What was your first reaction to the concept of Image Object – what initial ideas did you have in response to it?
Initially I wasn’t sure what I was asked to do or how to tackle the task, but when I started experimenting with the guidance of the tutor the concept became clear, and I started to develop a series of work.
Can you identify one of the contemporary artists within the presentation that you found most interesting and why? What does their work ‘do’ and ‘how’?
I was drawn to two of the works in the presentation slides Image Object - digital – firstly the work of Cory Arcangel – Super Mario clouds, 2002
I was drawn to this primarily because of the digital medium and I found the idea of projecting an image onto a surface such as a wall interesting. I found the potential for a variety of outcomes intriguing, depending on the texture and colour of the wall surface, the lighting in the room where is shown and the digital quality of the image - which somehow made the world ephemeral.
The other one that caught my attention was the work of Tony Ouster in his exhibition at the Lisson Gallery, London in 2003
This is quite humorous but at the same time unsettling, mainly I think because of the eyes. I also like idea of projecting images onto unusual shapes to see what happens.
- In your opinion, which of your experimental outcomes has been least effective and why?
In my opinion the virus in the box is not very effective as there is an incongruent distortion of the shape of the virus when projected inside the box, and the image and the object don’t converse with each other. Though I do like the fact that the colour of the box enhances and give vibrancy to the image.
I also didn’t like the outcome of the male nude in front of the exercise ball as it looks static.
- In your opinion, which of your experimental outcomes has been most effective and why?
I think the most effective is the bouncing ball projection on the box. I think it’s an interesting composition and the shape of the box gives a neat hosting to the image - it looks like the ball is bouncing from one wall to the other. I also think the colour of the box enhances the colour of the image making it look brighter, and I like the idea that the image enhances the existence of the carboard box - it feels as if the box has gone up in the hierarchy of thing.
During the group crit it was said that the big space of the forest in the confined small space of the box worked really well - which I agree. They thought however that the HIV virus was more effective, maybe because at the time it was the only one that had sound. And they also felt that it was relevant as it related the Covid 19 pandemic, which is true.
- What do you think the work is saying?
The outcome of the bouncing ball is ambiguous, subject to interpretation of the viewers and their own experience and circumstances. I see it as a reflection and acceptance of loneliness - the lone ball bouncing serenely and happily through the forest. After adding sound this feeling increased as the dramatic sound could represent the intensity of the world nowadays, despite which the ball hasn’t not changed its attitude, and really, I feel quite related to the ball. It was interesting that during the group crit some people felt it reminiscent of their childhood - and that it had a sense of happiness and energy, whereas to others the ball reflected isolation which produced feelings of sadness and loneliness.
The outcome of the HIV virus also became more meaningful when I added the heartbeat sound. To me this gives a powerful message – the virus - a disease that can kill, and the heartbeat - which signifies that it’s very much a living creature, and this also came out in my group crits.
Can you relate any ideas back to the theories you are being introduced to in Critical Dialogues?
I believe these outcomes have the characteristics of post-modernist art - ambiguous and subject to interpretation, with a reference to consumerism in the carboard box. I also think about Walter Benjamin and his ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’, and how technology has changed traditional work. He is focusing on the ability to reproduce, but which may change the feelings of a work and lose its aura. I believe that in the case of this work, whilst it can be reproduced it has an inherent ephemeral quality that may make it different every time it’s shown.
- How do you think this could developed further? What ideas has it given you?
I would like to experiment by projecting them onto surfaces with different textures, colours and sizes, and onto unusual shapes, and I’d also like to add different sounds to see if the perceptions of the viewers changes. I’d also like to experiment with the bouncing ball theme using other shapes with maybe videos as background.