some thoughts on ‘archive to interview’

re-watching the video lecture ‘archive to interview’ and making some notes and observations…

yes -the difficulty with online research especially imagery means that scale, dates, materials and context of work can be omitted and hard to decipher. i think rushed and superficial research is an inevitability of a digital age and somethng i’m guilty of.

by way of investigating how other related (or not) artists and images can come up using online research, look what ‘elaine crowe artist’ threw up in my research of myself online – i’m happy to see that some are mine but no idea why there are puppies and an african head dress?

seems obvious to look directly at artists’ websites rather than images or blogs etc when researching artists and archives but perhaps these artists’ websites might be laking in critical commentry.

i am reminded of a piece i made in college a few years ago when exploring the power (or limits) of language and the naming of things. using a search of ‘elaine’ i showed this playing in a continuous loop on a laptop on a desk in my studio. found it in my archives and not part of my ‘official’ website! (had it on mute so you couldn’t hear lola barking, tg)

speaking of sound – i did like adrian searle’s audio description of thomas shutte’s exhibition. it seemed to say more about the work than a than a series images alone could but it did take a lot longer. as a predominantly visual learner, maybe i have touches of a auditory learner too. indeed sound is increasingly part of my work and may yet take a prominant role.

i had come across bobby bakers work before – ‘kitchen show’ and other performances. but i wasn’t aware of her biographical drawings either. i must make sufficient time to look at them and also explore the uca library.

and in answering some of the lecture’s questions – i think i’m more inclinded to want to  make my own interpretation of work first before looking into the artists’s biography or statement for the work. having said that, i am always interested in hearing what artists say about their work but after and not before seeing and experiencing it. i often avoid reading the titles of the work before looking for similar reasons…..art is a proposition – an invitation to interpret in multiple possible ways rather than an exclusive intended way. as for artists versus critics – i think i’m more interested in what the artists says.