The original brief for this work was 500 words describing yourself looking at, or experiencing, an artwork. We were told it didn't have to be in text form if you had a reasonable alternative – if you could show you see text as a problem and have used something else to solve this problem.
The brief was discussed at length but never really gained clarity, seeming to change each time it was discussed. We were told, among other things, to 'describe yourself looking at, or experiencing, an artwork'; 'describe yourself as if you were another person'; 'describe the viewing of a piece of art in the third person', 'describe yourself viewing an artwork from the point of view of another person'.
Although these sentences seem similar they could be read in a variety of ways, meaning very different things. Do they mean how I feel about an artwork? What my pure perceptions are? My emotions? My judgment on the work? Does it mean how somebody else perceives me experiencing an artwork? This latter option seemed to crop up most often with the words ‘third party’ and ‘third person’ creeping in frequently, as did the word 'objectivity'.
Most others have approached the exercise in the form of short fiction such as "she was shocked and felt an urge to destroy the painting". However this can't be called objective - how could a third person possibly know she was feeling this urge - these feelings are subjective and is just an assumption by the third person, based on what s/he sees and hears.
Others wrote diary-like pieces describing their experiences "I really like the way he uses such-and-such" but this has no connection with any form of third person.
With the introduction of the third person and the point of objectivity, the best inference I could achieve was "I am trying to clearly communicate the experience of a gallery by x from the perspective of y". I decided the most accurate way of describing my own perceptions of art in the third person would be through the senses of that third person - their eyes and their ears. Based on this I made a very short video of myself viewing an artwork.
I could have written a short story of any (subjective) inferences a third party may draw from those perceptions, but why should I? Every third person will draw different inferences from those perceptions (and indeed from many works of art); and any viewer of this video will be that third person - so they can draw their own inferences. All I could write would be “he/she is doing x”; “perhaps she is thinking y”; “she looks happy”; “he looks like he thinks it’s shit” - but all of these are subjective assumptions.
In making a video every person who views it will be seeing my interpretation of a piece of art in the third person. It is the most absolute, most accurate description of a third person's view of my perceptions; you cannot get any more clarity than that which you experience yourself directly.
In one way this describes the third person's view of my perceptions - that I cannot describe them in any more clarity than giving them those experiences themselves - but more than this, it shows that the third person *cannot* experience my perceptions - this is all they can know of them. Any short story, painting, or any other account is only assumptions and second-hand inferences. If I want to be clear about what I want to say this is as clear as it can be - you cannot get inside my head - and you cannot get inside the head of the third person - you need to experience it yourself.
In hindsight the vagueness between third person, third party and objectivity was the problem. They were meaning third person in a grammatical sense, but substituted other words too frequently. The inclusion of objectivity made this impossible. Their aim, I think, was to achieve an idea of what a professional artist is, by viewing a piece of art ‘objectively’ - for example from a journalistic point of view. How is it possible to be objective about your subjective reactions to things? Do they really mean to analyse the work, without making any personal judgment on what it might mean? Whether it is any good? Whether it is art? Any judgment is necessarily subjective.
Either way it was a constructive outcome. I have more insight into their aims in the exercise, plus I’ve opened up a topic I could take further myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment