We are products of the past, products of history. And there are parameters that define us. And what I'm trying to do is to show the ugly and maybe that will be enough make us change.
To answer your question You and me were born without permission, without our say. And the world we were born is not nice. That is what meant by "...constant chaos we are mired in".
We might have a past, a history, I would argue that they define us. If they define us then us is unchangeable. Naively trying to show ugliness to force change is not enough. you merely show ugliness.
I would be after something a little more clever than merely harking back to birth and lack of permission. If those things do mire you then I would suggest acceptance and challenging work based on your acceptance might be a little more interesting.
I wrongly argued there about the defining nature of past and history. They do not define us, as an individual you are able to choose to do things outside of the initial definition, thus defying that which initially defined.
"What I do undoubtedly touches the realms of documentary as well as discovery - however, perhaps all art is a form of documentary anyway." Natalie Dowes-Sense of Place Project 2007/2008
3 comments:
To: Adrew Martyn Sugars
We are products of the past, products of history. And there are parameters that define us. And what I'm trying to do is to show the ugly and maybe that will be enough make us change.
To answer your question
You and me were born without permission, without our say. And the world we were born is not nice. That is what meant by "...constant chaos we are mired in".
JM
product is such a word of consumerism.
We might have a past, a history, I would argue that they define us. If they define us then us is unchangeable. Naively trying to show ugliness to force change is not enough. you merely show ugliness.
I would be after something a little more clever than merely harking back to birth and lack of permission. If those things do mire you then I would suggest acceptance and challenging work based on your acceptance might be a little more interesting.
I wrongly argued there about the defining nature of past and history. They do not define us, as an individual you are able to choose to do things outside of the initial definition, thus defying that which initially defined.
Post a Comment