentially about the things that you have brought up with the image maker and observer, the disconnect/surprise that happens when intention has another layer of idea/story added.
    I was speaking with Christopher (Pete and Frankie's friend from Berlin) and we were talking of the different problems of words and painting. Christopher said that a European would feel that their intelligence would be offended if there were words in a painting. Does that fit here too, with the project.

  4. if the project is offending?
    which European would be offended – the European painter or the beholder?
    whosoever, i as a viewer am not offended by words that consider the works (or by what should who be offended?), but often i prefer making the personal experience at first, since otherwise i might feel manipulated and am not sure about what i really see myself and what others see for me.

    there are no words IN the painting. but in order to mediate and to exchange thoughts and even to express our own thoughts for ourselves of course we use language, words and form texts, as well as we have other images in mind and particular feelings towards what we see. and i think this part of mediation is important if one wants to support that many kinds of people get encouraged to approach artworks.
    when words/ text and picture are connected it is one offer/ suggestion etc. but when both, text and picture, are perceived by people there is the possibility of a wide range of different experiences/ interpretations.
    or do you mean “words in a painting” literally? you don’t, do you?
    i just talked to my flatmate marie and asked her what she as an actress and with an interest in art on a personal level, as she said, expects from going to an exhibition and viewing paintings (since we did that together last weekend). she is also interested in both: having her own personal experience and thoughts on the works, but she would also really like to know more about the artist’s story/ intentions, at least more hints, she said.

    well, the reason why you initiated the project was to build a platform for getting various input and exchange with others to put this into your work or as you said to start painting from this and getting into a process of transforming the impressions that various people have and that you get from these. but shall it be also about showing part of the process that led to the art work? or is it just an invisible basis? but you also said that it should be about making the process visible, didn’t you?

  5. In regards to Michael's sentence about a disconnect to an image rich environment: Our environment is so rich in images, it is images full stop! It is which images make us feel alive, which do we pull out of the flow of our environment, of our minds? Which do we capture in a photograph, in paint, that is the challenge... Images connect to other images, and sometimes there are these rare and wonderful moments of connection, of recognition...
    Barbara Stafford wrote that 'when discrete features of our surroundings become salient so that we attend to them, they become imaginable, memorable, enduring. By segmenting forms from a continual flow, redundant details from working memory are simplified and brought into higher order or symbolic regularity as images. In an image one recognizes and holds mental content in an external form. Then one distributes it in a connectionist network. To connect, it has to be sensed in similar ways by people, as forms and figures that seem to awaken memories of a distant cognitive heritage'.
    (Barbara Maria Stafford, Echo Objects: The Cognitive Work of Images, Chicago: 2007)