|
When I graduated from the fine arts course at Curtin (was WAIT then)
26 years ago I had no clear idea about what I would do as an artist
(and even now I know not much more), so I started from scratch,
painting still lifes. It was only 15 or so years later that I began
to develop some more clear concepts about my direction as a painter/artist
and how I could explore some ideas which questioned what a painting
was, and in doing so enabled me to extend my approach to painting
away from its traditional base. This happened as a result of two
factors. One was that I was looking for a way to impart a sculptural
quality to my paintings. The other factor was a result of being
in close proximity to a number of like minded artists at the Old
Customs House studios in Fremantle from 1987-92. The support and
stimulation of being around on a daily basis artists such as Karl
Wiebke, Alex Spremberg, Jurek Wybrianec, Andrew Leslie, Carey Merten,
names that may mean nothing to many here, was a powerful agent for
experimentation and exploration into a number of issues concerned
with the development of an authentic contemporary non figurative
tendency in painting in WA. The ideas I and others were interested
in exploring at the time were:
The physicality of painting- the painting was made to be viewed
as a sculptural form, whether flat or shaped.
The concrete basis of the world of objects
The work made draws attention towards the materials it was made
from and the process of its making.
Gravitational force as an active agent in the way paint reacts to
a surface
The primary role of the surface or ground .How it is structured
determines the physical impact of the work- it wasn’t to be
taken for granted such as assuming that it had to be on canvas for
example
An all over configuration- that is a grid, or pattern as a means
of producing a visual field. This was to provide a strong structure
and to enact the idea of equivalence- that is no part of the work
could be seen as more important than any other.
Works produced in groups or multiples, showing permutations and
slight variations, many pieces which constitute a single work.
The works are not “pictures” in any sense, and no attempt
was made to depict images as such, but proposed a quite different
idea of representation. The work may “stand in” for
something after the fact eg the presence of a body, or a section
of landscape, or a wall, but this was never intended as a way of
making the work.
|