There is an interesting interplay between the surface of the object and surfaces of the image and my attention to the object and its physicallity does not diminish though a drawing or an extended drawing process. This retaining I see as digesting meaning, and how with objects the meaning can be unpalatable, sour, dry or equally like fast food quick and forgotten. The pace of the object is important in its reading and its digestion to enable learning encounters rather than a fleeting experience.
Reconfiguring stuff so that while we recognise and anchor ourselves we are then likely to be destabilized by the unknown in the known. I have learnt that there always needs to be a hook, where we (participant/learner) can tether ourselves to when the process of new information that may challenge or corrupt our knowns is in proximity. The - NESS- of the object or material and the -NESS - of the subject material need to be determined before they are unraveled[MM1] . Yes, the ‘becoming’ is interesting and through my reading there is so much movement around actually being in something, that the language becomes visually evocative. ‘being – in the event, the events on your surface, thoughts within the act, states of event. ………They are all interruptions or ruptures, aren’t they? (Atkinson 2011. p14) 'The ordinary can turn on you'. Kathleen Stewart (2007) Ordinary Affects. 'We learn in order to add to, extend, or change the structure of our expectations[MM2] , that is, our meaning perspectives and schemes: learning to change these structures of meaning is fundamentally transformative. Mezirow (1991) Meaning perspectives. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. There is an interesting interplay between the surface of the object and surfaces of the image and my attention to the object and its physicality does not diminish though a drawing or an extended drawing process[MM3] . I am interested in surfaces through an extended idea of surface, although I feel that then everything becomes phenomenological. There is obviously a difference between the representation within the drawing and the drawing as a form and object. The illusion of a 2d space isn’t the surface I am preoccupied by although I am interested in the status of the 2d object and the object when inhabiting the same space. I have been thinking more about my collaborative drawing research as I continue to use drawings as objects or drawn objects. The drawing in, drawing out, drawing from …. drawing breath all resonate with the process of the objects and using them. As I mention later in the blog. Extend, exhale etc. I am constantly drawn back into hermeneutics and the play with or preferencing of language which in turn pokes at the new materialist position of preferencing matter. I think this is the custard and the plastacine. Curdle. Maybe my failed objects curdle? No middle, no suspension of disbelief as the matter is too distinguishable with no mixing point? I asked the students at BCU to read a Karen Barad paper before I ran the session with them and one woman remarked that while she enjoyed the paper she thought there was an irony that it took a so many words to explore the importance of matter over language. I think the mimicking in my practice relates to the idea of the decoy rather than metaphor - this seems to become more focused through the drawing. I use the term drawing in its broadest capacity but as it is very much part of my thinking and mapping I tend to think of drawing out and drawing from. As the corporeal becomes more central the drawing in becomes breath for me and the expectation or preparation that that evokes. I see decoy as a seduction rather than a truth. The objects are metaphorical and I have always named them as such but I am interested in the idea of decoy in two ways, first and most literally that some of the drawings I do try and replace the object but secondly, I think of decoy in relation to the spectator of the objects. My other text goes on to talk about the sceptic and the objects being seen as alchemic, or that they are drawn from a bag of tricks and that I (or the facilitator) can be seen as shaman or trickster. Then the decoy out shadows the potential metaphor. There is a sense of being duped. This is where the learning is thwarted through logic rather than true encounter. I need to unpack this further but there is something particular about the ‘dumbness’ of the decoy that fascinates me in opposition to the pedagogical art object. When a participant (usually 1 in every group) is reluctant, skeptical, scared of the potential uncertainties the objects throw up there is an intransience that develops and stops thought. I feel the objects beyond a connection point on the body, not just prosethically. equally I feel my teaching as an all embodied /disruptive /enhancing adaptions of other. The prosthetic s that are beyond compensatory become ‘enfleshments’ (Garoian 2013 P124) and more bodily vital than a literal prosthetic. They are embodiment's and materials. Massumi (2002, 217) speaks of the body as the ‘original prostheses’ so in this definition the ‘felt’ becomes more relevant. 'It is not enough to say that one is conscious of something. One is also conscious of something being something' Percy Geertz, 1973, p.215. Making meaning. p 16 Tansformative Dimensions of Adult Learning I think a phenomenological position is driving the questions around the process of habit, encounter and knowledge.
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 |