Gravity: Ben Judd (12/3/15)

http://benjudd.com

Judd started his lecture by discussing the Biunial Magic Lantern by W. C. Hughes& co. c.1890. He described the lantern as being the precursor to cinema, in it's pursuit to create moving image. The magic lantern is live and has a participating element to it, in that for it to work a person has to be present, manually enabling the machine. Whereas cinema is pre-recorded and so although the audience is present there is not a necessity for a person to create the moving image in the moment. 

He then went on to discuss Sea Cadettes and how they never actually go to see. How they rigorously practise these rituals and performances but never have the opportunity to put them into practise.

This links with some of his key interests within his art practise: rehearsal, the propositional and the amateur. This bled into him explaining 'interstatiality' (a state of between-ness) and 'alteration' (oscillating from one position to another).

The first of his works that he mentioned was 'I Miss' (2002) which he briefly explained was a documentary-esk film capturing a group of trainspoters in Doncaster. Then he showed 'I Love' (2003) which was another documentary styled film about a group of amateur "glamour" photographers in a seedy area. He raced through discussing all his works, 'I Will Heal You' (2007): he went to Columbia  and worked with a Witchdoctor even though all the locals told him not too. She said he needed to be "clensed", he felt there was a strange power suggestion, making him wonder if it was real or monitor. By this point I was wholly unconvinced with his workforces, but it got worse! 

'Close To You' (2008) was when he went to a class for amateur physics. 'The Symbol' (2009) worked with a Shaman as he wanted his work to challenge his own belief systems and other people's. To push the boundaries of his own Western atheist familiarity. 

His work has several ethical and moral issues embedded into it, by his borderline insulting approach to challenging his belief systems. He puts himself into situations where we openly mocks what other people believe, and justifies this by saying that in the moment when he is a part of these people's lives he does believe as they do, and then after he leave and he's been gone for a while he remembers that he doesn't believe in what they do? Which makes me think he is either confused or just knowingly lies to them.

He followed on with talking about two other works that link in with his previous works but have titles that sound like Damien Hurst made them up. 'Conversations With The Other Side' (2009) was his attempt to blur the lines of reality and performance. Which involved a woman talking in a dreamlike state in a room in the gallery space, this was projected with a live stream to another part of the gallery space where Judd would ask questions? It was all a bit complicated and I struggled to fully understand. His work then became more of a combination of film and live action with another complicated name of 'Concerning the Differences Between the Delights of Pleasure& True Happiness' (2010) which I felt was awkward and uncomfortable to watch which was apparently intentional...

I felt that the concept behind his works were quite weak really and generally weren't my cup of tea. Although I liked the sense of continuity through his works, at least they were all vague and all linked into each other.

P.A.P LECTURE WRITE-UP Gravity: Emma Biggs (5/3/15)

http://www.emmabiggsmosaic.net/

I found Emma Biggs to be a very good speaker, the enthusiasm and passion she had for her work was infectious. Biggs introduced the lecture by drawing our attention to the equalisation of gender presented in the mosaics and frescoes of the Chora Church in Istanbul. And how it was "strikingly odd" that they would do this at the time in which they were made (around the 13th century).

Of course most churches and cathedrals of the time would depict an image of The Virgin, although this would be outweighed by several images of Christ. Which is why Biggs noted how unusual it was to have such a balance of the sexes within the Chora Church.

Biggs is clearly inspired by classical mosaic, as the craft in itself is very long-established it would be difficult for one to ignore how it was originally used. And although her work is not necessarily religious, she does not ignore the historical context of her artistry.

Biggs drew an interesting comparison from Tracy Emin's 'Everyone I've Ever Slept With' to The Virgin at the exit/entrance in the Chora Church.

Biggs believes there is an unconscious connection between the two. The Virgin is positioned over the exit of the church and so when everyone leaves it could be read that they are metaphorically re-born from her loins. She feels this is similar to the open and direct depiction of 'Everyone I've Ever Slept With'. When the viewer leaves the inside of the tent they have come from a very intimate and private place of Tracy Emin. She singled out the explicit nature of both works, how the works tell you what needs to be said. They obviously evoke a response but they don't necessarily have an agenda. 

It goes without saying that mosaics cannot be achieved without the aid of broken pots. When discussing some key aspects of her practise she specified that "handmade and industrial pottery is important to [her] work, not least by its gendered associations". In the respect that crockery is by and large advertised with a clear female slant, reinforcing the old stereotype that women are the homemakers and so kitchenware is singularly appropriate for women.

She spoke of her earlier life when she went to University in Leeds during the 70s and how it seemed as though everyone around her was in a punk band or knew someone in a punk band. She later admitted it was interesting how her current work is almost a rebellion of a rebellion. She went to University and ripped her clothes, started smoking and drinking to kick against what her parents had taught her was appropriate behaviour, only to kick against this defiance by reverting back to a fixation of handmade pottery and mosaic making.

However, before she got involved with mosaics she worked for Vivienne Westwood after leaving University, and found that this was not the right avenue for her within the artworld. She happened upon a group of Italian immigrants that made mosaics in the classic way& picked their brains about the media, as her heart truly lied in the making of a thing. It sounded all very exotic from my perspective but I suppose when you discuss your personal history to an avid audience you may be inclined to romanticise somewhat?

Biggs went on to discuss her work 'Made in England' with is a beautiful mosaic consisted of the underside of pots.

She acquired these pots through various donations made by people from Stoke-en-Trent. As that area of the world was rife with art schools and artists in its day due to the demand for creative people to make pots etc. Stoke-en-Trent obviously suffered from globalisation like China's handmade pottery industry did in the 90s, and 'Made in England' was a small way in which Biggs felt she was giving back to the community. 

 

She spoke about how "content alone is not enough", she had to give depth to her work with context or else it would only have been an old-styled mosaic made in the modern day. After discussing 'Made in England' her talk became much more passionate. Describing how each base of the pots that were given to her have a different texture and artistry with the stamp placed on them. Whether it has been hand-painted/stamped/embossed/lithographed makes a difference in "the variety of tone", and leaves a trace of the makers' working day. This connection with the past was significant to her and the work.

Finally she discussed some of the issues she faces with making artwork. About how "aesthetic content is frequently outsourced by artists to fabrications", which I took to be a criticism of how contemporary art has lost is cogency. Artists are bypassing what is aesthetically sound to create something generic and seemingly aesthetic, but falsely so. In Biggs' opinion "something's been lost and I think we should reclaim it", the humbleness of making something because it just looks good is very much lost in the artworld today. To the point that we have a detached response to the work, a "bloodless aestheticism" were we critique a work avoiding saying anything that just marks the work as 'good'.

I ask, that if art is truly subjective, surely there should be a place for all its forms? Can there not be a time when high-brow artwork can be considered purely based on whether you at that moment think it looks good?