You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘studio’ tag.
Other people in three studios:
“‘You know,’ Cage reportedly said, ‘when you enter your studio, everyone is there, the people in your life, other artists, the old masters, everyone. And as you work they leave, one by one. And if it is a really good working day, well, you leave too.’” (Robert Storr, pp. 59-60)
“The best ways to waste time in the studio are those that are unproductive and not related in any ostensible way to making art. I’ve fallen into a new way of wasting time, and it doesn’t involve the internet. My new activity is engaging and completely useless. I can’t tell you what it is; it’s embarrassing to me. I find a lot of what I do in the studio pretty embarrassing, but it’s no more embarrassing than what I make. I’ve never been able to work with people around. I don’t want to think about myself when I’m working. It is very hard to get into this state of un-self-consciousness, where I can get lost in the work.” (Rachel Harrison, p. 217)
This is our new home. In a complete change of everything, this home consists of a white studio. It means rather than making artwork in a domestic space as I have been for the past few years, I’ll be doing domestic things in an art-making space.
Some other holders are here.
In November we’re holding a workshop at Goldsmiths around circulation, distribution and dispersion of artwork.
I want to think about artworks that make claims about not being circulated. My interest in this area stems from my own work, but I want to use the opportunity to research things other people have done. Because of the nature of the subject I don’t anticipate sticking exclusively to examples from art, but I hope to draw some conclusions that have relevance to art.
Most of the work I’ve found on this subject is around event-based art. A starting point could be the dissemination of happening-type work Allan Kaprow calls “lifelike art”. In his 1966 lecture How To Make A Happening he urges us to “happen” in the real world and not in art, and not to put on shows for audiences. He differentiates between the happenings and the instructions or descriptions of them, saying that the latter are not art, “just literature”. Nevertheless these happenings enter an art context and find an art audience through this “literature”, or informally through anecdote. Read the rest of this entry »
You can keep doing things until things happen to them. Here are three people who know how to do this.
The things are back where they came from now, only red. There’s a nasty hierarchy now among my things. The painted things indicate the nakedness of all the other things. Are the red things fake, or are they the only things that are real, because they acknowledge themselves? They look smug about it.
The work is ongoing, and currently comprises over four thousand near-identical paintings of the same glass of water against the same simple backdrop. The glass is framed identically on each canvas, and variation between paintings is restricted to subtle differences in light and colour that reflect the changing conditions of the studio.
Because it is an ongoing project, the work is continually both complete (all there is so far) and incomplete (there is more to come). This duality means that the point of creation remains present in the paintings as a continuous threat to the integrity of the work. The threat is double: that more paintings will be created, disrupting the present unity of the work; and that no more paintings will be created, disrupting the present continuity of the work. Thus the work is continually on the brink of disintegration, and only as long as it does not disintegrate can it continue reassert its presence. It is a work in the present continuous: it is working.