T1: MMT: Pt 3 Research cont.d

The exciting result of sharing my learning on the blog and on the forum is that my eyes suddenly get extended to others’ eyes across the globe.

A big thank you to Inger and Jennifer who scouted out 2 inspiring artists that I most certainly have appreciated looking at and would never have known about otherwise.

Firstly, looking at the work of Claude Heath, particularly his drawings and notably his landscape drawings that utilise acrylic on a transparent ground. I also was intrigued by his graphic work ‘Waterfalls’ which is supported by a video here. I like that he studied philosophy before he turned his mind to creating art. He plays with the perception of 2-D and 3-D. I am fascinated by his discussion on this work and how his work is created to hope to understand water better – that he is attracted to something that as he describes, cannot be completely comprehended. Perhaps what I am searching for is a grasp at something else that cannot be comprehended: our inner language. ‘You can always use drawing to extend other question for other people in other realms.’ His blindfold drawings speak to me on a textural level and a familiar level. They are like the big brother of where my sketches are growing. He discusses 3d technology as a freeing restraint. And I am smitten by his use of the term ‘enquiry’. We talk the same language here. I feel less lonely in my thinking.

Which takes me on to my next soul-partner in creativity. I have always felt that ideas can be pulled out of ourselves, pulled through, but they are pulled through us as from another place. The picture I have in my head is pulling strings from us, the thread of an idea, it can pull from your heart or your mind or your belly, put it pulls and catches like a fishing line or net, as it passes through us it picks up the catch – slivers of sliver fish ideas, lumps of tangled seaweed memories, snapping claws of unhealed hurts, yet you keep pulling. it is not pulled out from us but pulled through use. Those threads originate outside of ourselves. Many of us at the same time can grasp these threads or be grasped by these threads) and pull them into being through ourselves, through our internal translation, and yet on the other side of the country someone can be pulling through similar concepts and questions and enquiries that reverberate since they are from the same part of the same source, but materialise with slight differences due to the individual they pass through. This is one of the reasons I am curious as to what you get to if you keep looking further and further into ideas for their source, their original language. Steven G Bonfield and I must have been pulling from the same sea or inspiration. Not only is his work a fusion of text and form, but he has created works that CAN BE TOUCHED. How long have I ranted about this?! My concern for playgrounds, art that can be handled and climbed over and through and INTERACTED with – other than on a visual, cerebral level.

Jennifer sent me some photos from his exhibition ‘The Language Landscape’ that she visited here. In the supporting text she mailed me it states how  he ‘makes interactive paintings and sculptures filled with or covered by writing….whose physical characteristics are indivisible from the poem.’ His Artist’s Statement calls to me like one of my pack:

‘I sometimes feel that I am primarily constructed out of language. The skins and bone and gristle of me is real but not as real (or as me) as the words that I speak and think with. My work is an attempt to get inside this world of language. To explore language materially and as a web of subjective connections. I’m not so interested in sharing my thoughts on language or aesthetics. I’m attempting to share my experience of them.’

With this statement he becomes another piece of the jigsaw of me, some bits fitting flush others sticking out where I stick in and not all edges touching, but definitely the next piece.

Now to hunt him down!!