Weekly Summary: 25.1.16 – 31.1.16
by Beauchamp Art
This reasonably productive week featured drawing at gig, digital painting from charcoals, 3D sculpting with attention on hair and the interplay of textures and colour between the contrasting materials. In addition to updating my website by forming an Exhibition Portfolio, and collecting together the few publications within which my photos and other works have been featured (though the latter primarily consists of my documentation of Henry’s various installation in magazines and so forth).
Moreover, having been sent information for Praksis, a residency in Oslo, around March/April time, with David Blandy, and artist I have research previously, alongside various others, I have begun the process of applying, although the deadline looms. However, the ability to take this opportunity depends on whether my contract at NUA is to be extended, and so has resulted in some contemplation of future prospects. This was discussed with my former tutor Victoria when I encountered her during the week, and suggested that an MA and going into further education promplty would be beneficial. Given I have been acting as a vicarious student in absentia, a proximo alumni, then this would seem a sensible recourse; to be engaged with a studious course. Although I have been hesitant about undergoing another level of a Fine Art qualifications, it would not be a totally illogical progression; rather than attempting to leap-frog into academia, allowing my critical and practical engagement to remain somewhat intertwined would likely be a reasonably positive pursuit overall.
Also, with my ongoing illustrative practical project (essentially an apocalyptic social apartheid/class struggle narrative), I have had to question my motivations for wishing to engaging in the subject, and the need to avoid glamorizing and glossing over the genuine conflicts of the current era. However, this has lead to questioning whether individuals coming from a working class background can be engaged in the arts without, to some degree becoming a class traitor, unless that individual’s work explicitly deal with such subjects, or is critical of the context? Nevertheless, does this then limit the potential of the artist through their ‘otherness’ to the middle/upper class status quo? Thus calling the role of art, state funding, propaganda and commercialism into the miasmic discourse. Conversely, could it be asked whether the artist must intrinsically stand (not just in opposition to but) in critique of existing dogma in order to perform a useful social function? Eisner stated thus:
The artist must, as an artist, be an anarchist and as a member of society, as a citizen dependent on the bourgeoisie for the necessities of life, a socialist — Kurt Eisner, 1919
Admittedly, this is a product of some personal conflict regarding an association with others and institutions that are a product of and are designed to produce for a bourgeois class, whilst inevitably being reliant on some level of exploitation and dis-empowerment of ‘others’ (‘the masses’, et al. designated to a secondary position as sub-humans beneath the deified wealthy elite who reap the benefits of others’ labour to further a financial apartheid rather than attempting to redistribute resources, e.t.c.).
And all of the above with social arrangements in tandem.