Hi Kimberley I continue to think about the day at SCVA. From the object as gift, and the notion of handing over, as well as the hand of the maker. Handing over the maker's hand, the object as mere vehicle. Then got to thinking how objects are invested with so much knowledge and information and how we physically respond and interact with this information. On Friday, after selecting the Chillida print as a resonance with my gift, I started to think about the ways the 3D object is different to the 2D work in terms of agency. Their respective tactility is a real issue here - the Auerbach at SCVA is tactile but not touching a 2D work seems so much more acceptable than not touching a 3D piece. Why is this, because we can get a hold of an object? Put our arms/hands/fingers around it whereas a painting rejects us and pushes us away? But then I was painting away in the studio yesterday (I am currently working in egg tempera) noticing the ritual mixing of the egg emulsion and the grinding of the pigment, and finally the gloopy surface of the paint felt through the brush as it is put onto the gessoed board and somehow that seemed just like caressing an object. Is that experience purely for the privilege of the painter? Caroline
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 |