My tutorial with Annette today addressed the installation of my work in preparation for the Glue Factory exhibition (Coming up 22nd March).
We spoke about how the work will sit, and agreed that the nails which were temporarily holding it up were heavy and distracting. Annette suggested that the work be held on a shelf, on the wall. I immediately agreed, as a shelf would hopefully refer to the thingness of the works (the aluminium text piece and porcelain included), and give them more presence as objects. We addressed the height at which the work would sit, and agreed that the wall piece should be looked at by the viewers whole body. This hopefully will make the perception a more immersive experience and will re-locate the viewer in the physicality of their own body. With this awareness inflicted, I plan on encouraging the viewer to move to an opposing wall to experience the other opponents of the work (the porcelain), which will hopefully be reflected in the aluminium text piece.
Foucault uses the term “heterotopia” (French: hétérotopie) to describe spaces that have more layers of meaning or relationships to other places than immediately meet the eye. In general, a heterotopia is a physical representation or approximation of a utopia, or a parallel space (such as a prison) that contains undesirable bodies to make a real utopian space possible.
Foucault explains the link between utopias and heterotopias using the metaphor of a mirror. A mirror is a utopia because the image reflected is a ‘placeless place’, an unreal virtual place that allows one to see one’s own visibility. However, the mirror is also a heterotopia, in that it is a real object. The heterotopia of the mirror is at once absolutely real, relating with the real space surrounding it, and absolutely unreal, creating a virtual image.
“objects in (the) mirror are closer than they appear“
The object components of the installation are attempting to be held in space. The objects that hold information, are going to be held in space; contained upon shelves, upon walls.
Annette noted that the work was emotive, it exists in longing of ‘that which is not here’. There is a thins/slightness of presence, encouraged by obsolescence. The work is perpetually dissolving, and is about something that has changed, and continues to change. The deflective nature of the work prevents us from grasping any concrete existence.
“Heraclitus, I believe, says that all things go and nothing stays, and comparing existents to the flow of a river, he says could not step twice into the same river”.