working with new techniques and unfamiliar technologies always creates the possibility of error or glitches. turning my hand to amateur electronics brings with it equal part exciting new discovery and hair-extracting torturous malfunctioning of sculptural potential. so far i've been successful at constructing component electronic circuits that function perfectly well - a flashing LED light, a variant voltage fluctuator, a counter and an electronic eye. that much has been fun and felt like quite an achievement.
now, publicly declaring the difficulties one encounters in one's art practice is a risky undertaking, as it exposes the trials and tribulations the artist encounters in his/her creative process and lays bare their decision making acumen. this blog is designed to provide an insight into my practice, including the manner in which i think through my material creations, particularly for the benefit of current owners of my work and potential owners, and declaring my failures is a risky affair. however, i think it's important to reveal these inner workings, to show the dead-ends of studio research together with the successful achievements. whether these current glitches result in a cul-de-sac that i have to reverse out of, or whether they prove to be small hurdles to be overcome, only time and hard work will tell!
the tricky part in this particular construction has been combining the disparate electronic components into some sort of integrated system that serves to enhance the sculpture i'm working on. a network of components that is a functioning, interactive ensemble of circuitry that creates the illusion of a working detonation device for a homemade 'bomb'. one major issue is that the combination of the elements results in a substantial increase in consumed power and a resultant drain on batteries. the consequence of this is that the electrical parts of the sculpture function only for a day or two, before batteries need to be replaced. now this would be perfectly acceptable, if this sculpture was indeed a home made detonation device for a 'bomb'. however, it is actually an artwork and must last at least the length of a standard art exhibition which is 3 to 4 weeks. so further investigation/consideration is required in this area.
the burning question for this particular work is this: how close to an authentic simulacra of a detonation device does it need to be?
this question has played on my mind for years with these sorts of sculptures. at what point does illusion need to be overcome by actuality? specifically for this sculpture, it is never actually ever meant to be a 'real' detonation device. in fact, it is never intended to ever really appear like one. the 'dynamite' is clearly and obviously only cut up branch segments. the sculpture is always itself only a simulation. other sculptures i have made have been created to actually appear to be authentically doing something, that in actuality they are only 'pretending' to. in contrast, this sculpture isn't really pretending to be what it appears. it is very much propositional. as if to say, imagine the power of nature.
so, in that light, pursuing authenticity beyond a particular point becomes unnecessary. one must make a judgement call about where that point is. i do not wish to give up on some of my ideas - such as having the viewer trigger the detonation counter by their proximity to the sculpture - but at a certain point, the technicalities of achieving some of these elements becomes untenable or impractical.
such are my frustrations with the work at this stage!
visually - the 'dynamite' bomb section, consisting of wired up trees branch segments, LED counter of home-made electronic circuitry, the artificial grass covered platform/plinth, the pot plants as the detonation device and the overall composition of all of these elements is very pleasing indeed. i find myself now entangled only in the finer technicalities of the last few little fragments of the work, having to resolve minor glitches and making some important judgement calls.
and this process of thinking through this final stage, has me leaning toward a more pared down expression of the sculpture - editing out the unnecessary and perhaps ornamental aspects of the work. in which case, interactive elements, overly complex networks of circuitry and additional configurations of electronics is not going to add to the sculpture's productive meaning. these things will have their chance in future work. thinking on it further, i feel that the interactive elements are more suited to installation contexts. this sculpture is very much a stand alone piece - one work in a group show of works, presented on a plinth and designed to evoke ideas of dormant power in nature. for that end, i'm thinking now that it should be simply and clearly produced as just that.
No comments:
Post a Comment