Jo lent over the barrior, positioned her body over the line to see looked closely but overstepped the mark. She is held behind the line and frustrated by its delination of space, of thinking and of connection. She wears her sleeves and her encased hands are then held again between her knees, as though doubly confined. The top of her body enters the space of the art work but her feet remain in the territory of the viewer. Later when she has removed her sleeve and has started to move with her object in the space, she positions it silently over the line, or under the cord of the corden. The object takes the same amount of space that her body did when it lent forward in the other space. The object points at the art work, tries to meet it, - she had done the same with her body. She is told to move the object back, but the object is only looking at the other object just as she had done. Behind her a gallery visitor is touching a sculpture and being told she cannot touch anything in the space. 'there were no signs saying I couldn't touch' I overhear her say. 'It goes without saying' said the woman from the security team. Jo comments below about the pull of the objects in her hands, the objects that I give her. I insight it, I create the pull, allow it, hope for it. But how can we seek out the moments of ownership of a disobedience to a tradtional interpretative state and yet adhere to the values and conditions of the spaces that the art and we inhabit. I have created a magnet of pull and push, it can annoy and disturb, so how do I sit with this ethically. In our first meeting at Tate we had unravlled a line, corden a dilineation of ribbon in the turbine hall. We had named the teritory or claimed it as our own, this was our yellow line. Was this new action by Jo the same, was the line of the gallery rope seen as someone elses ownership that stopped her from the experinece that she wanted? This time I had printed out the photo of the turbine hall and the ribbon and had sewn a climbing hold onto the image. It struck me that after Jo had held the altered photo and said that she wanted to take it home ; 'you can just give this to me now' she had said ...she had then moved in the space with her object and made her own climbing hold....foot hold. ....grasp onto the space that we occupied. The back of the image/object showed a puncture. This puncture was the stitches that held the climbing hold. The stitch was not concealed, tidied up, or trimmed. The puncture was visable. Jo : Thinking very simply about what happens when Kimberley gives me an object to take round a gallery; I hold the object I feel the object I make a connection with the object I move about the gallery I move around the work I hold my object, I feel my object. Then I get a feeling that makes me want to connect with the work My object becomes a conduit between me and the artwork. The holding of the object draws me in toward the work It feels like I am being drawn in It is a strong feeling A pulling in toward the work The barriers are extremely frustrating They are an interruption to a strong intuitive feeling of wanting to connect with the work. The circuit needs to be completed by placing my object with/on/next to the artwork. It does depend on the object that I am holding Some seem to have much stronger magnetism than others. Magnetism toward me and magnetism toward the artwork. These photos were taken when Jo joined group 2 of my research participants at Tate. Bringing with her the object that I had made, it interrupted, her thoughts were interrupted. She crossed the line.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Kimberley FosterKimberley's practice as an artist is pedagogical, it doesn’t just reference learning, it plays with, embodies and encourages learning at its core. The objects consider ideas of collaboration and authorship, discussions about touch and encounter, and bring into active consideration issues of learning within social and participatory practices. Archives
October 2018
Categories |