Show and Listen Drawing 2 Part Two.
From the The Figure drawing, discussed in the previous post, I found myself considering how else I might further explore Kandinsky's 'Impressions'.
A direct impression of outward nature, expressed in purely
artistic form. This I call an "Impression."
(Kandinsky 1911, p.56-57)
Though at the time I wasn't actually aware of Kandinsky "New Symphonic Constructions". My first port of call was to experiment with new objects to observe.
source
"African Violet (Sketch)"
2014
The most successful was this sketch of an African Violet, which I began during a visit too my grandparents home on the Isle of Wight. I quickly started observing simple lines and layering them across the page, trying to keep to the actual lines as closely as I could but without them clearly representing the flower itself. Though this was an enjoyable drawing to do, it felt much like the Figure drawing, in that it was enjoyable to draw but the use of an external object feels a bit restraining, as if by looking at an object and trying to describe it creates a rule to follow. Where as if you were to make a mark without specifically referencing an external source that mark would have an infinite potential.
Untitled Sketch.
2014
Pencil on paper
With this drawing, rather than using an external source I initially made small light marks on the left hand side of the paper, they were instinctual marks that were felt in that moment,but the source of the emotional and physical was indeterminate. instead of filling the page with initial marks I allowed myself to pass my hand across the papers surface whilst reacting to the left hand marks, as my hand passed over built up areas of marks and shading I would smudge the graphite across the rest of the page and as the smudges reacted with my hand and the paper over time I began to pick out shapes, building them up over time. if we look at the drawings right hand side, it is possible to see this building up in various stages, with very light working into the surface on the far right and formed building up in the centre. I'm not sure whether the shapes that are emerging in this drawing have such similarities to the drawings I have already discussed because of these similar shapes were inspired by the original drawings or because I have got a tendency to find these shapes with the developing "improvisation" (Kandinsky 1911)? Or is it because of the shapes that seem to be appearing in the works like the other Show and Listen drawing?
Show and Listen 1
2013
Ink on Paper
2014
Pencil on paper
With this drawing, rather than using an external source I initially made small light marks on the left hand side of the paper, they were instinctual marks that were felt in that moment,but the source of the emotional and physical was indeterminate. instead of filling the page with initial marks I allowed myself to pass my hand across the papers surface whilst reacting to the left hand marks, as my hand passed over built up areas of marks and shading I would smudge the graphite across the rest of the page and as the smudges reacted with my hand and the paper over time I began to pick out shapes, building them up over time. if we look at the drawings right hand side, it is possible to see this building up in various stages, with very light working into the surface on the far right and formed building up in the centre. I'm not sure whether the shapes that are emerging in this drawing have such similarities to the drawings I have already discussed because of these similar shapes were inspired by the original drawings or because I have got a tendency to find these shapes with the developing "improvisation" (Kandinsky 1911)? Or is it because of the shapes that seem to be appearing in the works like the other Show and Listen drawing?
Show and Listen 1
2013
Ink on Paper
Quick line Sketches 1- 2
2014
pencil on paper
These next two sketches represent a further exploration of Kandinsky's "Improvisation"
"A largely unconscious, spontaneous expression of inner
character, the non-material nature. This I call an
"Improvisation.""
(Kandinsky 1911, p.56-57)
Returning to the thought of the initial line marks of the "Impression." drawings but without the use of an external source, instead I made quick instinctive marks letting my hand move quickly across the page, not thinking about spatial relationships, just letting myself move freely. Then returning to the drawings very quickly shading areas as a means of connecting the initial marks, building up the surface. Though I enjoyed the freedom that initial marks allowed me, I found that these marks created definition from the outset, there was very little room for further changes, this may well be due to the amount of the marks and the pressure exerted in the marks, but I think the alternative where I made myself aware of the consequences of too many marks or pressing too hard would cause me to premeditate the outcome of the drawing, which feels wrong too me. There is a certain dishonest to this, yet it could be rectified by some sort of parameter, for example; ten seconds to make the initial marks, or make only twenty marks. Though again this feels wrong too me. I think this may be more that I don't really like the outcome of these drawings than any issue with honesty of marks or predetermination.
Sketches 1-4
2014
ink on paper
These Four Sketches were done in quick succession, the major event of these drawings was the choice to move from the use of pencil as the mark making tool, this may be linked to a sense of confidence in my mark making or it may be that though the use of pencil has its benefits, I do prefer the crisp, bold, colour of ink.
These drawings are progressions from the last two drawings in that the marks were performed in very quick free movements, the decisions in shading are now relative to cross hatching compared to blending, and this cross hatching plays the primary role in the definition of the emerging shapes, at this point I can see that I am returning to a clearer relationship to works like the "Show and Listen Drawing 1" in that material choices are very similar, the individual marks made are clearer that in the pencil drawings and the presence of the systems take on a new relationship with the surface they are drawn onto. where the pencil drawing feels embedded in the paper the ink feels like it floats within the space. this material relationship is very interesting and I will need to revisit it, if the ink drawings create an illusion of floating then is that a good or bad thing? With the pencil drawing, smudging and obliteration send a clear message that there is an actual physical relationship going on, where as though the ink does get absorbed by the paper and sometimes bleeds, there is something mysterious going on, like the drawing could be a physical thing other than the actual thing itself.
Ishi wo Tateru Koto 1 + 2
2014
ink on paper
By chance I wrote "Ishi Wo Tetaru Koto." (The act of setting stones upright), it was unrelated to the actual drawing and was instead from when I had been reading about Japanese Rock Gardens for a bit of general interest, but it does feel quite fitting in relation to the work I am discussing. I will return to this at a later point.
These two drawings came about when I considered the issue of the initial marks of a mark making system, I felt that the quick marks of the line based pencil drawings before the last four drawings discussed had limitations to them in that the quickly limited where the drawing could go, with the last four drawings I had become more confident and moved into the use of ink, but I wanted to try mixing the initial mark concept, using a much looser material (watered down ink) to create a semi-was that the constructive ink cross hatching could connect too. a bit like moss shaping and clinging to the contours of a rock. though I think this technique has some potential to it, I find these drawings dissatisfying, to the point that I quickly abandoned the second one. I think the first might be interesting on a much larger scale but in its current state it feels like the black ink is too heavy, drowning out the ink wash.
Final Sketch
2014
ink on paper.
This sketch was the final part of the development of "Show and Listen 2", which I suppose is quite evident! it was started during a train journey from my home up to Nottingham not long before the Show and Listen. Considering the fact that I was on a train, I find the element of journey quite an interesting factor. I enjoy the sort of neutral time train journeys allow, my journey from my home to Nottingham and back is six hours in total, the restraint that being on a train affords is both positive and negative, in that life temporarily goes on hold, so very little can be achieved in this time that isn't partially linked to that journey, you can not do many of the usual life activities, like cook your dinner, go to the super market, go to work, etc but you can partially do some of these things through technological mediators like a phone or computer, but effectively you are cut off from your normal life. which is an interesting dilemma, in that you can fill the time with the tethers of life, like speaking on the phone, or the time can be spent enjoying that freedom from life. Whilst on trains I find myself staring out of the window, frequently considering how the train passes through places that I might never experience, fields Ill never stand in, towns Ill never visit and people I will never meet. I find this disconnectedness both negative and positive in equal measure. The positive being that being safe in the knowledge that there is almost infinite potential for new experiences and learning, the negative, being the sense of isolation and sense of loss in all that might of been.
Returning to the sketch, it began as an enquiry into how much density of lines could be made before those marks could no longer be identified, Within these self obliterating marks the emerging shapes discussed so far still remain, but with the over working comes a stronger definition to the shapes and the drawing takes on a recognisable quality, to me there is a sort of geological feel to the image, which I find slightly problematic, if it takes on these qualities the sense of mystery evaporates and the necessity for exploration and questioning becomes less of a necessity. I think there are two solutions to this problem, the first being pushing the density to further extremes so that the whole drawing is covered completely, or changing the scale of the image and balance the density of marks across the surface.
As a follow up to this sketch I chose to follow the changing of scale and spreading the density of marks across the page.
Show and Listen 2
2014
Ink on Paper
The decision to attempt this drawing was a natural progression, the decision was certainly a practical one, in that I wanted to create something new to present as part of the show and listen, I wanted to create a dialogue between the older "Causal drawing processes" and this new freer approach to causal mark making.
the process of making this drawing followed what had been learnt during the sketching that has been discussed, which reminds me of the final aspect of Kandinsky's "New Symphonic Constructions", The "Composition".
"An expression of a slowly formed inner feeling, which
comes to utterance only after long maturing. This I call a
"Composition." In this, reason, consciousness, purpose, play
an overwhelming part. But of the calculation nothing appears,
only the feeling. Which kind of construction, whether
conscious or unconscious, really underlies my work, the
patient reader will readily understand." (Kandinsky 1911, p.55-56)
Moving from the first stage of "Impression" with the figurative and African Violet drawings into "Improvisation" in the emerging shape drawings, then into the final Sketch and the considered "Show and Listen 2" drawing. there are aspects of careful consideration to the illuminated lines which could be said to have been influenced by the lines observed in the Figurative drawings, but by using the freer "improvisation" technique the ability for the forms and lines to take solid shape. My hand moves without an objective, and my mind is clear of limitations(though it is limited by habit). the decisions of depth are mainly instinctive and the density of lines is allowed to go to extremes at times but due to the considerations and discoveries of the "final sketch" I am informed and attempt to avoid the trap of definition, though it does still remain. I believe that this process in some way reflects what Kandinsky (1911) refers to the "composition", though in a very superficial way. The work is considered in relation to the past calculations but is primarily influenced by feeling.
though I like this drawing, I can see some fault in it, at the time of presentation I felt it was a work in progress, thus the feeling still exists but I have not returned to the drawing to reach a point where I feel it is complete. I believe I have a desire to continue exploring the emerging shapes, which I have identified as something that should be avoided, therefore it may be a good thing to leave it as it is, If I have the strong desire to explore these shapes further, then wouldn't it be safe to assume the audience might also feel that tension? I like this state of 'becoming' which has resonance with Hegel's Being and Nothing dialectic with the synthesis as becoming.
"Being is Nothing and Nothing is Being. But the movement is always a to-and-fro, a back-and-forth, and this restricts the possibility of a side-by-side Being/Non-being unity. Insofar as this either of these processes of vanishing are circular and define Becoming each (coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be) is the very process of Becoming." (Krahn 2009)
Moving from the first stage of "Impression" with the figurative and African Violet drawings into "Improvisation" in the emerging shape drawings, then into the final Sketch and the considered "Show and Listen 2" drawing. there are aspects of careful consideration to the illuminated lines which could be said to have been influenced by the lines observed in the Figurative drawings, but by using the freer "improvisation" technique the ability for the forms and lines to take solid shape. My hand moves without an objective, and my mind is clear of limitations(though it is limited by habit). the decisions of depth are mainly instinctive and the density of lines is allowed to go to extremes at times but due to the considerations and discoveries of the "final sketch" I am informed and attempt to avoid the trap of definition, though it does still remain. I believe that this process in some way reflects what Kandinsky (1911) refers to the "composition", though in a very superficial way. The work is considered in relation to the past calculations but is primarily influenced by feeling.
though I like this drawing, I can see some fault in it, at the time of presentation I felt it was a work in progress, thus the feeling still exists but I have not returned to the drawing to reach a point where I feel it is complete. I believe I have a desire to continue exploring the emerging shapes, which I have identified as something that should be avoided, therefore it may be a good thing to leave it as it is, If I have the strong desire to explore these shapes further, then wouldn't it be safe to assume the audience might also feel that tension? I like this state of 'becoming' which has resonance with Hegel's Being and Nothing dialectic with the synthesis as becoming.
"Being is Nothing and Nothing is Being. But the movement is always a to-and-fro, a back-and-forth, and this restricts the possibility of a side-by-side Being/Non-being unity. Insofar as this either of these processes of vanishing are circular and define Becoming each (coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be) is the very process of Becoming." (Krahn 2009)
The emerging shapes in the drawings are in a state of flux where they are being constructed from nothing and coming into being as the drawing proceeds through time, the fact that these shapes are not real shapes, but have some recognisable similarities to natural atypical geometries creates an extra element of tension, we can relate to them as physical objects as we recognise the potential forms but they are in fact representations. so there is a sort psychological tension of the real and unreal during this state of shapes becoming. This is interesting notion when considering the route that I have taken to arrive at this drawing, with the early "impression"(Kandinsky 1911) drawings, where I used an external object as a means of engaging a later "Improvised" interaction.
This quality of becoming and question of materialism are really interesting. I definitely need to look into this further!
Bibliography
Kandinsky, W., 1911. Concerning the Spiritual in Art. [http://www.semantikon.com/art/kandinskyspiritualinart.pdf]
Krahn, R., 2009,Becoming and Being according to Hegel. Metabole, http://metabole.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/becoming-and-being-according-to-hegel.html [Accessed 22/02/2014]
Comments