understanding my conceptual practice so far/ MA conclusions

How do all of these ideas underpin the conceptual nature of my practice? opposed to a direct evocation to form and texture, my current body of work ‘small worlds’ could be described as ambiguous, almost fictitious in its contrived representation of geological landforms. Rooted in glaze experimentation and manipulation my work is ingrained in material sensibility and utopic romanticisms; perhaps delusions of the ‘perfect’ glazed specimen. I see my work as a modern counterpoint to the scholar rocks discussed and featured above. Seen below the work is often displayed on ceramic tablets not to dissimilar to the scholar rocks themselves, a gestural tribute to the ancient art you could say. For myself the term natural is something that is masked in mysticism. The elicit nature of my work much like the term natural itself is shrouded in ambiguity to allow the audience to impose their own subjective feelings, sensibilities’ and ideas of what the work/composition might be.

Inspired by my own personal and generational nostalgia (90s/early 2000s) achieving the perfect colours and process itself is a rigorous battle to achieve material textures that represent my immaterial and material memories. These memories conjure themselves as animated representations of volcanos and meteorites from watching endless hours of childhood television. Juxtaposed, are sensuous experiences exploring my dads building sites and the objects that dominate that space. These objects are often mundane oddities; discarded bricks, scaffolding, roof tiles and bags of plaster. My work draws direct inspiration from these oddities and you will see that many of the objects and plinths displayed within my composition are manufactured from brick clay or imitations of particular building materials. As memory itself is a consistent recollection of past experiences, what we know of the past can never be true and thus like Chinese whispers these material representations become distorted in their configuration. Like many of the objects discussed throughout this paper the original idea or experience of an object through time has transformed and the memory of an original object is very different to the modern counterpart. Although incredibly complex to understand when dissecting the various elements of memory, we as beings through evaluation are able to understand a small glimpse of what makes us tick, why we make the aesthetic choices we do and understand that a lot of the choices we make are both innate, learnt and in response to our imagination and environment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s