MFA Dialogue with Claire Elizabeth Barratt and MPhil Presentation Slideshow and Notes

During the 2016 Summer Residency I am in the process of completing one degree program [MFA Creative Practice] and beginning another [MPhil/PhD Creative Practice]. During the first week of residency this involved two presentations that were in one way polar opposites yet in another where simply the continuation of the explorations I undertake with my art.

I don't want to write too much about either presentation at this point; however I want to provide here snippets of both for the readers of this blog to use as either a memory aide or a glimpse into those two moments.

The first is a link to a portion of the live video stream that was a part of the MFA Dialogue with Claire Elizabeth Barratt RAW/PORTRAYAL/MATERIAL/SELF/PORTRAYAL/RAW/MATERIAL/SELF/MATERIAL/PORTRAYAL/RAW on Tuesday, July 26 in Studio 14 of Ufer Studios, Berlin-Wedding. The video was recorded on an iPhone6 which through FaceTime projected the stream onto the wall at the far end of the space. A number of viewers of the performance/installation/dialogue used to film what was happening in the space.

The second is the slideshow with notes from the MPhil introductory presentation to my work and proposal at this stage in the process which I gave on Friday, July 29 in the same place, Studio 14, Ufer Studios.

MPhil Presentation Notes to Slides

1.    quick look at video of FaceTime live stream projected…https://youtu.be/t5mSzmxebys
2.   
3.  Who I am and what I’ve done. I’ll keep this brief as we’ve been together almost a
    week, had a chance to talk some, and hopefully everyone had the opportunity to
    attend the MFA Dialogue I had with Claire Barratt Tuesday which presented my
    recent work. For those unable to be present at the DIALOGUE the bit of video I
    showed before starting was part of the live stream we had set up during the
    performance-installation portion of the presentation. If you were not there and
    would like to know more about this, I’d be happy to talk to you later; and the
    same goes for if you were there and want to talk with me about it.
4.  This is where I spend most of my time; a section of my studio with an opposing
    easel and a wall.
5.  Here I am working at the wall on the third movement of my MFA thesis work
    Sonata: Allegretto. [the painted panels being configured and reconfigured in the
    space during the video at the start]. This was before this painting passage’s
    fragmentation.
    I am a painter. What this means is that my practice is centered around the act of
    painting and the object[s] which are a product of this act. Painting is the
    beginning and outcome, but never the end, of my research. Although a painting
    might reach a point of resolution where I let it go, I don’t believe a work is ever
    really finished; instead the point of resolution generates the next starting point in
    my process.
6.  Metaphors I frequently use to describe my process involve driving. Sometimes
    I’m behind the wheel; however more often painting is the driver, the vehicle and
    the main highway on the journey. There are side roads that enrich the journey,
    and this is when I take the wheel. Sometimes these are enforced detours,
    intentionally taken to obtain skills or information that is not obtainable along the
    main road, other times they could be a “Sunday drive”; taken for pure pleasure.
    I’ll discuss the side roads more momentarily.
7.  The past two decades in my practice I’ve explored the physiological,
    psychological, and cultural fragments that are the building blocks of identity; the
    spaces in which these parts are repeatedly constructed, combined, unfurled and,
    at times, concealed to form and re-form what we might consider to be the whole
    self.    The image I am showing is a photo of myself with a piece I’ve been working on
    for a number of months.

    My process involves taking an idea, a source image, through multiple iterations;
    fragmenting it; putting it back together in various ways using different [mostly
    paint-based] media and seeing what happens, what information is revealed along
    the way.

    This piece is two canvases, 40 x 50 cm mounted with a piece of mirror between.
    The canvas on your right [lighter] is an oil painting whose origins can be traced
    back to a series of photos I took of my flesh in a mirror and have worked with
    across various media for the past 18 months. The canvas on your left [darker] is
    a photo-print on canvas of the painting on the right. I’ve glazed in sections with a
    clear acrylic gloss varnish.

    I am showing this work as an example of a side road taken in the studio,
    exploring imagery, ideas and materials I was simultaneously applying along the
    main road, but in a different way. This piece may or may not develop into a
    ‘resolved’ work or become part of a larger body of similar works, but that was not
    so much the intention. The intention was to play with the idea and materials in a
    different way as a means of gathering knowledge which could be applied to the
    main works I was focused on at the time, or to future work.

    Let’s call this a ‘study’; and I spend a lot of my time playing with studies between
    my easel and wall.
8.  In my most recent work [TI-MFA: Self Portrayal] I explored individual identity
    through self portraiture. I looked at how the ever changing understanding and
    expression of the fragmented self, existing within the defined space of the
    triangular relationship formed between the artist, the object [painting-self portrait],
    and the spectator as described by Richard Wollheim in the first lecture in a series
    held at the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC in 1983, published in
    Painting as an Art (Princeton, 1987) functions with regard to the artist’s
    application and manipulation of truth in self portrayal.

    This image shows the three versions of artist books I’ve made using the thesis
    text and Sonata images as a basis. [seen on table in video] The format I chose
    for the artist book, the unbound text and images contained in a box outfitted with
    mirrors is a tactile expression the relationship Wollheim spoke of and the
    fragmented and reconfigure-able nature of identity I am addressing.
9.  Part of my thesis research included a closer examination of the self portraits of
    Marcel Duchamp. Seen on the left is the self portrait of his alter ego, Rrose
    Selavy in a photo executed by Man Ray under the direction of Duchamp in 1923.

    Looking at Duchamp’s work led to the development of the question of what
    happens to the value of ‘truth’ in representation of identity once the control of the
    artwork is ceded by the artist to the spectator, and ultimately leading to what I am
    proposing for the next segment of my journey.

    On the right is the self portrait Marcel Duchamp at the Age of 85taken in 1945
    under Duchamp’s direction by New York commercial photographer Percy
    Rainford to accompany a feature on the artist’s life in the magazine View.
    Duchamp was in fact 58, not 85 at the time. It was the backstory to this self
    portrait by Duchamp which sparked the question for me: What happens when the
    truth of identity is a fiction to begin with?
10. My recent research on identity led to questions pertaining to artworks produced
    by alternative identities of the artist; questions of how the production of an
    artwork in the guise of a fictional, or at times fictitious identity, impacts conceptual
    and formal aspects of the work as well as the complexity of the relationship of
    artist-work-spectator.

    In Eastern and Western traditions artists have for various reasons created
    artwork attributed to alter-egos, pseudonyms, altered identities, or heteronyms.
    Ex. include to escape a traumatic experience or memory thru the ‘other’; to
    create free from restrictions of gender, class or culture; or to enable the creation
    of art which differs conceptually or formally from the work for which the artist is
    already known, and otherwise could be unacceptable or damaging to the artist’s
    career or the value of previously produced works.

    Since Duchamp artists have increasingly explored the formation, manipulation     
    and questions of identity in their work instigated and in response to the expanded
    discussion of the politics of identity [race, gender, sexuality, class, and mental or
    physical abilities].

    Much of this work has occurred, or been recognized as being produced by artists working in   new media and performance genres, though the questions being     
    asked pre-date the recent interests in all things ‘identity’ and artists working in all     
    media continue to explore these questions as well.

    Whatever reasons an artist chooses to create art in the guise of an ‘other’,     
    characteristics of the identity from which the work is produced are a part of the
    work.

    Identity is a construct; art created and attributed to an identity separate from the
    artist’s own cannot be examined conceptually or formally without consideration of
    ho and h the artist chose to build the new artist-persona the way she did.  

    These choices impact not only the conceptual and formal manifestations of the     
    artwork created by the new persona, but also the materiality, a term I use to     
    encompass qualities of the object that are both formal and tactile, which as the
    basis of the works’ formal expression are important to defining an object as an
    object.
11. Returning to this image I showed earlier; Materiality and concept of the object/
    work intersect in a liminal space, much like the gap seen here between the
    original and its copy.

    This space, seen metaphorically, is also the type of space one could find the
    constructed identities of the artist-creator and the spectator.

    The interplay between the artist and her newly created artist-persona within this
    liminal space will be the focal point of the following questions I address in my
    research.
12. 1. Ho is the materiality of the paintings created by me, the artist, and my
    fictional artist-persona impacted by our interaction within this liminal space?
13. 2. Ho might the fictional character of a painting’s creator, who is also a work of
    art, manifest itself in terms of an artistic style in the paintings that is different from
    the style of mine as the artist who created this alternative persona?
14.  3A. How does the addition of the fourth entity, the fictional artist-persona, into the
    of artist-object-spectator relationship impact this relationship; and what relevance
    does the relationship’s occurrence within a liminal space have to the paintings
    occupying the space of the object in the relationship?
15.  3B. Is it possible to expand the relationship to that between artist-artist/object-
    object-spectator to exist in a non-liminal space; or is it by nature a relationship
    that only can occur between the gaps?
16.  This third question will necessitate a closer examination of liminality in the artist-
    object-spectator relationship, how it is manifested and defined.
17.  Finally to end this section, as artists we are creating art in a time that not only
    houses, but nurtures broad approaches to the exploration of personal and group
    identity within a wide range of individual and collective creative practices.

    Seen here is the cover of the current, Summer 2016, issue of Artforum featuring     
    the theme ‘Art and Identity’. The cover work is by Barbara Kruger and is a
    response to the letter she received requesting her participation in this issue.
    Kruger’s response was to mark up and question the language used to describe
    our understanding of identity today and how it is expressed.
    For the hyphenated word ‘post-identity’ Kruger chose to respond to ‘post’
    separate from and together with ‘identity’. Kruger writes, and here I’m reading the
    text for the whole word, ‘post-identity’:

    “So we might assume identity is malleable, fluid, shifting. Naming, pointing and     
    categorizing are no longer unexamined actions. Can you control the drive to
    name, assume or point? If you could do that, would you? How?”

    How?

    The questions I am addressing in my research will provide a solid foundation for
    future contextualization of the impact of fictional identities as creators of material
    objects to the objects and artist-object-spectator relationship within a liminal
    space.
18. Here I’ll attempt to speak of my proposed methodology and methods for the
    studio and written research.
19. Returning to my first slide:
    As a painter the place at the core of my artistic research practice is the studio.
20. The next few slides I’ll run through quickly as an example of one ‘side road’
    method I am currently employing not necessarily to create heteronyms but as an
    exercise to build my skills in developing character through image making. These
    are a series of mixed media works, approximately 18 cm x 24 cm on paper
    Arches hot press watercolor. They begun as collages in a bound sketchbook
    using imagery from fashion magazines, photo remnants from my past projects,
    as well as scraps of paintings, drawings and prints laying around in my studio to
    create portraits of persons encountered by one of my existing heteronyms while
    on she vacationed in Florida and which I based on the stories she told me. These
    collages are then taken through multiple iterations of scanning, printing, painting
    over, re-scanning…and each step along the way includes a digital scan of the
    image which then exists virtually.

    The current stage a few of these character studies find themselves in is a return
    to direct collaboration with my heteronym, Melusine van der Weyden, who has
    collaged text to the fifth iteration of the work. These can be viewed in person at
    the International Experimental Art Space organized by TI student miChelle Vara.
    There are events after this evening’s presentation, and the creative minds
    potluck dinner this Sunday at 7 PM to which all are invited to come see mine and
    Melusine [along with a other TI colleagues’] work.
21-25.
26. Development of heteronyms requires skills that I do not necessarily have access
    to through painting. Therefore I am looking to areas outside artistic research for
    methodologies which will lend themselves to this project.

    Two areas I am looking to are: Theater/Performance and Writing/Literature.

    Within the area of theater/performance I am looking to Stanislavski’s system for a
    ‘natural’ development of character. This involves familiarizing myself with his
    teachings, exercises, and application of concepts by a variety of actors and     
    schools; and from there formulating methods suitable to my own practice.

    In the area of writing/literature I am considering the of use qualitative research     
    methods via case studies from literature, specifically the experimental writings of
    twentieth century authors Fernando Pessoa and Robert Musil, to study how     
    these authors developed and expressed fictional characters, heteronyms and
    characteristics of identity in their writings which consist of prose, poetry and
    philosophy, what they were saying and why.

    I will then incorporate the information learned in my own experimental methods of     developing the paintings as well as in the written documentation and exegesis of     
    the process.
27. I will use a combination methods from art historical, psychoanalytical and
    phenomenological methodologies to build a basis upon which I’ll address these
    questions through the medium of painting, specifically the vocabulary of
    abstraction as applied to the genre of self portraiture; and through the written
    portion of the project documentation and dissertation. This will involve methods
    such as case studies of historical and contemporary artists working with issues of
    identity, alter egos, and abstraction; and the examination and interpretation of
    texts on identity, liminality and materiality.
28.  To end I’d like to summarize how I currently envision the form this research will
    result in.
        —The creation of a heteronym who paints.

        —A main exhibition highlighting the abstract self portrait paintings of the
        heteronym as well as my own painted self portraits created in parallel to     
        those of my heteronym; with the possibility of a smaller, exhibition
        featuring works I have done related to the creation of the heteronym as
        well as works created by the heteronym as side roads taken along the
        way.

        —A book in the guise of an exhibition catalogue, which forms the written
        portion of my doctoral thesis. This will contain the written defense of my
        thesis comprised of writings under my own identity as well as that of my
        heteronym.

Finally I want to add that this website is in the process of being re-conceptualized to better serve my MPhil/PhD research. Currently it is configured for the project Self Portrayal. Those pages will remain in an archive form on this website for the next few months until they move to their new home in the Transart Institute archive which is currently under development.

My initial MPhil/PhD proposal which is currently under revision is not posted here at this time in because of the current site configuration. Please use my presentation as a guide for the direction I am moving with this.

July 15, 2016 post of links to Summer Residency 2016 Reading Diaries

My workshop reading diaries for Summer Residency 2016 can be accessed either via this link to the menu page or to each individual workshop page by clicking on the course title below.

Documentation- Forms of Reflection with Merete Røstad

PhD Workshop “Live Writing” with Geoff Cox

Introduction to the PhD Viva Voce Examination at Transart Institute with Simon Pope

Subjectivity and the Mirror: Framing the Self with Ruth Novaczek

Tools of Engaging Conflict with Dorit Cypis

May 15, 2016 The Last Post

Prologue

This month is an update of the past month’s activity and musings and the past year’s, two years’, project work. The structure of the website highlights the work under the top menu header MFA Thesis Project and Year One Archive.

This is the last post of this particular segment of my journey and I want to create a slightly different posting than previously. With the exception of an image related to my studio windows at the end of each of this year’s postings I have rarely included images in the blog posting. I’ve decided to include more visuals directly in this post along with hypertext links as connections to the thoughts bouncing around inside my head as I write. I suggest clicking on any links for a bit more inane insight to the depths or shallowness of my internal process.

And now our feature presentation…

The Month

The old English saying “April showers bring May flowers” is a reminder to have patience and persistence of hope even when surrounded by grey clouds and heavy rains; trusting that when the clouds and rains pass an abundance of beauty and sweet smells will take their place.

Try explaining that saying to a cat.

The reality the saying for me is, despite having the intellectual capacity to understand its meaning and origins and enough experience embedded in me to trust that, yes, the sun will shine and the flowers will bloom, I react more like a cat on a rainy day when facing a downpour or sustained drizzle. Pacing the studio in a lousy mood, yowling to those around me to turn the sun back on this instance, as if they could. Finally settling grumpily into a pile of blankets to sleep in self-generated warmth until that sun comes out again and I can bask in its heat while lounging on the studio steps under the blooming Oleander.

Despite intermittent rains and near frost, the past month has produced an abundance of  fragrant blooms outside the greenhouse as well as within.

Mid-month saw the last submission of my MFA thesis report text. This involved spending the weeks prior thinking, reading [not just my draft], re-reading, writing [not just my paper] and re-writing with the goal of fleshing out the paper’s identity. This included the addition of technical elements as well as adding a Preface and a Postface, strengthening the relationship between the written and visual, and provide the reader a set ‘jug ears’ by which to more assuredly grasp hold. Before these additions had suggested to a colleague who was getting a bit lost in the draft of the text to imagine the words read by Abbott and Costello after having just sat through readings of Beckett and Stoppard; probably not the best help through the text.

My primary concern was the length the format imposed upon the paper. The word count is reasonable, however the page count is at a glance overwhelming. I have been trying to consciously write less and say more. A reader of the final paper who had no knowledge of my attempts to add some ‘nothingness’ into my practice, accurately identified the source of the lengthiness by saying I have filled so much of the paper with nothing. The reader did mean this in a positive way, and I accept the remark in an equally positive manner.

The paper’s length impacts the ability to produce an artist's book within a justifiable economic framework, something I’ve also been considering. I have come up with a solution which reduces the volume by half while adding a stronger connection between the text and the painting [Appendix], and within a format that ties together elements I’ve worked with over the past two years. Here is a photo of some studies of pages, none these have made the final cut.

The pages of the text I am most content with are those in the Postface because I feel they provide a clear and open inconclusive conclusion in alignment with my thesis statement and my practice; positions the further forward momentum of my research; and tie together the visual form and function of the text as I conceived it. Here are a few pages to give an idea of how things shaped up in the end.

I like this page from an earlier segment too.

Aside from the paper I spent the month in the studio completing the third movement of the Sonata. Sonata: Allegretto (Das Ding) Like the previous two movements the third developed at its own pace and in its own style within the structure I had established. True to the role of a third movement it achieved a fuller, and maybe even more conclusive state than the first two, at least when viewed as a painting prior to its fragmentation. As I worked I found myself aware of the elimination of an overall approach to composition with each layer of paint applied, similar to the second movement. A brief interruption of working on the painting occurred in early April with a weekend trip away from the studio, that distance, time spent looking, listening and doing nothing, along with communication on approaches to painting I had with Andrew Cooks precipitated a shift that I feel had positive results on the process in combination with a period of 14 hours where the paint, the brush, the paper on the wall became the pile of blankets I needed to self-generate some warmth on an otherwise cold and rainy weekend. Here is the third movement pre-fragmentation.

I had a hard time bringing myself to physically cut apart this movement. I needed two weeks until I broke out the X-acto knife. Before then I cut the painting apart digitally with my iPhone and formated those photos to include in the Appendix of the paper, and I considered a number of ways to not cut apart [completely] the painting and still maintain the integrity of the piece as the third movement. In the end I decided to file away those thoughts for future explorations and stick with the plan.

What helped me to follow through with my original intentions was work I had been doing the previous week in the studio making collages in my sketchbook and over-working a set of those digital cut-ups of the third movement I printed on Arches 300g hot press Grain Satiné watercolor paper at Andrew’s suggestion; and the timing of this review of the Lee Krasner exhibit at Robert Miller Gallery. In that time had come to realize by not cutting apart the painting I was exerting the control over it that I was aiming to negate with the whole piece. The painting physically fragmented still exists, it does its work, and can and will be worked and re-worked in a variety of iterations. This is Sonata on May 10, five months after its initial drawing on January 10, in its current, performable state.

The Year[s]

The main artery of the past two years has been this website, documenting the process as a form of self portraiture; here is where everything I’ve explored comes together. The past weeks has made me more conscious of the relationship of my practice to the ‘infinite loop’ of computer programming I mentioned in my presentation during the 2015 Winter Residency. For me this is an intentional looping, with each trip around a gathering of new and re-discovering of old information, and then applying it as needed. At times I might choose to interrupt the loop, but it is never done with the intention of ending the loop; just a pause to allow the processor to catch up before the process resumes. Those pauses can be any length, anywhere along the loop.

In a recent Skype Andrew Cooks reminded me of the conversation we had in the courtyard at Uferstudios outside ‘the box’ that first summer residency and Jean Marie Casbarian’s question she posed to everyone they met with that summer:

“Residency is over, you’re back in your studio, what’s the first thing you’re going to do?”

I’m not sure how I answered this; I’d like to think by saying “begin my loose-leaf Journal Pages” which by the time I left Berlin was what I intended to do as soon as I was back in my studio, and is what I did do. The work I’ve been doing the past ten days at my table in the studio feels very much the same as those Journal Pages, yet at the same time very different. While I will spend the next eight weeks preparing for the third summer residency of my MFA by making those artists books, gathering all that is here on this website onto CDs, preparing the reading logs for the workshops, figuring out the details on packing and transporting what I am bringing with me, and all those other little details, I’m not pressing the pause button just yet. I’ll also begin the first residency for the MPhil/PhD; infinitely loopy.

To be continued.

MCP506 Final Paper

My MCP506 Final Paper can be accessed directly at http://www.robynthomas-explorations.com/mcp506-final-thesis-paper.

The paper is best read on a tablet or smartphone screen.

The images included in the Appendix can also be viewed in the Gallery page http://www.robynthomas-explorations.com/every-single-note

Links to April 15, 2016 Updates

Here are direct links to the updates for April 15, 2016. Links to the galleries and writings are contained within the text for the April 15, 2016 Monthly Blog update with the exception of a text posted after that post. I've include a direct link to it here.

April 15, 2016 Monthly Blog Update

Fourth Studio Advisor Meeting 150 Word Response

600 Word Response to Spring 2016 Skype Crit

Additional Essay

April 15, 2016 Monthly Blog Update

Unlike my local weather and the planets in our solar system the past month has not been for me a time of taking two steps forward then one step back. It has been one of those rare periods of forward progression, moving at a measured, steady pace with time to address everything on the agenda. It is a full and exciting agenda, with daily additions, some surprising and some anticipated; balance is maintained.

My primary focus, in addition to the painting, has and will continue to be for the next couple of weeks my MFA Thesis paper. My research advisor, Laura Gonzalez, returned her comments to me within a few days of receiving my first draft so I have had ample time to think about and play with the final version and other iterations of the paper’s contents. March 21 was the first of two Skype crit group sessions, on that day I asked my colleagues for feedback on the first draft of my thesis as I was writing it in a style new to me and I was unsure of how readable the paper was. In addition to my advisor’s and my crit group’s responses I had a few other people less familiar with my work read the paper over and share with me their understanding based on what they read. This has helped me identify the points that I really need to address as well as what works best and why.

Parallel to working on the MFA Thesis paper I posted two new writings on this website directly related to the thesis project. Composing for Decomposition is about my thoughts on how working through the first two movements of Sonata shifted my approach to the role of composition in the work. The second, Colors and Fonts, is a short piece I wrote to help me find the voice, style and look of Me, My Self, and I, the narrators of my thesis paper. I am working on another essay, also related, which I hope to post in the next day or so. Happily that bit of writing has been delayed by some coats of paint, which now need to dry. The natural rhythm of the painting and writing seems to have emerged this spring.

The studio has been very hospitable the past month. I completed work on the panels of the second movement of Sonata: Adagio (an sich), additional photos can be found in Gallery Five. The first movement Sonata: Allegro (Das Ding Ansicht) was in an exhibition at the University of Rhode Island Providence Campus through the end of March. Once I had both movements in my studio I was able to photograph each panel individually; they can be viewed in the gallery Every Single Note. My intention is to include the individually photographed panels as an appendix to my thesis paper [Note: the photos are not scaled to size]. I am not sure the third movement will be ready for the May 1 deadline, but will definitely find its place in the final, final version. After photographing each panel I had a couple of sets of 4 inch x 6 inch glossy prints made. One set I trimmed down and spent a few hours playing with different configurations to get an idea of the potential and possibility contained within the work. Photos can be viewed in the gallery Practice Playing.

After a partial spring cleaning of the greenhouse I began the third movement of Sonata: Allegretto (Das Ding); photos of the work to date can be viewed in Gallery Six. Unlike my experience with composition in the first two movements, this third movement seems to be developing into a hybrid of the first two in terms of approach to the theme, structure, color, mark and material. This is what I was seeking, but unsure of how best to approach. Between the first week and the second week of working on the painting I went to New York City for three days to look at, talk about and think about art. After three days back in the studio, reflecting on the development of the work, I see how this time, like my trip in December, has been helpful to me in terms of seeing the direction the painting is moving. The overarching theme to the weekend was inconclusiveness/unfinished/infinite. The meeting I had with my studio advisor, Andrew Cooks, was helpful in my gaining further clarity in the relationship of these within my painting and writing, and ways to take this further. The sparks have been flying, igniting the writing [forthcoming essay post as well as the final elements I’ve been working on in the thesis paper], in the third movement of the Sonata, and in my sketchbook, which after a pause of a couple months has found its way back to the top strata of my worktable.  As part of Andrew’s provocation I began exploring some ideas about edges in mixed media; the works can be viewed in the Sketchbook One gallery (last seven images).

Along with this main work I continue to work on three related pieces, the process documented throughout,  however I am not ready to post images here. This is partially due to the need to scale down the images in the first two galleries from the Fall, two of the works do have their beginnings documented there. I have, in spare moments begun this process in anticipation of the transition of the pages to an archive, but it is tedious. I have also not decided how I want to configure the documentation of these three pieces. They are studies, but not. Perhaps they are simply auxiliary works. Or just other pieces floating around in the same space. My goal is to have this figured out and on the website for the final post next month.

While I am very much focused on the here and now, I am also giving the occasional glance up to the coming months. I ordered some test swatches of fabric printed with some work from Twinning for a collaborative piece with Claire Barratt as part of our presentation in dialogue in Berlin. I am also thinking about other elements that will be needed; soon we should know more on date/location at which point plans can become more concrete. Travel and lodging in Berlin have been reserved so my focus now is on transporting work, for the dialogue presentation and for SPACEBODIES II. I have pretty much decided what I will do, now it is just figuring out the logistical details.

I continue to read and realized at 3 AM this morning it is time to set up the annotated bibliography for the next stage of my explorations as the recent readings are transitional from what I have been addressing with my MFA to what I want to address as I finalize my proposal to submit to Plymouth University for the MPhil/PhD program this summer in Berlin. I am excited to continue on; to return to a metaphor from my first year, like Alice I’ve reached the bottom of this rabbit hole [there are many] and now it is time to open another door.

Fourth Studio Advisor Meeting 150 Word Response

Andrew Cooks and I met April 8.

Our conversation circled around inconclusiveness; how this is expressed in my practice--specifically with the current work Sonata. I updated him on other works in my studio, plans for my paper and Berlin.

Andrew provided thoughts on the painting: edges [how, where, tools], process writing/painting [multiple voices, different/shared, mirrors], intentional mark vs. action/re-action, space/figure-ground echo’ voices, repetition, camouflage [hiding in plain sight]; suggested a number of books, including J. Lord  A Giacometti Portrait, and A. Camus Myth of Sisyphus; recommended I visit Ursus Books on my way to The Met Breuer the next day, and visit the Art of Japan Galleries in the main building. Books, store and galleries were wonderful! Familiar with Giacometti’s work, I was unfamiliar with the artist. After reading Lord and Camus I question if it is correct to call Sisyphus a myth, or an artist?

600 word response to Spring 2016 Skype crit

Please follow the link for my 600 word response to my Spring Skype crit on Monday, March 21, 2016.

Links to MCP506 First Draft MFA Thesis Paper, Third Studio Advisor Meeting, and Blog Update

Here are direct links to March 15, 2016 updates:

First Draft MFA Thesis Paper

Third Studio Advisor Meeeting 150 Word Response

Monthly Blog Update

In addition I have added an edited and updated version of my annotated bibliography.

March 15, 2016 Monthly Blog Update

This month’s post unlike the previous month’s posting only covers 28 days, the approximate length of a lunar month, and the number of panels in each movement of the self portrait I am currently working on. Images and text documenting its process [to date] are found in Gallery Five.

This past month has seen me sticking closer to home and studio, a physical state of ‘localness’ corresponding to a similar mental state, spending much of my time with an even more inward focus than usual writing the first draft of my MFA thesis paper. I took a more experimental approach to writing than previously. It was very challenging, taking three times longer as would be typical to write a similar number of words on the same subject in a conventional manner. Yet I really enjoyed the process.

Throughout I continued to work on the paintings in my studio, state of dryness/workability allowing. Fortunately (?) the paints I am currently working with are at the slowest end of the drying spectrum leaving more space/time to focus on the writing. No time did I feel I was being pulled away from the studio to write; signifying for me that the writing has integrated itself into my studio practice in a position equivalent to object making. This was one of my objectives and I am pleased to have met it.

In the studio, alongside Sonata, I have been continually working on smaller works which are helping me explore ideas parallel to the larger works. I have been documenting photographically, however I have decided at this time not to post images in order to keep the focus on Sonata.

I want to mention a few instances of decimation of my work this month.

Last June I was asked to be a part of an exhibition at the University of Rhode Island Providence Campus this month loosely organized around the topic of the issues local [Rhode Island/Massachusetts] women artists are addressing in their work. I decided to exhibit Motherboard  and Sonata: Allegro (Das Ding Ansicht). I have updated both galleries to include documentation of the installation of each painting.

In addition to that exhibition, two local, long established, artist-run co-op galleries organized non-juried, open call exhibitions on the theme of portraiture/self portraiture/artists confronting the concept of personal identity in the 21st century…’selfie’ shows, as one co-op referred to their exhibit... ideas I’ve been working with these past months. Although I have no interest in becoming directly involved in or a member of either co-op, both have been around for decades and have done much in sustaining the local art scene and artists, and I occasionally exhibit in their open call shows as a means of supporting their work. I did anticipate that much of the work would be more figurative/representational than the work I sent [similar to work in this sketchbook from last spring]. The works were very abstract, with no recognizable human features beyond ‘flesh’. Needless, I was surprised to receive a call from the co-op whose call read closest to my own questions concerning self-portraiture...right down to iPhone generated ‘selfie’ photos. The artist responsible for installing the exhibit had decided my work did not fit his vision of ‘self portraiture’.  The co-op asked if they could keep the work for the next show on nudity, titled ‘Clothing Optional!’. I declined, that is not what the work is about. I was not surprised to see the contents of the exhibition when I went to retrieve my work--big painted canvases of faces,. I found the whole experience quite humorous, in part because I was in the middle of writing my thesis with much about Duchamp...and here I was being ‘mutted’. It re-affirmed why I’m exploring the ideas surrounding identity/portraiture/self portraiture in this manner. Oh well, Rrose Selavy!

Looking ahead, in the coming month I plan to ‘finish’ the current stage of Sonata: Adagio (an sich). After de-installing Sonata:Allegro (Das Ding Ansicht) I continue with it into its next stage. More writing is in store editing/tuning the final draft of my thesis paper. I plan to re-configure the galleries on this website making space for the final months of documentation of the MFA work. Crit group Skype sessions are scheduled. In early April I have travel plans on the calendar to NYC/Philadelphia; including a visit the Frick Collection to view the Van Dyck exhibit, [watching Marcia Pointon’s lecture April 6 Why Portraiture? as a live webcast], seeing what The Met has done to the Breuer building, and visiting the PMA. I will also continue looking ahead to the coming months; numerous application deadlines are on the calendar, plans to be made for the summer, Berlin and the many things setting in formation to follow.

Third Studio Advisor Meeting 150 Word Response

I met  with Andrew Cooks January 16 in NYC; see February blog post.  With Laura Gonzalez in NYC, I met jointly with both advisors to discuss my work as it progress towards conclusion of the MFA and beyond.

The NYC conversations led to productive email correspondences. To my current series of paintings, Sonata, Andrew has offered feedback to the posted writing and images on my blog, short intermittent updates via emails, and with his first semester assessment. This included providing information on the works of Bernhard Sachs, Imants Tillers, T.S. Eliot, Marcel Duchamp, identity(ies) and between spaces. Andrew's well considered feedback to these email communiqués has been very conducive to the unfolding of my thoughts at a (s)pace fitting to my process; providing me the desired outlet to develop my writing as an integral part of my studio practice.

Our next meeting is scheduled for April 8.

Links to MCP505 Annotated Bibliography, Outline & Introduction

The following documents can be accessed under the "MFA Thesis Project" header in the top menu bar; or by clicking the links below.

MCP505 Annotated Bibliography

MCP505 Outline

MCP505 Intro Paper

February 15, 2016 Monthly Blog Update

It was a very full two months in the between and beyond.

WINTER RESIDENCY 2016

My December posts introduced the ideas and format for my winter residency presentation. Winter residency presentations are for an informed audience, familiar with the trajectory of the work via blog postings. It was my intention to perform a presentation that would provide me with insight on how the spectator responded, verbally as well as physically, to the ideas and work I placed before them. I did not want to provide them the structural conventions that might keep them in their ‘comfort zone’ of response.

The questions I asked myself, based on the structural criteria I established, were, did the presentation produce anticipated or unexpected responses and critical feedback, and provide open questions for the development of the work and research? Was the insight I acquired enlightening relative to the path I am following which will culminate in the thesis? Finally, what specific knowledge did I gain?

Viewed through the lens of scientific research, with the presentation I set up an experiment, placing myself and the work in the role of the ‘control’. The spectators, despite being a population mostly of ‘insiders’, provided the variables. They produced a range of individual questions and responses; yet as a group produced what I would deem to be a general response.

I have uploaded a gallery of photos from the residency here, including thirty-three photos of my presentation. Although the photos are mere glimpses into seconds of the 45 minutes, I found it interesting what the photographers captured in the way of gesture and body language of the individuals and group. The images, in my opinion, correspond to the overall sense I perceived of the presentation’s direction at the moment and in the days following; openness to the format and the appreciation for the opportunity to engage with the work physically, as opposed to viewing it hung or projected on a wall.

From the questions, feedback, and conversations in the days that followed I found there to be a general understanding of my explorations of identity, specifically my own identity relative to the place in which I find myself, Between the Easel and the Wall; the role of writing in my process; intention and chance as a part of my process; my explorations into the formal and material concerns of painting; and how I am exploring the relationship between the work, the artist and the spectator through the performative aspects of painting and painting's existence as object. Questions were raised, yet these questions pointed in the direction of comprehension rather than incomprehension.

During the presentation and immediately following I did not receive the impression that the spectators felt the situation was exceedingly controlled in a way that impinged on their ability to freely respond, however this is likely because I myself was too deeply involved in the presentation at the moment to gauge this. A few days later Andrew Cooks made the point that the presentation, because of the way it was performed, my reading with my back to the spectators, not offering an explanatory statement, could be interpreted as ‘distancing’ or ‘blocking out’ by the viewers, a form of alienation; the invitation to come forward into the space with me, particularly during the Q & A, could be deemed as aggressive or intimidating by some. I do see the point of this understanding. Had I conceived the presentation for a less informed audience, it would have been considerably different.

No explanation was offered during the presentation because I had posted the info on my blog prior. For those who did not have access to the blog post, such as visitors, of which there were a few, my assumption was that the majority of those present were artists, thus have an understanding of feelings and ideas addressed in the texts, as well as experience occupying the space where creativity and identity are formed. The reading-text-presentation, just under 15 minutes, was within the time limits and less than many other presentations; every person has his or her own ability to focus on what is being spoken under any given conditions. Minds will wander, sometimes because they feel alienated by what or how something is being said, sometimes because they need an additional form of engagement, such as a concurrent visual presentation, on which they can focus which is lacking, or for any number of other reasons; my point is, I could have made it easier, yet I chose not to. It is not an easy place or position to be in, that which I was describing, and I wanted this reflected in the presentation.

I agree, it probably was aggressive and intimidating for some to ask people to come forward and join me in the space. Again, it is not an easy or comfortable space to occupy. Any type of Q&A establishes a slightly aggressive situation. Generally someone, usually the person being questioned, is placed in a defensive position. Inviting the questioner to join me in the space challenged the dynamics of this situation. My intention was not to intimidate, but rather to gain more equal footing, to be in balanced dialogue; and to make apparent the uneasiness surrounding the situation by deflecting it. Did this prevent some people from coming forward, asking questions, or providing feedback? I don’t know, perhaps. However I am reminded of another conversation with Andrew Cooks on the reasons people have for asking questions after a presentation or talk. Some ask questions as a genuine inquiry for further knowledge, others ask questions as a means of expressing their own opinions and not seeking an answer, a third group ask questions to talk, be heard, and make their presence known. As the person being questioned it is not my responsibility to know the motivation for the question (although motivation can be interesting and telling of both the question and questioner), it is just to address the question. My point is, those who had questions to ask asked them, those who had feedback to provide provided it, either during the Q & A or at some point in some form afterwards.

Distancing was an intentional device I applied, the aggressiveness I became more aware of in hindsight. This awareness has made me think about how I might alter the presentation should I do a repeat-version for a different audience. It spurred me to ask others more specifically about their perception of the presentation. As I reviewed the photos I saw the potential for this interpretation. The situation could be analogous to being at an exhibition, film, or performance in which you realize this is something that is unappealing, uncomfortable, perhaps ‘too controlling’, then you leave. In this case you’re not really free to leave. Because you lack this freedom the discomfort is amplified. As the presenter, is it my responsibility to create a situation where everyone is comfortable? No. It would be impossible and improbable to make everyone comfortable. It is my responsibility to create a situation that is mutually beneficial and provides knowledge or ‘enlightenment’ to the information I am presenting. One way of doing this is by establishing parameters leading to questions such as: why am I uncomfortable/comfortable or responding in this particular way? I believe this is key to the art I make, therefore by extension to the presentation of and dialogue surrounding that work.

SPACEBODIES

It was a wonderful honor and experience to be selected by my TI colleague Andrea Spaziani, curator of the exhibition SPACEBODIES, to be a part of this first event of the Transart Triennale 2016. [The Gym @ Judson Church on Sunday, January 10, 2016]. Photos can be viewed here.

My intention for the performative drawing, Sonata for Psyche Tattooing, was to approach the images I have been working with the past six months in a considerably different way than I have been doing in the studio. The term “Psyche Tattooing” came from my TI colleague Deborah Carruthers in reference to drawings I have done over prints of some of the Twinning photos. I was curious what would happen by drawing, which for me is generally done in the privacy of my studio, in a more public space...being observed...and doing so upon images that are projected and then disappear. How would the process be altered, what of the identity of the Twinning image remained in the drawing after the projection was gone? This was an opportunity to experiment for me beyond my studio walls, as well as to generate the basis for the next work.

POST-RESIDENCY STUDIO WORK

Returning from the previous year’s winter residency I had difficulty getting back into the flow of the studio. Part of me half expected the post-residency hesitation to re-occur. I am happy to say it did not; I found myself back at the wall the very next day, and it is where I have been l every day since (with one four day exception). I believe this is due to having a clearer sense of direction; also a result of questions and ideas brought forth during residency and afterwards that I was itching to begin addressing in the work. Not to mention those three big drawings from the performance and a new tube of Schmincke Mussini Lasur-Weiss paint!

Although I have been working on three, multi-paneled paintings [and sketchbook] this past month I decided to only post documentation one of the works at this time: Sonata: Allegro (Das Ding Ansicht). I feel this piece is most relevant to the questions I am asking, and to the thesis project as a whole. The images and explanatory text can be found in Gallery Four.

This painting descends directly from the smaller studies and the larger painting Motherboard I presented at winter residency in the formal and material concerns addressed. I feel it goes further in its relationship to the conceptual explorations of my research on the flexibility, fluidity, layered complexity, and general instability of a single, fixed identity; as well as the relationship between liminality these aspects of identity. I intend to complete the remaining two movements of this Sonata in the next few months.. Additionally,  I hope to include this first painting, either alone or together with Motherboard, in an exhibition I have been invited to take part in at the University of Rhode Island, Providence Campus in March.

WASHINGTON DC

I attended the CAA annual conference for the first time in Washington DC earlier this month. It was a very informative experience. A brief summary of the sessions and workshops I attended and worked as a room monitor [defrayed costs by providing me with free conference registration]:

Performance as Portraiture art historical research/ research on contemporary artists exploring questions on the shifting nature of identity and ‘otherness’.

The College Studio Practice, Academic Theory and the Tactile Experience: from Margin to Center sponsored by the Education Committee. Three presenters, all drawing/painting tenured faculty, presented their approach to teaching undergraduate foundation and advanced level drawing/painting.

Job Hunt 101: Essential Steps in Securing a Job in the Arts a professional development workshop. Basic review of the realities of the job market, application and interview protocol, and other stuff that’s ‘good to know’.

Advice for Beginning/Inexperienced Instructors a professional development workshop. The practicalities of teaching once you get the job, protocols, etc. How to write a syllabus, treating and expecting students to be grown ups, preserving your life as an artist, etc.

Pink Collars or Pink Shackles? How the Adjunct Teaching Crisis Threatens Women’s Lives and Careers; co-chaired by TI Alum Miriam Schaer and Jean Shinn. It was the clearest, most informed reality check-professional development discussion around. Panel consisted of a sociologist from New Faculty Majority Foundation to provide the general and specific data; a department chair [administration] to provide the perspective of someone who has worn all the shoes; two long time adjuncts who were ready to give it up until they got involved in forming unions at their institutions and how this has (slowly) improved the situation; a group that presented through a video http://bfamfaphd.com; the most helpful portion was a presentation by Karla Stinger-Stein, who shared her approach to finding adjunct jobs. She goes in the opposite direction from the advice given in the professional development workshops. The Q&A that followed was very positive despite the potential for a ‘gripe fest’, it was anything but!

Pigments in a Bind(er), chaired by Sarah Sands from Golden, with additional talks by Richard Frumess founder of R&F Encaustics, and Scott Godfrey (?) from Gamblin on a project this past year testing Cobalt and Ultramarine Blue pigments across different binders.oil/acrylic/casein/encaustic/watercolor/egg tempera… We all got a sample board with chips; and it was a lovely, nerdy painter session.

Artists in Dialogue sponsored by ARTspace; Rick Lowe and LaToya Ruby Frazier followed by Joyce Scott and George Ciscle.

Augmented Reality- Invention/Reinvention sponsored by the New Media Caucus.

The Study of World Art in Washington D.C. sponsored by the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts.

Copy That: Painted Replicas and Repetitions before the Age of Appropriation chaired by Valerie Hellstein (de Kooning Foundation). I was on the edge of my chair. The presentations were: Copying the Sacredness: A Case Study of the Portrait of Christ by Jan van Eyck; The Demand for Death: Benjamin West and General Wolfe; Rossetti and Replica; and “Who Will Paint New York?” (Again): Georgia O’Keeffe’s City Night.   So much on identity…this one deserves some more detailed thought [and writing] from me…eventually.

MFA THESIS WRITING & READING

It’s that time of year, putting the research and the practice into words. The combination of holiday gifts, time in NYC and the trip to the CAA Book & Trade Fair put a lot of additional reading material on my table, as has the conversations that were generated at winter residency. Since returning from Washington DC I reviewed and completed my annotated bibliography, for this stage of the process. It is lengthy, and I am aware that the majority of the sources and information contained within will not be appearing in the upcoming paper, but it is a good feeling to see the information, the notes and quotes, captured for future reference.

As for the writing, the outline I generated prior to my trip to Washington, I know after reviewing my annotated bibliography, requires some re-structuring. This is the task that lays directly ahead of me, along with the introduction.

THE FUTURE AND THE HERE AND NOW

Aside from the plans I have mentioned throughout this post about what lays ahead in the studio, the work in exhibition, the thesis writing, I am also looking ahead to other things.

Claire Barratt and I proposed to do our presentation in Berlin this coming summer in Dialogue. We began discussing this directly after last summer’s residency, continued the discussion more in depth in NYC, and have a Skype session planned on February 17. In addition to presenting our work individually we are considering ways of collaboration as dialogue.

Part of my reasons for attending CAA was to begin familiarizing myself with the discussions along that avenue of the art world, one I’ve pretty much avoided until now. I have also been thinking, and writing, about the direction I want to pursue in the studio and the research post-MFA. These thoughts and glances towards the future are being balanced by the focused stare at the here and now.

A point I have directed my gaze to in the past couple of weeks has been the following remarks Andrew Cooks made in his evaluation of the previous semester:                               

Most particularly I believe it will now be in your daily practice of painting (since you are first and foremost a painter) that solutions will reveal themselves and I encourage you to sit and do nothing for prolonged periods (and paint of course) as you dwell between wall and easel; to allow the language of painting as it plays out in your hands to guide you; to reveal and assert its participation in this dialogue.              

This also brings you to the crux of what you are up to and after: that is, what is the work of the work?              

Is the work a proxy identity? A mirror? A simulacrum? A decoy? Any or all of the above? And how do you manage this construction of identity as a convincing and engaging assemblage of image, word, idea and performance?            

It is an exciting and simultaneously daunting place to be: between.           

As paradoxical as it sounds, I have been making a more conscious effort at doing nothing. This involves more time looking, sitting, listening to what is in that space between the easel and the wall. Doing nothing also involves some playful smearing and mark making, away from the conceptually structures of the research and towards the pleasures of the material.

To the question “what is the work of the work?...Any or all of the above?” I can only answer at this time it is any and all of the above because it is about the flexibility, fluidity, layered complexity, and general instability of a single, fixed identity; as well as the relationship between an indeterminate, liminal space in which identities manifest themselves.

As to how I manage to construct this...I’m working on it. Today I feel much closer than yesterday, and tomorrow I might just be further than ever before. 

Yes, it is “an exciting and simultaneously daunting place to be: between.”

Information for Winter Residency 2016 Presentation

This blog post is for those of you who are visiting this website in preparation for my presentation at Winter Residency 2016. Here you will find information on the presentation as well as direct links to the most relevant pages on this website. If at anytime you get lost, click on ‘Blog/Monthly Blog’ and you’ll find yourself back here.

If you are not familiar with my previous year’s project I encourage you to check out the Year One Archive. This year’s MFA project, though different in scope, does build off the previous year’s work. However if you find yourself short on time, then this would be the part to breeze through or skip, with the exception of the M502 Twinning page, it’s important!

The place to start is the Proposal.

From there I’d recommend visiting the Galleries.

Please note, at times the pages are slow to load due to a combination of factors. I have found that the images are best viewed on mobile devices. There are intentional ‘white spaces’ on the pages, and the disjunction of text and image is also intentional, so keep scrolling.

Again, if you are running short on time I suggest focusing your attention to the Painting Studies Process Galleries and the Photographic Painting Studies Process Gallery. The smaller painting studies I will bring to the presentation can be found in Gallery Two, and Gallery Three is dedicated to the development of the larger painting Motherboard. The Photographic Painting Studies Process Gallery documents my explorations with the photos from which the paintings evolved.

After the Galleries I suggest visiting the Writing pages.

As I wrote in my project proposal, writing, particularly explored as a self portrait, is an integral part of my studio practice and this project. Again, acknowledging that time is short, I suggest focusing your attention to Between the Easel and the Wall, Words of Wenders and Words of Schier on Wollheim. These writings will feature in my presentation.

Now to my presentation, here is what to expect:                        

Between the Easel and the Wall

A performed self portrait of the painter Robyn Thomas in her studio.                        

The performance is comprised of a visual component, a written component, and a spoken/performed component.                    

The performance is conceived to fulfill the presentation requirement for the 2016 Winter Residency in NYC.                        

Total time allotted for the presentation is 45 minutes.                        

The time will be broken down into an initial 15 minute segment in which the written component is spoken/performed in relation to the visual component.                       

The remaining 30 minute segment will be an open floor discussion during which the viewers will be invited forward to engage directly with the paintings Robyn Thomas has brought to residency.

Robyn Thomas will time, present and moderate the presentation and subsequent discussion.                    

Visual Component [details]                       

The visual component consists of a single image projected on top of the backs of paintings stacked and leaned against a wall.                       

The paintings are the four sections of Motherboard, each section measuring 24 inches x 36 inches, for a total span of 96 inches x 36 inches. The canvases will be raised slightly more than 1 inch from the floor by blocks of wood. The tops of the canvases will rest against the wall. The painted side of the canvases will be turned to face the wall so the painting is not visible to the viewer during the spoken/performed component.                        

In front, to the side, and laying on the floor surrounding Motherboard will be studies done in conjunction with the larger painting. These studies of oil and acrylic paint on paper, measuring 11 inches x 14 inches, 12 inches x 16 inches, and 19 inches x 24 inches, have been partially mounted on artists’ wood panels with a 7⁄8 inch depth. Others have been left unmounted. These studies, like Motherboard, will be initially turned away from the viewers.                       

Robyn Thomas will be dressed in her studio clothes with her hair tied up, ready to get to work. She will be seated on a chair in line with the point where the image of the easel and the image of the wall meet. Her back will be to the viewers, she will face the projection and the paintings. On her lap will be a sketchbook whose pages contain the written text she will speak. On the floor next to her will be her coffee cup containing water.                       

Written Component [detail]                       

The written component is a collaged text, the words of others, the  words of Robyn Thomas, words that pass through Robyn Thomas’ head and come out as translations.                         

The text will fill the required 15 minute presentation time. There is also the transition times at the start and end of this part of the presentation to consider. Therefore the overall time the written text is being spoken/performed should be around 13 minutes.                        

The pages of the text will be printed out and glued into a 9 inch x 12 inch black, spiral bound, sketchbook similar to those used by Robyn Thomas in her studio.                     

Spoken/Performed Component [details]                       

During the installation time Robyn Thomas will unpack the canvases, panels and papers, arranging them along the projection wall so that the paintings themselves are not viewable.                        

The image of the easel and wall, saved as a Keynote slide to a thumbdrive will be projected via the TI MacBook. The MacBook should be set so that it does not go into ‘sleep’ or screen saver mode.

The video presentation is the single slide.

Assistance will be required to set up and monitor the projector, and turn off the projector when requested.                       

Additional assistance will be required by someone sitting near the light switches to turn them on when requested to do so by Robyn Thomas.                       

There might be another person who announces the start of Robyn Thomas’ presentation, she will not introduce herself, the title of the self portrait, or give any additional information to the presentation at its start. This information will be part of the 30 minute discussion period, if needed.                       

Robyn Thomas will time the presentation segments on her iPhone.                       

During the spoken component her back will be to the viewers and she will be speaking to the projection/wall so it is important for Robyn Thomas to speak loudly, clearly enunciating each word, at a pace that is neither too fast or too slow. Although pace, pitch and volume may change as necessitated by the text, should viewers begin to call out or remark they cannot hear or understand her, Robyn Thomas may choose to either raise the volume, or ignore the remarks and continue on.

The texts are available online prior to the performance, as are these notes, so that viewers who have looked at the blog/website prior to the presentation, are informed to what is happening, being said, etc.                        

When the spoken/performance is complete, Robyn Thomas will ask that the projector be turned off and the lights turned on. She will then get up from the chair, placing the sketchbook on it, walk to the paintings, and turn them to face the viewers.                       

The viewers will then be invited to stand up and enter the space for an open floor, moderated discussion of the paintings, as well as ask any questions or provide feedback/comments on the performed writing they have just witnessed.

The viewers are invited to pick up, touch, and move the paintings around the space, playing with order, direction and configuration. Small nails and a hammer will be available for anyone who wishes to hang one, some or all of the smaller paintings on the wall.

The larger paintings will be leaned against the wall, raised off the floor by blocks of wood. The larger paintings will not be hung, but direction, order and grouping may be played with by the group either by leaning the paintings against the wall or laying them out on the floor.

This segment will fill the remained of the allotted time; 30 minutes.                      

At the end of the presentation the paintings will be quickly removed from the projection space and re­packed. Assistance in removal from the space will be requested.             

So, that’s it. I look forward to seeing you all in NYC, seeing your presentations, responding to your work and hearing your responses to mine.

And don’t forget to come to SPACEBODIES at The Gym at Judson, Sunday January 10, 2016. Doors open at 3 PM!

Mid-December 2015 Blog Update

Although there is no ‘TI calendar requirement’ to update this month, as I have posted new writings, images in a new gallery, and the second round of the fall written critique group question/feedback/response it makes sense to post the links to the blog portion of my website for a matter of record.

And I am in the habit of posting.

It has by now become a part of who I am.

I began yet again to make some changes to the website.

These changes came in part out of feedback I received in the second round of written critique. In the group a number of us had been thinking about how our blogs and various websites worked together; fit into our practice and its presentation. Currently I have two websites, both of which are created and managed by myself using templates from the hosting companies. One website, which I consider my “professional” website I began in 2009. The other website, this one, I began in June 2014 as the website for my TI blog. I pay a yearly hosting fee for each website.

So now I have the expense of two websites; and when my TI projects come to an end I don’t want to abandon the site, despite the additional cost. What I like about this website compared to my other website is that it is a space where I can explore, experiment, document my process and generally ‘work’. The other website is more of a space where I can preserve, archive and show finished projects. I’ve decided that I will continue this website as a type of ‘virtual studio’, open to anyone interested in a studio visit, to learning more about the process. The other website will remain a ‘virtual exhibition’, for those only interested in the finished product. This website will remain a self portrait of the artist at the easel; the other website will be the paintings on the wall.

Once this was decided the next logical step for me is to begin the transformation process from the ‘student-project-process-website’ to the ‘project-process-website’. When I have completed my MFA thesis project in a few months the website’s transformation will be complete and the finished project, like the first year’s project, will be archived. The website will then have a new inter-’face’. The first step in the transformation occurred a few days ago with the elimination of the module designations from the TI program in the title texts. “Year Two”, once the first heading on the homepage has been replaced with “Self Portrayal”, the actual project/thesis title. Feel free to explore the website and see what other changes you might notice.

I did add a new gallery to the painting process studies galleries section. Gallery Three documents the development of the painting “Motherboard”, the first of the larger paintings I intend to do as part of my thesis project. Although I continued alongside the larger work this past month to produce and work on smaller studies in oil and acrylic, beginning to mix the two in technically acceptable and more renegade ways, I have not posted any new images. I have also begun mounting some of these studies on paper to wood panels as a way to skirt the framing issue and give them a greater physical presence. The larger painting, which is composed of four separate canvases and a number of the studies, both mounted and un-mounted, I intend to bring to Winter Residency in NYC and will incorporate in my presentation in place of projected images of the works in a developing or resolved state.

A brief note to my Winter Residency presentation. Like last year’s presentation, this year’s presentation will take the form of a performance-self portrait of the explorations I have been conducting in the studio since summer residency.

It will not be another Keynote-PowerPoint-Prezi extravaganza!

It might involve a hammer.

No iPads or other digital devices will be harmed in this presentation.

This will be an active, hands-on experience for everyone.

The final update I made to the website this past month is a new addition to the Essays section of Writings. This piece is a looser composition based on notes I made on December 4 and December 5 while visiting New York City to look at and think about art. Notes From Two Days in New York City is my attempt to not just sketch out my impressions of the experience but also to flex and tone my writing-muscles a bit in preparation for the thesis writing to begin next month.

It has been a very busy month as usual, with many things too numerous and complicated to mention pulling me in a multitude of directions, mentally, physically and emotionally. However I am glad to have gotten the first painting to the point it is at, happy I took the time to travel, look at art, think, talk with people whose conversation and thoughts I value, and write; and I am looking forward to my presentation at Winter Residency. The coming weeks will be focused on tying up loose ends in preparation for my next trip ‘down south’ as well as continuing developing the pathways leading me forward.

November 15, 2015 Monthly Blog Update

Last month I used the excuse of the October update as actually covering a period of six rather than one month for it being longer than I originally thought it would be. Unfortunately that excuse cannot apply this month. Anyway, in addition to taking things slower this year I also have challenged myself to avoid making excuses.

The period I am cover in this post is October 14 to November 14. Immediately after posting last month I set to work preparing a presentation I was invited to give shortly after returning from Berlin to the Women’s Guild of Beneficent Church, UCC. I do receive a generous scholarship from Beneficent Church for my studies with Transart Institute, and I felt it would be a good challenge to put together a presentation for people interested in what I am doing, but not necessarily involved in the art world. The presentation, titled Dumb as a Painter: Where Research Meets Creative Practice, consisted of some background info on my personal history and what led me to becoming an artist. I presented a few of the paintings done in the years leading up to my current studies, some of the self portraits I created for my first year project, work from an exhibit I had locally in June 2015 which was for me a bridge between the two parts of my current studio practice, and what I am working on now as I move towards my thesis project. I used the presentation as an opportunity to share my understanding of the role research plays in creative practice through my studio work and research projects. The talk lasted just under one hour, the audience remained engaged throughout and then proceeded to ask questions for an additional 20 minutes. An edited version of the slide show will eventually be posted to YouTube with a link provided on my blog once it is available. Overall it was a good experience not just because I had to prepare the presentation, but it also encouraged me to reflect further on how I got where I am, look again at where I want to go, and explain it to a different group of people.

Next up was the start of the Fall Semester crit group season. I presented to my crit group on October 23 and responded to the feedback on October 30. The critique post, feedback and response can be found here.

November 2 my studio advisor, Andrew Cooks, and I had a conversation via Skype. My 150 word response can be found in the blog post directly preceding this post, or by clicking here.

This past month aside from a few local exhibits in Providence, RI I have not gotten out to experience much art in person; instead relegated to looking in reproductions and online, neither very satisfying experiences. I am preparing a trip to NYC in early December to view a number of exhibits, more to those in next month’s post.

This past month my writing has focused primarily on notes to myself, email conversations, and crit group related feedback. However I am feeling the itch to another form of writing. In the process of preparing for my December art-viewing excursion I have begun to mull a piece of writing based on one of the exhibits I intend to visit with the intention of posting another essay in the writing gallery by mid-December.

Aside from reading a number of interviews with artists, exhibition reviews, and other art as well as non-art related journalistic endeavors I picked up once more my copy of The Essential Kierkegaard, taking in the essay Works of Love (1847). I also broke out Ecrits Jacques Lacan, to look at On the Subject Who Is Finally in Question. To round out my theory reading this past month I turned to Meyer Schapiro’s Words, Script, and Pictures:  Semiotics of Visual Language. Although both essays/lectures from Shapiro contained ideas of interest and relevance to my research, it is the second essay, Script In Pictures: Semiotics of Visual Language which I have found to be of greater relevance; particularly the author’s discussions on Goya’s self portraits, the role of text as a mirroring of speech, and the position of the ‘reader’ as internal or external in relation to image and the text contained within.

To balance out the pleasure of theory with some pleasure for the sake of pleasure reading with Denise Mina’s Resolution (2001). I’ve included photos of a couple of quotes from this crime novel in the Painting Studies Process Gallery One; reading in the studio is something I’ve found myself doing more since my return to oil paints. It is something to do while the paint drys. Both citations are revealing of the characters’ identities and their struggles to come to terms with the complexities of those identities. I have since moved on to the first of Robert Galbraith’s Cormoran Strike novels The Cuckoo’s Calling (2013). The recommendation of these and other crime novels came in Berlin from Andrew Cooks; mainly for pleasure reading but also as a way at looking at character development [identity]. In our recent Skype Andre recommended the novels of Robert Galbraith, as possibly being of an additional interest because Robert Galbraith is the pseudonym of the author J.K. Rowling. Ms. Rowling’s creation of a pseudonym as a means of publishing work that is different for that which she has become well known is of relevant interest to me as I explore working with a pseudonym, a form of ‘alternate identity’ as a means of broadening my range and exploring areas which under my own name might be more difficult to do. More to my work with/as Melusine van der Weyden in the coming months.

Other than reading while waiting for the paint to dry I have been watching films. In addition to the two films I mentioned in my 150 word response watching on the Artists Documentation Program webpage I have also watched All Divided Selves by Luke Fowler, Joan Mitchell: Portrait of an Abstract Painter, Venus in Fur, This Must Be The Place, and Peggy Guggenheim: Art Addict. All Divided Selves, a film exploring the work and legacy of psychiatrist R.D. Lange was enlightening to Lange’s ideas concerning mental illness and identity as well as introducing me to the work of Luke Fowler. The documentary on Joan Mitchell was interesting to watch after the filmed interviews with Terry Winters and Frank Stella as it consists of her talking about her paintings, though not from a purely technical/material viewpoint as in the ADP videos. The recent film on Peggy Guggenheim was interesting to me as a memory prompt for an autobiography she wrote and I had read many years ago, but also to hear how the current art world figures, those who knew her and those that did not, speak about the role she has played as a patron in 20th century art, and her identity as such. The two other films, Venus in Fur and This Must Be The Place are fictional works which place questions of identity and how our behavior or actions are directed by our understanding of who we are as must as by the ‘who we are’ we project is responded to by others. Venus in Fur is a pretty clear, almost ‘traditional’ adaptation by Roman Polanski of the two person play by David Ives. This Must Be The Place left me questioning whether or not I was hallucinating the storyline as it became increasingly more bizarre. On the other hand, the shots were quite enjoyable, almost like a well crafted graphic novel by someone who really wanted to mess with the viewer’s sense of his or her own sanity.

With this I come to the actual work I was doing in the studio this past month. As I mentioned earlier in this post I reintroduced oil paints and self-mixed medium into my studio practice. Yes, I have officially reopened that can of worms. For my crit group post I did add images of the beginnings of those studio explorations along with a brief text to the Painting Studies Process Gallery One on October 23. Here I want to re-emphasize the nature of this and the other image galleries, Sketchbook, Painting Studies Process Gallery Two and Photographic Painting Studies Process Gallery, as galleries documenting the process and not necessarily showing finished work. The images are posted in a way that requires the viewer to scroll through, often unable to take in an image in its entirety. This is intentional. The text which accompanies the images begins on the left hand side of the page, near to where a new group of images begins. The text does not line up with the images, nor does it provide detailed information to the images. The text and the images are merely glimpses into the process; the parts of their identity which will eventually develop into a ‘final’ work. Once the self portraits I intend to complete for this project are completed, they will be viewable in their own gallery separate from the process. Until then, bits and pieces are what are presented as building blocks of that which is being constructed.

I have added to all three galleries a brief text and images of work in progress between October 23 and November 13. Please click on the following to go directly to these galleries:

Sketchbook

Painting Studies Process Gallery Two

Photographic Painting Studies Process Gallery

In the past few days I have begun focusing my thoughts towards two dates coming up this winter. The first being Winter Residency in NYC in early January, and the second being work for an exhibition of women artist working with contemporary feminist concepts at the University of Rhode Island Providence Campus in March. For both of these I have begun work on two larger scale paintings, both of which I hope, most likely in the state of full scale studies, to bring to Winter Residency in January.

Bringing this monthly blog update back to where I began, with my mid-October presentation which involved dredging through the origins of my existence as an artist; is one final thing I did this month, and that was create a video slideshow of some of my paintings and drawings produced between 1988-2008.

In recent exchanges I have once more become aware of how conversations surrounding the current art I am creating are often limited by the inability to experience the materiality of the object when only viewing it in reproduction, particularly in a digital representation. Add to this inadequate knowledge of paths traveled prior to the digitally represented work around which the discussion revolves. With this the conversation itself becomes either one by which neither party admits to the limitations of the conversation and simply accepts by means of not acknowledging these limitations; or the conversation deteriorates for either one or both parties into a Sisyphean endeavor.  This is not to say that I in anyway feel as if I get nothing out of either form the conversation takes; sparks generally fly no matter what. What I am saying is, even after a conversation which has started new fires or re-ignited dying embers, I am often left feeling as if there could have been more. Perhaps this is a more beneficial state to be left in? A state where questions remain unanswered. Ultimately such questioning does instigate the search for additional fuel sources to keep the fire in the studio exuding warmth and glowing bright. Colder weather has returned to my home in New England, but in my studio the fires are producing an ever increasing amount of heat and light.

Second Studio Advisor Meeting 150 Word Response

November 2, 2015 Skype with my studio advisor, Andrew Cooks. The call focused on issues of materiality, modularity and scale I am currently exploring. Andrew recommended the Artists Documentation Program archive of converastions between artists and conservators. I have watched Terry Winters’ conversation with Carol Mancusi-Ungaro as well as Frank Stella’s conversation with Elizabeth Lunning and Brad Epley. Having recently revived the use of oil based paints and home-mixed medium in my painting practice I first viewed the conversation with Mr. Winters, whose use of these has been influential to me since the late 1980s. In contrast, and as preparation for my upcoming visit to the Whitney Museum of American Art’s current retrospective of his paintings, I next viewed the conversation with Frank Stella. To say the least the differences were thought provoking as I continue searching for an equilibrium between the material and the conceptual in my own work.

Critique Group 600 Word Response

Thank you Abbe, Deborah, Lindey, Omayra and Stephanie for your feedback--

It is correct to assume intentionality; a great part of how I approach and present what I do is my personal attempt to apply the Quinean double standard.

Everything on the website is meant to be viewed simultaneously as a single piece and the whole pie. This website is dedicated to my TI project process documentation, but I do provide a link to it on my professional website. Most of the work featured there pre-dates TI work; I will add a selection of this work to the professional site next September, after Berlin.

The struggle to access knowledge and the realization of our inadequacy no matter how hard we strive is analogous to our struggles confronting issues of identity. Some will turn away, accepting defeat; others continue on, becoming more disgruntled and oppressed by feelings of inadequacy; yet others not only stay on the course, they remain open, finding grains of knowledge along the way. I build roadways, but it is the viewer who decides which to travel, how to navigate, and the time spent. I found Stephanie’s remarks concerning frustration with ambiguous authorship limiting access to the unknown author’s other works enlightening in this regard; it seems negative, but could actually be applied to positively support my intentions, whatever they might be. Omayra’s remarks about the humbling nature of unclear authorship was something I had not considered, but will more.

“ I began by looking back at the Journal-Pages  from the previous year and then sketching out a visual dictionary of forms, musters and themes I used in that work; this covers the first three pages of the sketch book.” I will keep in mind Lindey’s suggestion of working each item in the dictionary into its own simple painting, perhaps further down the road with additional ‘elements’. Deborah, an early version of the website placed the titles/info directly beneath each image, not in the sidebar. I changed to this template because that configuration is not possible here; I wanted the information present, but not so easily accessible.

In the writing-drawings I explore script as image as opposed to script as text. For more on this long history of the obscuring of text in image see: Script in Pictures: Semiotics of Visual Language (Shapiro, 1996). Abbe used the word ‘fiction in regard to these drawings and to my question on pseudonyms/authorship/self portraits; writing “fiction is sometimes more truthful than reality.” I believe often reality is more dishonest than fiction; I am more interested in addressing dishonesty in our realities than creating truthful fictions.”

Creating a portrait of our ‘self’ is a social act because “man is by nature a social animal” (Aristotle, Politics). I create work for both myself and viewers, and the role of subject/object constantly shifts between us.

The associations brought to a work of art can create roadblocks to further passage. It is my job to keep the roadways free from obstructions; I do this by recognizing possible obstructions before they occur. Hence my hesitation with pixelation similar to the skins of popular video game characters.

The recent work is unfinished. The‘breath of chaos’ present in the pixelation colors and “the organic feel not often felt in geometric design” [Stephanie] I believe is my abstracted body’s presence in the work. Here is a current show in LA exploring similar ideas.

You all provided an enormous amount of insightful feedback; although I did not answer all your questions here, I hope was able to provide a bit more insight to my project and process.

To read the complete first round feedback process from question, to comments to response please visit http://www.robynthomas-explorations.com/critique-group-2015-2016/.

October 15, 2015 Monthly Blog Update

Leading up to writing this first ‘official’ monthly blog post for my second year in the MFA Creative Practice program I thought, oh, this will be short. Afterall, I have taken it upon myself to slow down and be a bit more focused this year. Not that I wasn’t focused last year, but my intention this year is to focus my studio practice on moving towards the creation of a more limited number of final works. But to get there I still need to explore and studies are for me a part of this, as is a lot of documentation.

As I began re-developing my website and posting to the different sections I did come to the realization that this monthly update really is more than a month, in fact it is really six months since the last update, which encompasses a quarter of the total time in this program. So if it seems like alot, it is. But next month will be less, maybe.

I want to restate now what I have said many times last year, in my presentations and writing: this website is the primary ‘self portrait’ not only of last year’s project, but in many ways it will continue to be so for this year’s project. Therefore the more effort spent in examining what is posted here, contemplating the structure of the website, the more things will begin to make sense. Throughout this blog post there will be links to other pages within this [and other] websites. The links will take you to the work I have done recently, so click on them.

Post-Berlin one of the first things I did was place the full documentation of the previous year in an ‘archive’ on this site; the slides of my presentation in Berlin have been added as well as the audio of the Q & A portion of the presentation. The archive is live, and it is accessible through the top menu on the pages, but not on the cover pages.

I then created a cover page for ‘year two’, which is now the home page of this site. The blog, project proposal, writings, galleries, and critique group pages are directly accessible from this page. Throughout the year the site, particularly the links on the cover pages might undergo slight changes due to space availability, but I will always post those changes in this blog.

For this month’s post the two sections of this website to which most attention is to be directed are Year Two Writings and Year Two Galleries.

Year Two Writings contains three subheadings, Essays, Words of Others and a link to the Blog. Essays consists of writings I have done as part of my studio practice, Words of Others contains writings by others which have provoked something which made me want to post them here. Both subheadings currently have two postings each. Eventually a subheading will be added which will contain the writing elements which are required for my thesis.

Year Two Galleries contains three subheadings, Sketchbook, Painting Studies Process and Photographic Painting Studies Process. Here is where you will find the images related to the studio work as well as more detailed writing regarding the process. Eventually a subheading will be added for the final self portraits referenced in the project proposal.

That is it for this month’s post. In addition to what I have posted in these pages, I have spent the past six months reading, watching, viewing, thinking and traveling. Sometimes I just lay on the couch in my studio and look at the clouds and blue sky.

Initial Studio and Research Advisor Meeting[s] 150 Word Response

I’ve communicated often with my studio advisor, Dr. Andrew Cooks, regarding my thesis project. Dr. Cooks and my research advisor, Dr. Laura Gonzalez, attended my presentation in Berlin, after which together we had an extensive post-presentation discussion. 

• I will write a thesis paper in the first person, making it an academic paper with my voice more   present than is standard.
• Analogous to focusing my studio work to a limited body of paintings, I will address a single artist as a means of contextualization of my work and thesis question.
• My writing will be with the painting an integrated part of my studio practice; ‘studies’ for the final thesis paper.
• My painting will incorporate expanded notions explored the first year and revive in combination with current practices previous explorations with oil-based paints and printmaking techniques.
• I create this work with consideration towards PhD studies beyond this year’s MFA degree.