The Function of the Studio, Buren

The Function of the Studio

1971

David Buren. translated by Thomas Repensek

Buren brings into question the value of an often overlooked integral part of the artistic process; the artists studio. 'The importance of the studio should by now be apparent; it is its first frame, the first limit, upon which all subsequent frames/limits will depend.' (Buren, 1971) We have recently been asked to consider the role the studio plays in our work. For me the studio is not so much a place where I do the work, in fact next to none of the work I produce comes from my degree studio. As a photographer a lot of the work is done in the dark room, my work also is about writing, all of which are done from my computer. To me the studio space is not an area that fuels my work, but its a space that I can use without being interrupted, where I frequently display where I am in relation to my studio practice. Buren's idea of the studio is that of artistic creation, of a second canvas almost onto which the work is made, when the work is removed from this a part of it is left behind. This brings into question the idea of context. I think Buren is talking more about painting, where locational context is not necessarily as important. I feel often now that, and I speak from the perspective of my own work, as an artist I consider the location the work is going to be in previously, and cater to the effect this would then have on the piece. Buren here discusses a disconnection within the work when it is removed from this studio space, where the work originates and its 'unique space of production'. (Buren, 1971) The work is created within that space, the space fuels the artist, what does the work then lose if this is taken away?

David Buren then considers the role of the curator. He speaks of a gallery often by using the term museum, this is interesting as it implies a negative view of the gallery space, Buren's emphasis here is on the importance of the studio, the text suggests that the gallery is a space in which the work is shown to the public, devoid of all individuality and promise. It becomes bound in this collection and rules. This is where Buren suggests the role of the curator comes in with relation to the gallery. He talks of how the studio is almost like a shop, where curators come and choose the work they want to show, the work is picked, specifically sorted through to find which is right for the public to see. The intentions of the artist for the work are gone, it is the curators intentions that now matter. What does the work mean now, how does it fit in with their space, their rules. Buren talks of the studio as a 'commercial depot' where pieces are churned out without any true considerations for the pure intention or meaning, the work has to be displayed and due to circumstances often it is in any way possible, no matter the consequences this may have on the change of meaning for the work. Because of this Buren suggests that a works true place of belonging is in the studio, where it originates. 

He goes on to consider this need for the artist to show works in gallery locations and exhibitions, artists need to show work, however how does this displacement from the studio alter what is seen?  '...it is impossible by definition for a work to be seen in place; still, the place where we see it influences the work even more than the place in which it is made and from which it has been cast out.' (Buren, 1971) A work can change simply because of the location it is set in, a photograph in a white wall gallery space would have a very different meaning to the same photograph projected onto the side of a building. One example of this that I have recently seen is the work of Neil Ayling, Ayling worked with Anthony Caro in his studio on his large sculptural pieces. I was introduced to his own work in a lecture and was pleasantly surprised by the pieces, he looked at using lines and refolding images to make new sculptural forms. One piece that particularly caught my eye was a room where a sculpture was made that seemed to show the walls folding in on themselves down new lines, completely transforming the shape and space of the room by becoming an edgy multitude of dimensions and angles. He focused on the use of buildings and lines, and in one exhibition took sections of a building and made these into free standing sculptures in a white gallery space. This removal of that section of the building from the rest into the gallery space completely shifted its position. It became a separate part, it brought a questionable importance to that area. It made you consider what building it came from, why that section was specifically chosen. What is interesting is that in this case the separation makes us wonder about where it came from, but as Buren suggests the separation of the work from the studio does not, it is considered normal. '...the place for which the work is destined is not defined by the work, nor is the work specifically intended for a place which preexists it...' This is interesting as he talks of the two things as being separate,  the work is not intended for a specific location and the location is not defined by the work, the exist in their own as two separate entities. He is lessening the value of the final location of the work, and heightening the value of the studio, the place in which the work is ripped from. Buren suggests the opposite propositions when dealing with a work of art and curating. He states that works or art are all the same, and then that works of art are unique. How can we get a balance for this? If all works were unique then curating a combined show or collection would be impossible. Yet if all works were the same then the result of the curating would be incredibly boring. 

The text speaks of the role of the gallery, but emphasises on the works true place in the studio. There is a sense of reluctance when Buren is speaking of the gallery or museum, he seems to be resigning to the fact that the work will be taken from the studio and placed in the gallery. What does this then mean? Buren speaks of the plain white walls of the gallery, the uniform space that caters for all work in the most demographic way. You then question the result of the knowledge of this empty space. Buren speaks of the dullness of art where this is concerned. What is good in art is taken away, the passion of the studio that surrounds a work is stripped when it is removed and placed in these sterile white walls. He mentions the work of Constantin Brancusi in relation to this and how the artist battled this disconnection by bringing the audience to the studio space, to see the work in its prime, there was no disconnection, just the sense of seeing what was meant to be seen; completion. 

MOMA, Museum of Modern Art, NYC

Thursday, 18th December

After spending the week running around New York, the last thing we really wanted to do on our final day was walking around a 6 floor art gallery. However, I am glad we did as I felt we really had saved the best for last. The skyscraper structure of the building was hard to pin point along 53rd street, you would not expect the size of the building when you enter, but this is much like the rest of New York. The first piece you encounter when you enter the building is a series of photographs by Nicholas Nixon, titled Forty Years of The Brown Sisters. It consisted of a series of large scale black and white photographs, of four sisters, one taken each year with 8x10. A photograph was selected to represent each year and it was determined that the sisters would always stand in exactly the same order. This work appealed to me because not only was it photography but it was a clear indication of time passing and age, something that I have been considering in my own work with relation to my family. What I found interesting was the way that the viewer tended to shift quickly through the photographs, the order was oddly presented, starting from the top and going in three rows along, you could see some of the earlier photos and the more recent ones at the same time. This positioning made you look at the difference in the faces of the sisters, the lines or the change in hair style, slight indications that time had passed. The similarity in the physical outcomes of the photographs makes this distinction very difficult to notice yet it was still powerful. Most of the audience proceeded quickly to the final photograph after looking through the first few, eager to see how old the sisters had become, how well they had aged. The differences between the individual images was very small but when you compare the first and last photograph there is an obvious difference. It makes you think strongly of time, and family, how we exist with those around us and grow with them, age. I then darkly thought of any future photographs. What will happen when it comes to the point when they are to take the photograph and one of the sisters had passed away? I feel that this is what the end of the work questioned, how old are the sisters now. How different can their lives be? How often do they see each other? Could it just be for this yearly photo? It is the relationships that you do not see in the image. The work was a topic of conversation for many when walking around the first floor of the gallery, you had people comparing how well they had aged with the females in the photographs and then others who were laughing at what they would look like in photographs similar to this. Although the photos were personal, of one family, it spoke openly to others. 

I was surprised that the Matisse: Cut Outs exhibition was on, my Mum and I had just recently seen the same exhibition when it was at the Tate in London, and I must admit we were not particularly thrilled with it the first time round. The Matisse exhibition was located on the very top floor, dominating that space. The layout was similar to that of the Tate, I again found the video of Matisse making the work the most interesting aspect. I find it difficult to express why I dislike the work, its simplicity is unsettling, and not particularly exciting. The methods behind the work that you see in the film is much more interesting than the work itself. The larger pieces were much more appealing than the smaller ones, the sheer magnitude changed the simplified materials and technique into something else. My favourite piece of the exhibition was the stained glass window, the light shining through transformed the dull paper shapes into colours that screamed with brightness, using light to make the work seem three-dimensional. I felt that this exhibition was outshone by the rest of the work in the Museum of Modern Art.  

The following floor offered a much more exciting array of works to look at. I enjoyed the place so much that I find it difficult to pick which area I liked most, of all the new works these were by far my favourites. The exhibition was titled: The forever now, contemporary painting in an atemporal world. It explored the use of internet and the clashing of times and cultures that this access to information caused, it challenged the mixing of timelines, questioning the given of art history. It offered a proposition of new ideas. The show itself was striking, you first approach a series of large white canvases by Joe Bradley that hold simple school time sketches on them, these alone questioned what art was and played on the ideas of abstract expressionism and the theories of developing alter egos that were presented by Carl Jung. I made this connection with my own work from the second year of the degree where I studied Carl Jung's ideas of the "shadow". Paintings were interrupted by neon strip lighting and the subject of the frame was played with throughout. The most intriguing piece for me was a series of canvases without stretchers laid out on the floor. You were able to touch and pull about the crumpled and folded canvases at your feet, altering and changing the image as you saw fit. Many were unsure of touching the work on the floor, knowing this was not normal gallery behaviour. The piece in my mind questioned the position of the art galley, the cliche of paintings on wooden stretchers attached to a wall in a single line around the space. This was the most conceptually intriguing piece I have encountered in a long time, and enhanced the reading I have been doing of David Buren's thoughts on the role of the studio, and by connection the role of the museum or gallery. 

The next two floors were for me my favourite of the entire gallery. It was a vast collection of different styles and eras of the art world, bringing together many famous names and works, seeing them all combined was truly exciting. As you walked around the space you encountered works by many artists some of these including Van Gogh, Picasso, Matisse, Ernst, Carl Andre, Ad Reinhardt, Duchamp. There were four pieces in particular that I was childishly excited to see. What was great was the way that you would glimpse something in a distant room that you recognise and run to that and see something else and run then to that. The first that drew my attention was Van Gogh's Starry Night, which was the centre of attention in the room. It is one of my favourite paintings for a very odd reason. There was a fantastic Doctor Who episode on Vincent Van Gogh which explored his life which made me appreciate his work much more, it gave me the chance to learn more about some of his paintings and his life as it was very informative despite the programme it was made for. This connection for me is what I thought of when I looked at this piece. The second was the bricks of Carl Andre, I found these interesting to see in person because I had recently read an article about the controversy that this piece caused. The third was Jasper Johns Flag, which I had discussed in my second year essay on Conceptual Art. I remembered that it had recently been sold and it was fascinating to see this in actual size and put a physical image to the ones I had been looking at. The final piece that I really enjoyed seeing was Kosuth's piece of his definition, I looked at him also in my second year Conceptual Art essay and have continued on with linking his works to my dissertation. He is an influential figure for me, and I recently missed an opportunity to hear him discuss some of his works at a lecture programme, seeing a piece of his in person lessened the annoyance of this slightly. It was great having such history combined and collected in the two floors. And for me this is what made the day truly spectacular. The two floors are often rejigged and reconsidered as they stated that it was difficult to keep the work fixed as there were so many differing interpretations of the paths that art has taken, changing the exhibition regularly celebrates this.    

The final floor consisted of a exhibition that I had researched prior to going to New York after seeing an advert in Art Review. The exhibition was the work of Robert Gober, and was titled The heart is not a metaphor. The title is what drew me into the work in the first place, as a reader of terrible holiday romance novels this title struck a cord and gained my interest, although my view of what the work might be about was very different to reality. His pieces used varying home elements, taking objects we know well and altering the meanings. Mixing both purity and innocence with dark subjects. The bright wallpapers that adorned many of the walls were striking, and different from what you usually expect from a gallery. The homely feeling this brought contrasted with the images it was portraying, in particular one wallpaper featured drawings of slavery and discrimination, these images were facing you from every angle. The exhibition writing stated that the work portrayed that these were not incidences that simply happened in the past that we can forget, they are our background, a wallpaper, they will always remain there. The abstract of the home elements mixed with the stark linings of the bare wall structures showed an honesty and a transparency in the work. Creating an edge to normal home comforts, the works became sinister in a gentle way. The tone overlapping everything you knew about those objects. The exhibition had dimensional aspects  built cleverly to allow for holes in the floor that when you looked closer formed pools of water on the floors below, adding elements of an awareness of being in a multi floored building, like the dollhouse that sat on the floor of the gallery. The fabricated wall structures only further emphasised this feeling.

New York's Museum of Modern Art is an experience I will not forget. The variety of the works and the size of the space was enough to even hold the interest of three very tired people who have been walking non stop for a week.  

Guggenheim, New York

After an amusing pedibike tour through the paths of Central Park wrapped in a fluffy blanket, the Guggenheim space greatly contrasted with the reminder of old christmas film locations. After walking past the grand building of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Guggenheim stood out in its place between the overbearing skyscrapers of the city. I have never seen a building with architecture quite like this one, that in itself was a work of art and reminded me of Colchester's local Firstsite building. The centre of the building was ringing with a spiral sloping walkway adorned with art works and dotted with smaller galleries on each level. The white sloping floors allowed for a gallery experience that I have never before encountered. The gallery flowed well and the open drop of the centre of the building and the sheer size of this space guided you around the works. Which in themselves displayed superior levels of refinement and simplicity. 

The title of the main exhibition was ZERO. The work is from the period after the war, when countries were divided. Artists exhibiting in the space wanted to emphasise this point of a blank slate, a new start, an artists language in tune with hope. The work was very minimal, with single colours and a varied use of the grid. This exhibition took up the entire outer spiral wall space starting and finishing with a large room. As you walked around you could see the relationships of the works on the walls by various artists, connected by their simplicity and minimalist ties with the Guggenheim space. Heinz Mack explored the concept of painting as a self sufficient entity. The works were very light, which when paired with the bright white modern space, emphasised this idea of a new beginning. The final level of the exhibition, the one at the very top, was a display of varying light works, patterns and shapes were etched with light into the walls of the dark room, giving a sense of brightness and hope. 

There were adjoining rooms to the main exhibition space which housed a few varying smaller shows. The one which stood out for me was the work of V.S Gaitonde in the exhibition Painting as process, painting as life. The untitled array of works provoked an air of calmness about the room. The paintings created using tools and rollers were earthy and natural. Working with the idea of the symbolic and the spiritual the artist used vivid colours in which can only be described as visual shrines, whose sizes dominated the white wall space and gave a sense of completion. Each individual piece seemed whole. I must admit I was more enamoured with the space itself than the work inside it, I have never experienced anything quite like it. The exhibition matched the modern space, in which I am sure much older and traditional works would seem out of place, which is something that I felt about the levels in which we encountered these. If I had a chance I would definitely revisit the space again. 

Pop-Up exhibition at Firstsite, Colchester

We had a pop-up exhibition at Firstsite, Colchester, on the 26th November. It was exciting to be exhibiting in such a large and well-known space. We spent the morning setting up the work and then the show was open to the public from 1pm till 3pm, then had an hour to take the work down. I had been slightly unsure about what work I was putting in as I was questioning my presentation rather a lot and got confused as to what message I was trying to convey. I was worrying a bit too much about something that was only up for a few hours, so I decided to use it as an opportunity to experiment with context and how to display work effectively as well as also have some more time in the Bruce McLean exhibition that I have found so influential. 

I wanted to use the Bruce McLean work as inspiration for the Pop-Up exhibition. I connected with the work that was showing and felt that it was one of the best exhibitions that Firstsite had put on, at least of the ones that I have seen. I considered my reactions to the work and how the connection only formed once I had been told about the meanings behind some of the piece or how they were painted; the context. I thought that if I hadn’t known about those things I would have found the work a lot less appealing. His photography and use of contact sheets connected well with the photography work I had been doing for the studio module. His ideas and his thoughts on challenging conventions and the role of the art critic could easily be used in my dissertation. The connections were there for me but I wondered about those who didn’t quite get to that stage when walking around. His array of various mediums could possibly discourage a number of viewers as they wonder whether all the work is of the same artist, whereas for me this was more of the appeal. I do not particularly have one medium and tend to use lots of different materials also. 

I wanted to document other thoughts of people looking around the exhibition. I look my Nan and my Mum along with me one day and showed them around the exhibition. I didn’t tell them anything that I had recently found out about the work I just let their first impressions take hold. I recorded their conversation as they went round and took a series of film photos of them interacting with the space, never of them closely. The photos would get the idea of them interacting with the exhibition without it becoming personal. 

My intention was to combine the two. The conversation for me was the most interesting part, my Nan picked up on the elements that I knew she would. That some of the paintings looked like children could paint them, or the simplicity and humour of some of the others that she really did not connect with. These are a few snippets of the conversation that I thought were key and also featured greatly in the work:

Whats she taking a photo of Carol. Just ignore her. 

Do you want me to speak? There’s nothing to speak about.

I told you to take photos of my bins yesterday.

Nan’s on to a winner there Mum.

Has he done all these? Yeah all of these are his work, yeah. 

I see I like them ones over there though. Did he do them? Beautiful, absolutely. 

Do you not like it then Nan?

I think its lovely, I like the ones I can understand.

Sometimes you need to be told about it.

If somebody explained it to you you could relate to it a bit, some of them you think a little kiddy could do it but you couldn't obviously. 

No, you’re right they couldn’t.

What I found most interesting was the points that my Nan raised without much of a push. She questions the originality of works by stating that I could just go take the same photos. As well as considering the variety of works that one person can do. Most importantly my Nan states the value of being told about something in order to connect more with the work in question. What children cannot do is create the context and the meaning, it is the intention behind the work that makes a difference. 

The photographs that game out were very abstract and dynamic, the light was very bright in the room so that contrast was particularly high which made them tricky to print; I had to burn in certain sections in order for them to look right. The original idea was to have four of the photographs with four sections of the writing as a caption under each one. The images I chose were the ones that really displayed the first site space and my Mum and Nan interacting with the recognisable work on the walls. I had been experimenting with an old typewriter and found that this was a professional and clear way to write on these statements out, it looks intentional and adds an anonymous feel to the work. 

This plan for the work did come together in the end, however I had a slight upheaval in the middle where I questioned the effectiveness of the photographs. I planned on placing them in the Firstsite space away from our allocated location. The work would become a comment on the Bruce McLean exhibition. I wanted to include an email address on the back which asked for feedback. I realised that these photographs would be too big to place discreetly around the space, and so tried out many different means of making them smaller whilst also working with the writing. It became very complicated and stressful as no other format was really working. It was at this point that my tutor suggested I use the Pop-Up exhibition as a tool, instead of worrying about a finished outcome, I use the show to experiment with different ways of displaying the work. 

I was set on using the photographs and the words combined, and so made copies of all of these various sizes and versions that I had tried. I also took with me the original three photographs with the captions underneath. I then created a short video with a slide show of the images set to the sound recording of the actual conversation I had with my family on the day. My aim was to test out these different formats and see which ones got the best results and feedback. 

In reality it didn’t quite work out that way, although I knew this was the case because having to make the work in the space did not allow for mistakes to happen, if the show was on for an extended period of time technology problems could have been worked around, in this case there was just not enough time. There was something wrong with the system at Firstsite that wouldn’t allow for the sound from the video on my laptop to play. I decided not to show the film at all because it was only at this point that I realised the importance of the sound. The sound for me was the most effective, it immersed you in that atmosphere as you heard the children in the background and people talking, footsteps walking around the exhibition, it took you back to that time, made you mentally track their movements. Sound also allows for the viewer to use their imagination and picture what is happening, although sometimes I feel you need a visual clue to link it with somewhere, for this piece it was the photos. What I have been thinking about recently and what could be interesting, is the sound recordings I have been making of my conversations with my Nan when going through old photos. These are really powerful, however I think you would again need that visual clue to give the sound a context in which the audience can place the words in. 

As for the other pieces, I discussed the different formats with my tutor Jane Frederick and I realised then that by far I still preferred the larger photographs with the writing underneath, simplicity in this case worked better. I think I was making it too complicated. It was agreed that I should hang these in the space anyway. I still wished to use the smaller cards I had written with the postcard sized photographs, not only to experiment but I also felt that for me that was such a large part of the work, taking it out of the exhibition space and making a comment on the work being currently displayed in Firstsite. I also knew this was a great opportunity for feedback. I placed the small cards in Firstsite leaflets and next to the other postcards they sold. This was done without their knowledge. This sort of work for me I find interesting because it is not necessarily public, it is not known about, it is something that you stumble across. That was a much more personal part of the exhibition, although it wasn’t openly acknowledged I did not feel that the work was complete until I had tried this out. I am yet to receive any feedback from the cards. 

For me the work was successful, the fact that it was possible to make those links with the images and the Firstsite space and as a result the exhibition strengthened the work. I received good feedback on the larger photographs that I put in the exhibition space. It contrasted with the rest of the large colourful work that was in the room which I think worked well. I did not feel completely comfortable exhibiting work in that space, I find the space very imposing and rather unfriendly and I felt that that played on my mind throughout the day. Also, considering that it was only for the day you feel a lot less precious about the work than you would about work that was staying up for longer, although it is such a well-known space I much preferred making work for and curating the Waiting Room space the week before, I felt much more comfortable working and exhibiting there.

Bruce McLean: Sculpture, Painting, Photography, Film at Firstsite, Colchester

The Fine Art group had a day at Firstsite where we were given information about Firstsite promoting and helping young artists which will be relevant to us when we finish our degree. The current exhibition was that of Bruce McLean, it was a collection of his work throughout the years. We were shown around the space by a member of the Firstsite staff, Bethany explained some of his more famous pieces and the influences he had, as well as reactions he often gets to the work. 

I was completely blown away. He is well known for his variations between what mediums he uses, I often wouldn’t appreciate someone who paints in the style that he does. Very abstract, bold and bright. I much prefer photography, however I do appreciate paintings but it has to be something that really strikes. When I saw his koi carp piece Oriental Garden, Kyoto (1982) I realised that his work did just that for me. In relation to this, Bethany spoke of how he paints so quickly, she said he believes that in order to paint something you need to do it in that moment, as fast as possible, in order to capture what you are seeing without it being tainted by surroundings, people or thoughts. 

My dissertation focuses on Roland Barthes’ The Death of the Author (1967); exploring the ideas of interpretation and the role of the artist, the audience and the art critic. Going for God II (1982) is a painting by Bruce McLean that depicts his recognisable figure battling out of a surrounding sea of figures, as well as a stair like constriction of the restrictions of the frame. The painting goes against the idea of the critic, and the way that a single person can say whether something is good or bad, what gives them the power to decide this? His piece connected well with my dissertation, the role of the art critic has always had negative connotations, his work emphasises this desire to break out of the power of the critic. 

We have a Pop-Up exhibition at the Firstsite space in some of the meeting rooms which are connected together. I plan on reacting to the Bruce McLean exhibition in my work, exploring the viewer and how works are interpreted by different people.  

My Little House?

I am going to write a piece about my own work for The Waiting Room exhibition. After deciding on what photo I was going to include in the show, I then had to consider how to present it. I first needed a piece of writing that summed up the photo to me in correlation with the brief and my personal proposal. I found this piece incredibly difficult to write, I also did not mean for it to be as emotional as it was as this is not how I usually write. I looked at the photograph and wrote from my heart and found it incredibly sad. These are the words that went alongside the work:

My Nan marks her little house with life. The house contains her essence, until her presence seems to be held within each surface, each wall. An overwhelming sense of comfort, strength and softness. A reassurance that everything will be okay, you can get through things together, you just have to face it. Memories reside here of a time when things were very different: childhood. A time that has not been forgotten but displaced, making way for the complications of getting older. Yet in this space,these memories are held, preserved, waiting to be retold, shared, laughed about and lived once more. 


I thought about how I felt that that chair represented my Nan. The things that I thought about when I looked at it, what I felt when I enter her house. I attempted to encompass those emotions I had in a very short piece of writing, whilst referencing to the ideas of marks on life, how we are contained, our presence in a surface. I included not only this but what this presence makes me feel, or remember. This was a really important piece of writing for me, perhaps one of the most important things I have ever written, I have never been so emotional when writing before. I knew from that moment that my work needs writing like this, instead of writing something so analytical which is a usual reaction from me, I realise now I need to dig deep and write from the heart. The words were much more powerful. They were a part of the work for me, more important than the photograph even. After writing the piece I put it and the photograph together and tried to detach myself and look at it with the eye of the viewer, which is very difficult, if not impossible, but I at least needed to try. I made the connections with the photograph, by describing characteristics of my Nan which were visually the same elements that the chair had, I concluded that this connection was possible. I emailed Sarah this piece of writing and she felt it worked well with the photo, its always important to get someone else’s opinion who is not so involved, because although I feel it works, those who know nothing of my relationship with my Nan might not necessarily understand. Sarah said the piece made her feel very emotional which is something my work has never done, but I felt very proud of doing something like this that is so out of my comfort zone. I am usually very detached from my work emotionally, so this piece meant more to me than anything I had done before.

I then had to consider the presentation. I wanted to make sure that the piece of writing and the photograph were physically connected, purely because it was such a vital part, that connection needed to be known, if they were separate it would just look like an artists statement about the work; but this was the work. I had been experimenting with using an old typewriter that I borrowed from Sarah, I tried writing this piece out on that and it just worked. Its difficult to explain, but when you see something visually and it is just perfect for the piece you know you don’t have to try any other format: you have it. This added that age to the piece that was a continuous theme through the photograph and later the frame. I did consider handwriting the piece, I think this would have been personal but less clear and refined, my handwriting is terrible, and the typewriter had that quirkiness that worked with the image and the building. It also made the writing more formal, like a caption. 

The next issue was the frame. I knew I wanted to frame the piece and hang it horizontally, I had already decided as well that I wanted to attach the writing to the frame so that in hung down from string, this meant that not only was it connected, but could be hung or propped easily without ruining the effect of the work. Because of the amount of work we had in the exhibition I wanted to make sure that it was versatile. I didn’t really want a new bought frame for the piece, it wouldn’t fit in with the work and it would make it something that it wasn’t. I realised I needed an old frame. I went to my Nan’s house and looked through all the frames that she has at hers, and struggled to find one that worked with the aesthetics of the image. However, it was a very strange moment for me when I come across a perfect frame hung up on the wall of her little house. It was a photograph of my mum and my dad at their wedding, in an old fashioned black frame that was covered in dust and was quite fragile. The frame was perfect, it was bittersweet for me because my Dad passed away when I was younger and it was an emotional moment when I realised that a photograph of him was the one that worked perfectly. Although the frame was black and it visually worked, it was the meaning of the photograph that fitted so well with the emotions I have been going through throughout the making of the entire piece. I kept the photograph of my dad and mum behind my own photo, which fitted exactly right. My family and myself know what photograph is behind my work which in a way makes it even more special for myself, it was a personal touch that I knew would get the waterworks going when my family went to see the piece, it certainly did it for me. I looked at the finished piece and with a distanced eye could make the connections with the brief, and the writing underneath the photograph. As well as the parts of the image that were key. I was pleased with the piece, I think that its something that I would like to explore further, usually I would say that I could change this bit about it or something else, but for this, and the time that I made it, it was exactly right. Obviously it could have been developed but I didn’t want this, that is something that I will look into doing in the future. This piece was the start I really needed for this final year of the degree. 

As for the location of my work in the show it was on the pillar next to Sarah’s video piece. I had no problem with the location, I think it really made the work stand out. But the bright green paint of the walls was not the most ideal of backgrounds. Although the green made the work stand out, it was a bit too much, however a white wall would not have worked either unless I used ageing yellow paper to do the writing on so that it didn’t fade away. A old fashioned wallpapered wall would have worked well I think, almost like it would be returned to its natural setting, a piece of art in a place where you wouldn’t think you'd encounter it. I think the piece look refined, and I really thought out each element, it was quite simple, as is a lot of my work, so it looks intentional. I wish to evoke a certain feeling in the viewer and I think I did this. Particularly with my family, my Nan had not seen the writing at all and she cried when she read it. it was very personal and I knew that she would like what I put, it was important that I had her approval of the piece, in a way it was something for her more than the show. She liked it so much that I am going to frame it together for her for Christmas, maybe then I can see what the work would look like put back into the place that it came from: My Nan’s Little House.