As a reflection from the talk week this year, I had very informative and positive feedback which has precipitated my practice with ongoing and various tangents and ideas to follow through in developing and devolving myself in the ideas of identity and personal embodiment. As a reflection throughout another postgraduate students critique, we discussed the problematic phrase of writing or words in art as a confusing and interference with the art itself. Something which I would like to understand thoroughly and question why it is essentially problematic.
Although we discussed that writing can be problematic, two of the Artists involved in the critique both suggested to take this liberation to the opposite extreme by exploring the relentless possibilities and encounter of the work by exaggerating the diaristic mentality into a physical stream of diaristic words. One that would encounter, spacial facades, installation, time, embodiment, severalty, and conceptual mark making. All of which are conformed in this continuous stream of mark making and diaristic assertion of which we acutely assume is truthfully and accurately displaying the conceptual representation of the artists identity.
The encounter of the work is played in a push/pull negotiation as the viewer is pushed away from the work to encounter the over all play and ambiguity of the size and spacial relations which loose detail to the diaristic writing becoming unreadable. The encounter therefor emphasises the exaggeration of the diaristic form rather than the content which is only played into the viewers conceptual encounter when pulled closely to the work to which segments of the diarist writing are read, rather than the labour some acquired effort to read the whole script which becomes dislodging to the mentality of the desired encounter with the work. The viewer can become equally aware to the conceptual ideas within the diaristic writing by obtaining the key words in a small segment such as identity, mental, disorder, which frame ideas much more abstract than the work itself does.
The work which I also experimented with rotating the work to the opposite side to play with the frustration of words that appear unreadable. This is evident in one of the images above which I have left a partial and controlled segment of the work rolled back, which evidently only exposes that section of script for the viewer to interpret, and leaving the rest of the script visually evident but dislodging and frustratingly unreadable. This may work more superior to the work telling the viewer everything when displayed directly to the front, as the viewer can form their own perspective and idea of there position in the work appearing far more connected than displayed directly to the viewer. This exists because a space is narrated sitting between what is told in this diaristic script and the viewers response and encounter, which appears disconnected.