With my last project done, it’s probably time to talk about my new venture. So far this term I’ve taken 15 exposures of a bubble-wrapped glass swan, from different angles, and averaged them out using their luminance data. Here’s an example:
15 of such prints will be hung in a gallery, in varying sizes and orientations. The work raises questions of identity, and of our relationship to photography. In our post-industrialised age, what could matter more than such a discourse? Clearly, I hardly need to mention the importance of the 15 and its tremendous ‘history’. With its factors of 3 and 5, two prime numbers, there is a subversive and fractious relationship between the hangings and the viewer, who cannot fail to note correlations with the fifteen members of the United Nations Security Council. As such, the trans-patriarchal hegemony of neo-consumerist thought, if it can indeed be referred to as such in the light of Danielle Rosseau’s delicious analyses, is brought into full relief. The piece penetrates the space of the gallery, usurping its surroundings into the work itself. This phallic imagery was of course first elucidated by Freud and honed not to but by perfection as per Lacan, whose untranslatable concept of mierda pretenciosa is the major Work in this sphere. If I may be so bold, I might usurp the standard narrative and declare it does not open a window upon the soul, but quite the reverse. The piece, which I shall henceforth refer to as the Piece, is in a sense defined by its Lack (in a Butlerian sense) and women in particular will find a resonance in its starkness, as their subconscious jealousy of the organ oscillates with their irreconcilable desire, instigated in the Mirror Stage, for a Replacement for their lost sex: the Child.
Thitherto, and in ironic contradistinction, the Piece raises questions of identify, and of our relationship to photography. Without question this can only be called an Installation, and so I have decided to include a background melody of atonal lutes, juxtaposing the childlike nature of the post-colonial enterprise with the imperialism of the major scale. As Foucault tells us, this is in fact an Orientalist position, but one fundamentally undermined by its neo-humanist overtones. What might naively be called the ‘scientific method’ is revealed to be nothing more than a faux-Western archetype, revealing nothing more than our own biases. What was once signified can now only be called Signifier – Saussure was on the right track, but exposes his biases in the light of Kant: only a work of this joinessaunce could make and indeed conflagrate such terms (Clive Owen was, as ever, way ahead of us on this one). Building upon the astonishing portfolios of Renike Dijkstra and Andreas Gursky, I have tried to take the mantle of stark ‘layerhood’ and demonstrably first-past-the-post political expediency, and expand upon it in innovative ways, perhaps evoking a sense of the true Objectivists: Bernd and Hilla Becher.
Of course, this raises the spectre of the self, but I’ll leave the deconstruction of such as an exercise to the reader. Finally, it raises questions of identity, and of our relationship to photography.
Hopefully that seems ok! It seems pretty cool to me. I’ll keep you updated on its progress.