My reflections - as an exhibiting artist - on the Viewer Participant/Artist Methodology employed during the 5th Gwangju Biennale, South Korea in 2004.
(An experiment where an artist was paired with a non-artist during the production process of an art work)
Have you wondered about an experimental idea where an artist is paired with a non-artist during the production process?
It was an interesting experience where one was expected to allow an input from a third party.
It may be likened to a critic physically holding the artist by the hand but that would have been very a humiliating experience, if such ever happens.
Some art connoisseurs might even say this idea resembles a situation where a work is examined by a first line of a participating curator - the Viewer Participant (VP) or likened again to an art director of an advertising agency giving instructions before the creative work gets to the client or public.
The process and the successful outcome of this novel interaction all depend on the understanding, respect and maturity on the side of the VP and artist.
I like the idea only if the completed work is ready for modification, when the artist now shows the work to his VP and thereafter waits to get the reaction of the latter if he understands the message of the work.
The VP's reaction and understanding might be - at one extreme end - be totally different from the artist's earlier thought process.
The VP's interpretation might also jell with the artist's idea, coming close to what the artist was trying to conceptualise at onset.
Good to say that my VP is very much conversant with artists in Nigeria and the art world.
So we started on a good note. Though in a very subtle manner, I allowed him to reveal his thoughts and what he understood about my project.
Somehow we connected.
The next challenge was creating the time to meet face to face as he had his primary job to attend to and I had mine too.
Therefore, there was a need to be a team player, to show tolerance and patience as expected from both sides.
We strived and both of us learned new things from this forced ad-hoc marriage. We were able to flow together eventually.
Generally speaking, there is a tendency for either member of the team to be tempted; to feel like a headmaster of a school, giving orders to a pupil.
It all depends on the two individuals.
I think this unique interaction can only work very well in the event of a work that has been originally initiated and put in process by an artist - though before completion - prior to a third party coming along.
Thereafter a collaborator - such as the VP- can only come in to suggest his feeling, to influence the final production of an artist's work.
I can't imagine otherwise.
To avoid friction it will simply be pretence galore on both sides, if the artist is forced into this kind of situation.
He may not want to append his signature on the final work, as he wouldn't be fully convinced it was his original idea that was on display after all.
There is a solution for this novel methodology of art production.
The solution I propose is this: A more honest and spiritually satisfying work on both sides will evolve if the artist believes in this concept of collaboration, as he would on his own volition, genuinely seek a third party that he fancies, to have an input in his work.
It can be likened to a glamour photographer who seeks an agreeable, next-door girl to pose as a model, to allow him try new compositions and techniques.
As for me, my Viewer Participant came up with his observations and personal interpretation of my work both verbally and otherwise.
His written submission he allowed me to edit. This ensured we met up with our objective.
Possibly we were both lucky in that we consciously showed a sense of maturity, understanding and respect for ourselves, and the work at hand.
No comments:
Post a Comment