ARTISTS TALKING

# 1 [27 January 2009]

This idea comes from the stating/showing [http://www.rich-taylor.co.uk/systems2/stating_showing/systems_redwire_ci.htm] series in which I come up with an idea either in writing or in the form of a drawing or series of drawings.  This idea runs from the logistical problems of projection and how this can be utilised and/or actualised as to represent something about the phenomena of perception within space.  The work will have much to do with illusion.  The drawings that are to be presented will be small and almost archival in scale, and will be framed.  They will record the ongoing workings out of the installation process that in the end will result in the projection itself.  The drawings will be mathematical in style and therefore analytical and technical in outlook, however their appearance will have more to do with the notion of illusion and how such a style in drawing emanates truth or indeed does not so.  The drawings will be of my own workings-out as an artist, so therefore will be process driven and will most probably be wrong.



The projection itself will be of a simple film that is made of the rolling out of electrical tape from a straight on angle.  In the actual film the tape will not reduce or enlarge in scale.  However, after the film is made its appearance will be altered in preparation for the projection to be shown at a given angle against a wall.  To deal with this angle and still present the tape as constant in scale there will be much adjustment mathematically to the actual film.  All the adjustments that are to be made will be inversely proportional to the affects of the reality of the situation or presentation.  Here I will be dealing with the problems and uses of perspective and how its illusions can be manipulated.

In the past I have presented other, more simple works, using the stating/showing method  [http://redwireredwire.com/page42.htm].  I have exhibited an actual photocopied drawing using the proportioned properties of the A4 sketchbook and externalised the initial ideas that were presented within the pages.  This photocopy was framed as an actual existing artwork.  Also installed was an actual investigation into the space from the drawing [as instruction] whether it is wall based or ceiling or floor based.  
What results is a relationship between the two.  Furthermore, such a relationship then becomes questionable, as the realisation that is the installation within the space is inevitably changeable and is dependent on the given architecture.  A question that comes from linguistic capabilities: what is stating and what is showing of the idea, and which comes first?

# 2 [5 February 2009]

?deifitcejbo semoceb neth egaugnal
A new portion of the blogging system: 

How to make language an object through typing certain things backwards?  

To first of all define the word ‘Stating’ and then to show the word itself as a possible object in space by typing the definition backwards; this will then help explain the reasoning behind the work that is being made.  Defining the word stating is to perhaps distinguish its meaning, linguistically, from the word showing.  Then there is a certain process that deals with how the act of defining can also be an act of representing.  Therefore to represent something is to define it against something else; thus the duality of the pieces that are made.  The objects that are made are that of archival references to certain understandings of something, and this something is usually an in depth look at an everyday occurrence, illusion, or object.

In this situation the everyday object is the electrical tape, the occurrence is it’s unwinding and application, and the illusion is its maintaining of size.  The illusion of size of course depends on an application of measurement, which necessitates a concept of proportion and perspective.

Then there comes the complexities of recording occurrence.  As an occurrence is ephemeral there will be a need to film its happening.  Then there comes the problem of filming, as in the very actualities of making the film.  In this there are inherent problems to do with perspective and a maintaining of proportion and such inherences are then reflected of course in the very way in which the film is presented.   


The way in which the film is to be presented is where the appearance of the work then becomes scrutinised: it is this scrutiny that I am interested in and how certain illusionistic capabilities can render the very simple contents of the film as non-changing in its presented environment.   

# 3 [9 February 2009]

The presentation reflects the studio?

The acquisition of a space to make the film [in mind of how this space is to be re-construction in presentation].

Does the arena in which the film is made have to reflect the very arena that the film is then to be displayed?  Or does all of the changeability in perspective etc. happen within the digital editing of the film.  In other words does the camera [that which films] be inversely proportional in angle to which the projector is pointed?  Or, does the camera face the tape head on, and then does the digital editing account for the changing in perspective?

[within the filming process there needs to be a delicate handling of the tape in order for there to be a smooth unwinding of the tape – this smooth unwinding will also be slowed down within the actual edit of the film as a whole]

previous and simpler films have been made [see images].  Confronting different coloured backgrounds, a difference in background colour may be used in the film other than white…  In the previously made films there is an intervention of the hand [that of the artist/the maker/the doer]; however in the new film that is to be made, no hand will be present.  Another device will therefore have to be crafted in order to unwind the tape, to give the illusion that it is unwinding itself....

# 4 [28 February 2009]

Intimate/macro space and covered/trajectory space an exploratory installation that with projection will, through material bind the two. 

An every day material such as electrical tape exists in its potential state as a sizeable object that can be experienced intimately, regardless of perspective.  Furthermore when the tape is then unwound it begins to cover the space, which then transplants it into the domain of perspective, and it is at this point where the medium of presentation comes to the fore in negotiating the trajectory space.  

Two different coloured tapes will be used to begin this exploration.  One will unwind up to the other which begins unwound; the second then winds up after collision with the first.  The frame in which the film is projected (or the composition in which the content is edited) acts as a boundary for where to tape can extend to.  This boundary therefore prevents the second tape from overrunning the perceivable space and acts as a wall upon which the second tape bounces off and then begins to wind itself back into its original state, thus the cycle starts all over again as a reflection of itself.

The amount of space covered depends on the space in which the projection exists.  However as the actual tape that is filmed will be present in the installation set up and it will be a prerequisite for the tape in the film to be proportionate to the tape that physically exists.  The tape that physically exists is to be presented upon, (thus highlighting) the apparatus/equipment that makes the installation possible: namely the DVD player and the Digital Projector.

The film itself will be especially simple and will be played on loop as if the context is endless and the person viewing the work can enter at any point and exit at any point.  The speed of the film however will be notably slow as this is needed to make reference to something that is almost still but then is moving with a willingness of momentum.  This willingness of momentum I think is important as the covered space is then more strenuous.  The film can be made at a good speed but then will have to be slowed down during editing.  

# 5 [6 March 2009]

The Film and how it Works.Film Works…  

So the DVD player and the digital projector become sculptural objects, through their role as image producing machines.  Image making machines become objects and the objects become subjects thereof.  Certain artists seem to be making a feature of the workings of actual image production and presentation.  Certain artists seem to be making specific use of a cine-film projector, presenting its presence as an actual sculptural and animated entity.  This is what I am interested and prospectively engaged in.  I feel like I need to wrap televisions in order to signify them as sculptural, and in order to separate them as individual entities…  I like how televisions can be used as 3-dimensional objects that can then contain 2-dimensional information.  There is a certain dialogue that happens when they are presented as actual artworks.  This dialogue happens through the negotiation between illusion and physicality through presentation.  The subject of the televisions (other than that they are themselves) is the content that is shown upon them, and this content should always refer to other drawings and evidence apart.   

However what happens when the very content is the subject of the object within which it is shown?  Is it therefore within or actually upon?  It is interesting how the projectable space, through its illusion in light, acts as an actual boundary within which something is confined.  It is this confined space that is then explore-able in its changeability in actual space:   

Two different coloured tapes will be used to begin this exploration.  One will unwind up to the other which begins unwound; the second then winds up after collision with the first.  The frame in which the film is projected (or the composition in which the content is edited) acts as a boundary for where to tape can extend to.  This boundary therefore prevents the second tape from overrunning the perceivable space and acts as a wall upon which the second tape bounces off and then begins to wind itself back into its original state, thus the cycle starts all over again as a reflection of itself. 

# 6 [13 May 2009]

Here is an image taken from the film series... that i seem to have left behind for a while.


the title of the work still seems rather obscure. i will ask anyone who is willing to answer, at what point does a title for a work happen? and does it stay the same?  i for one seem to re-invent the title almost every time the work is re-exhibited.   As the work is re-staged according to the new environment, or depending on new components added or old ones taken away, the title changes also.

What also seems to be happening is that i make work, in digital format, and then come to saving the work on my computer or hard-drive.  At this point i have to come up with a name for the file, this name has to be   easy to remember for me... it is interesting how this file name can also become the name of the work just out of simplicity.  So the name that i use to understand the whereabouts of by work, then becomes the name that the audience reads in order to engage with the work.   This is an interesting transition... 

# 7 [24 July 2009]

I have just blogged on my other blog (OutofOffice) where I am blogging about an exhibition proposed for the beginning of next year (January 2010). It made me think about this blog and how I am neglecting it, I seem to be thinking this with the absence of much else to do - in other words I do not work as such at the minute I have just been spending some time updating my online presence.

I have recently re-located to Glasgow and have joined the Transmission Gallery as a member, for the price of a day of invigilation: I opted for this in order to hopefully meet some new people and get some more contacts. Take a look at my online profile with a picture of a mixed media piece I did earlier this year and also a little more information about my practice: and a biography!
Richard Taylor on Transmission

The best thing about this website is that you are searchable by tagged key words that relate the you practice: for instance if you go to the website and click on Drawing I will come up, if you click on Conceptual I will come up, if you click on Animation I will come up... etc.

I have also produced an online profile on LinkedIn:
This seems like a good resource and a good way to network with people: you can upload information about current and past projects or employment. You also upload a picture of yourself, which is horrible but also I guess for the purposes of signification (I tried to upload a picture of my artwork but it would not let me).

Another good thing about this is that it lets you link to other online applications like google presentations and slide shows of work, I am yet to get my head around this though.
Google is a very useful tool
Take a look at my LinkedIn profile here:Richard Taylor on LinkedIn

# 8 [26 July 2009]

To engage with a practice that confronts problems can be problematic, but it also produces possibility: this comes from re-assessing understandings and concepts that come from the things I have learned and characteristics I have attained... things familial.

Many projects to date have been self-funded by scraping the barrel: I see this as pertinent to how I work fitting with my work ethic. Being at the tail end of a now "better off" working class family, the word resourcefulness was driven in to me as was the not so healthy practice of holding on to one's thoughts, remaining proud but also quite unprepared. Thank goodness for resourcefulness and the ability to be experimental whilst unprepared.

A family of hairdressers and business degree graduates in the end produced an artist wanting to pursue his 'career', but to that I have phone conversations asking, "When will you get a job that earns you money?" I see my father less than I would like, whilst greying he holds on to less of his thoughts than ever before. I often think about where I get my creativity, is it handed down along with the grey hair gene? Does the fact that my father says he was "always good at technical drawing" - something he let slip not long ago - mean I somehow attained a knack for putting pencil to paper? I also sometimes think, "Why don't I just become a hair dresser it'll earn me money" As earning money was always presented as something essential in producing consolidation I'm standing by that inherited resourcefulness:

Finding my practice then, is a process that happens with the things I already have or things easily attained (things reminding me of my father's garage). I then utilise a process driven activity to re-configure such materials (re-organising the garage...) rendering a practice that is more about notions of discourse, the problems of language and understanding, using words and objects, their descriptions and states: it is relatively open ended and non-problematic.

What is problematic is the nature of exhibition. My artistic concerns extend to the application of a work or series of works to visually communicable scenarios; they confront inherent problems and thus possibilities, using presentation as a medium. Working site-specifically is in some ways easier as I adapt myself to various spaces and intricacies. However what lies within this is the difficulty in having an overriding statement on what the work is about. What I do seems to be defined by the different projects I complete, by the certain places in which I intervene. I often think that in order to somehow consolidate the work that I produce I should do an MFA: in this I would hope that congregating with others in an institutional environment would make things clearer... or better placed.

But first I guess comes money before any such consolidation: meanwhile I can rely on my knack for technical drawing, solve problems by cleaning out and exploring a garage or two...

# 9 [28 August 2009]

A recent exhibition at Wakefield's Westgate Studios puts some of my work in context with the interior and exterior environment.

The exhibition falls under the name Artomata and consults the notion of artists in multiple disciplines working under the process of the artist as a machine.

This piece works with the idea of representation. the chess borad is painted, the painting is framed. the subject is the chess board, which is then presented as the the representation. where as the painting as it resides on the floor emenates elements of object, the things that is represented instead of the actual representation itself. the tools of communication and rules are the chess pieces, these are arranged and drawn into the space.

the whole piece interacts with the sun coming through the window. the pattern of gridded fire escape and the radiator inside the sash window. all elements of visuality that interplay with notions of representation.

# 10 [13 September 2009]

These are some images from a project I am currently working on: culminating in a visual exhibition, the work has taken on elements of research and exploration into architectural space and function. The subject is a church, in which the exhibition itself will be held. I am exploring notions of representation as the building is seen as a functional arena, a timepiece, and an example of period interior design. Furthermore the idea of hidden / non-public space that is functional to the place as a timepiece (the bell tower) will be represented in the physically accessible alter flats.

The symbols are taken from the design on the alter flats, yet are painted systematically to engage with the page and lines in which they fit. The other imagery is made up from notational script / ideas / scribbles as well as plans and forecasts of what will eventually be a self emanating light installation.