•Proposal; 'The Immeasurable is Invaluable'
Sue Wilks : 2003 - Symposium Proposal An art-video recording that I made recently is the point of entry into my reflection upon the concept of ‘Critical Intimacy’1 which is presented by Mieke Bal in her book ‘Travelling Concepts in the Humanities’2. My need in this investigation, is to clarify how the concept informs my art thinking and practice.
The art-video I refer to represents the most recent work from an oeuvre that I have been producing over the past decade which is concerned with a personal tenet; the immeasurable is invaluable.
I am aware that although the concept of critical intimacy offers my art practice support my reading of the text was a misreading of Mieke Bal’s work, that was a different misreading to Bal’s misreadings of Spivak’s work. However, through my mistranslating the concept from its theoretical frames of reference; ‘postcolonial theory and politics’3, into the language of art practice, I gained clarification in my art thinking and a productive attitude towards my work.
Through my misreading I gained an awareness that (since beginning my practice-based Ph.D project two years ago) I have been making repeated attempts to extend an invitation to others to engage in critically intimate working relations, as an art practice.
Mieke Bal presents a case for thinking and writing through art practice in her book ‘Louise Bourgeois’ Spider; The Architecture of Art-Writing’4 in which she discusses the need for close engagements with works of art in terms of ‘what the work is, means, and does in the present time of viewing’5. My misreading of Bal’s chapter on the concept of critical intimacy has resulted in the concept being transported into the field of art practice where it might be thought through application.
It is usually the case for those who want to contribute towards academic conference discussions, to present a paper articulating their theses. And yet I seek to contribute towards conference discussions by introducing my home-based art practice into the cultural analysis seminar environment, through screening the art-video recording that I made. That is because it is better placed to communicate that which I cannot write, but need to articulate. And so I would like to take my work on a brief journey over institutional disciplinary boundaries in the hope that it can contribute and perhaps also borrow, in what may emerge to be a mutually constructive exchange.
This intervention would be specific to the environment and the event of Mieke Bal’s Symposium because it consists of an attempt to invite critically intimate relations with others through the presentation of an art-work that has developed out of a struggle with this specific problematic; politically and personally. In this work my art practice attempts to form the means of an invitation to multidirectional, critically intimate, working relations with others through a politically, pedagogic project. The misreading that I seek to present offers a potentially productive diversion for the concept of critical intimacy and while I did not make this video recording specifically for this event it does have specific relevance to this event, because to interject the art would be a critical misreading of the academic conference environment itself.
In her chapter on critical intimacy, Mieke Bal directs her concept (among other things) towards progressing working relations between learners and teachers. In my work I direct Mieke Bal’s concept towards resisting the politics that can dis/en/able working relations between learners and teachers. To be able to teach and learn in a critically intimate manner and environment, requires that staff as workers, along with students as workers, need to be facilitated and supported at an institutional level.
Through research-structured art practice I am seeking to counter the managerial ethos that has consumed the contemporary education sector and damaged working relations at all levels and to oppose the judgmental assessment strategies that have been introduced into art learning programmes. The need for all workers in educational institutions to become critically aware of their capacity as active agents becomes ever more urgent as institutions and therefore the people who work within them, are subjected to the reductions in funding that are leading to the demise of critical studies departments and the decline of the education sector in general.
References
1. Mieke Bal, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities; A Rough Guide, (Canada: University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2002), pp.286.
2. Mieke Bal, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities; A Rough Guide, (Canada: University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2002).
3. Mieke Bal, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities; A Rough Guide, (Canada: University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2002), pp.292.
4. Mieke Bal, Louis Bourgeois’ Spider; The Architecture of Art-Writing, (London: University of Chicago Press Ltd., 2001).
5. Mieke Bal, Louis Bourgeois’ Spider; The Architecture of Art-Writing, (London: University of Chicago Press Ltd., 2001), preface, pp.xii.
•Introductory text (read prior to my screening of the Stones video)
Hello.
I shan’t be reading my full conference paper today, but I’ve put copies out if you’d like to take one for later. My original title has since altered to ‘The immeasurable is Invaluable’.
This is a brief introduction to my video screening.
It is usually the case for those who want to contribute towards academic conference’s to present a paper articulating their theses and yet I seek to contribute towards today’s discussion by introducing my home-based art practice into the cultural analysis seminar environment, through screening an art-video recording that I have made.
I have taken my work on a brief journey over institutional disciplinary boundaries in the hope that it can contribute and perhaps also borrow, in what may emerge to be a mutually constructive exchange.
In making my art-video recording I critically trusted a raw desire to act with an object and to speak while doing so. The thoughts, memories, and feelings that generated this desire were and still are, unknown to me. I decided that it was worth taking the risk in trusting my desire and following it through, in the format of a research experiment that has no specific outcomes to anticipate other than to see and hear what happens.
It is in this respect, (that the audience is critical), that I invite you to respond to my work.
•Feedback that I received from Professor Mieke Bal following my screening of the Stones video
Mieke said that she is not intending to critique my work as an art historian because this would be overstepping the bounds. The intimacy [for Mieke] came from the disjuncture between image and sound. She mentioned the relentless presence from the sound [of the stones] for viewers. I was advised to think more around temporal discrepancy, moments of resistance and time. Professor Bal noted how my voice altered... childlike in part 1 (when I talk about memory) and more forceful in part 2 (when I discuss politics and pedagogy).
•My after-thoughts in relation to my presentation
The video was presented on a large screen [approx. 1.5 x 1 metres)
Myself and another student presented work in the session 19/09/03
I formed a labour-oriented focus prior to the presentation. The video screen turned out to be a huge projector and I didn’t know how this might alter the work. I had laid out copies of my full-paper on chairs for people to read later and began with a short introduction designed not to rigidly frame what was to come. My introduction was delivered clearly but very nervously. I then screened strands 1 and 2 of the video. Every thing went smoothly in a technical sense, and I then sat down while another student in the session gave a wonderful paper.
The format for the panellists, was that at the end of their session they joined Mieke (at a table) up front to receive comment and critique. It wasn’t a case of audience discussion because apart from Professor Bal, a student and a couple of tutors no one else spoke. The layout didn’t encourage communications although comment was invited. Me and the other student went up front to receive our critique and although Mieke’s comments to both of us were very positive she was unable to offer me critical guidance other than some suggestions around writing my paper up for publication. I had hoped to ‘see and hear what happened’ following my presentation but nothing did. Mieke approved of our work and the audience didn’t discuss it (too scared to talk?)
Problem. I am relying so heavily upon responses that I seem to be complicit with the academic frames that demand evidence. Teachers only ever get a few responses at best so I have to question my reliance upon articulated responses and whether to push this aspect of my work would result in me being tipped into the field of advertising?
Am I saying that I want a workshop with a class? Do I want to get people to respond there and then? This is dodgy territory and so it forms an interesting part of my progression.
Need to think around my desire for responses. Do I need a ‘class’ to work with me and the video? Are my calls for responses a trap whereby I am asking for the very thing I critique... evidence? 20/09/03
Focusing in on what’s bothering me.
The presentation did not affront anybody. On the contrary, it succeeded in gaining academic approval. It meant alot to me that Dr X was pleased with my work and felt it had improved immensely, although she didn’t give me comment on my work but on my presentation... ‘you have your PhD’. But those all important personal audience responses didn’t come.
Okay. So the format didn’t encourage this and Alison did say ‘leave some time for responses’...
So as a pedagogic prop my work failed. Will I get e-mail responses. I very much doubt it.
‘Academic success’ and failure of the work. Interesting.
Where do I go from here? Do I pursue the desire for responses through a ‘free workshop to BA/post-grads', an open invitation?
There’s a close call between inviting and asking.
Its not a case for giving up. Now that the presentation difficulties seem to have been resolved (in terms of conflict) I can get to grips with the issues this exposes.
A tutor’s feedback: ‘I’m in this situation [at work] now. I can’t imagine doing this again next year. Your work made me feel sad’.
Another tutor was intrigued by the apparent rapid speed of my actions in the video. She wanted to know if it had been speeded up. It hadn’t.
I missed opportunities to press for responses, I don’t like asking anyone for anything. Top |
