Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Writing is like pulling a tooth, or worse.
Writing is tough to do. It requires concentration, skill and enough sobriety to be able to read through the slurs. The ideas are easy to come by. I have an abundance of overwhelming conceptual dribble that pulls your brain into a struggle with reality to the point that I have to try and explain it to others. I know the world would be a better place if we did not have to prove things to each other, but without a confirmation that our ideas exist then we are without challenge to existence. The point here is that I have teeth that need my attention, but I would rather suffer through the pain than deal with it, however I cannot deal with the pain that if I do not write I will pass on the very point of existence.
The original ideas that I was so concerned about have now been lost due to this distraction listed above, but I am writing and that is the underlying requirement to conceptual transmigration of ideas. Part of the concept / struggle that I am dealing with is the chemical difference between dyes and pigments. Techically it isn't relevant to much and not worth discussing, but on a conceptual level I find a paralell with my earlier concepts. I have always been amazed at the process of photography as much as the results (argggh today I dropped a digital camera in the mud and screamed) that are shown in their final form as silver prints on paper. The idea that the underlying molecular structure of the silver allowed these items to be interpreted artistically was an early part of my conceptual misunderstanding of composition, since composition on a moleculer level is truly the ultimate determinate of the final visual composition. The separation of the molecular to the conceptual is where we are delusional and ultimately duped by chemical based arts.
The reason why photography is valid as an art form is that is no less chemically dependent than painting on the final product. The craft required to make photographic prints is far more complex, but then so seems the honeycomb to the ant hill. Underlying all of these process, including the biological ones, we are in essence dealing with interpretation as the abritrator and therefore we have the problem. ART is not with the making, but with the viewer and chemically we are on the same level as the ant.
I come to this point as I am struggling with where I am and where I how did I get here. I continue to see large paralells with my earlier artistic endeavors which reinforces the idea that when you are younger you should just work, don't ask questions, just work. The work will take you where you want to go, not the questions or answers to questions. Then later you will have something to look at and consume. Now I am at the point where I can deduce that in 20 years I have not gotten very far. I have stopped or I have been in a loop or I am further than I realize or there is no where to go. That last sentence was really fun. I am going to post some pictures now of a variety of works that show that even if I have had 20 years I still cannot escape my own astetic and every thing I make ends up looking a certain way.