Balance, 2015. Plaster of paris.
Balance recognises a journey through a split direction from a single point.
I discovered this great article on twitter:
This article suggests that unlike most Galleries and Museums where viewers are told what the art is and what it is about; Tate Britain have opened an exhibition whereby the viewer is told “…only the name of the artist with his birth and death dates, the title of the painting and the year it was painted. What Curtis has understood is that pictures on show in a public gallery are themselves primary data. You study history so that you can understand them, not the other way around. And anyway, who says they need to be studied? Gallery visitors should be allowed to have their own responses to the art in front of them, not told what to think by the curator.” Although I don’t always know what the artwork is about, I always look at the information beside the artwork to incline me towards some conclusion. However, sometimes when I do understand the artwork I would prefer not to be told otherwise; which is what this Curator is enticing the public towards. Sometimes artwork can confuse the viewer when their personal opinion is different to the artists’ which could act as a deterrent for the public from visiting art galleries and museums at all, as it has done in the past.
To practice my own drawing techniques i need to copy, by eye (and/or measurements), other drawings so my hands and eyes can learn the flowing curves of drawing sculpture. I chose these drawings to copy because i knew they were relevant to my future practice; i was attracted to the complexity of the structure, knowing that somehow these drawings are representations of nature.
These drawings are my copies of Richard Deacons own drawings:
Geometry is most often regular and symmetrical; this bouquet of flowers are all made up of the same flower therefore the pattern representing this geometrically would be perfectly symmetrical. But, why? Why should they be regular when nature itself has made them so irregularly beautiful? The pattern of each individual tulip would be the same. But why? Clearly they are all different.
This is perhaps going against the very rules of geometry and the Natural order, but I have my own interpretations which I believe to be geometrically accurate representations of a bouquet of flowers.
Amena Amer-Monochrome mosaic:
“This is a photograph of a mosaic wall in the Grande Mosquee de Paris. Completed in 1926, the mosque was built in recognition of the thousands of Muslim from the French colonies who fought against Germany in World War I.
The complexity of Islamic mosaics, the colours and the way in which each of the coloured pieces complement each other to create an artistic masterpiece that never fails to enthrall, but can at times overwhelm the eye. Thus, I chose to take the photograph in monochrome as a means to highlight the beauty of the pattern created by the muted.” Amena Amer, 2012
These patterns evoke wonderful memories in me of visits to the great Mosques in Saudi Arabia, Paris and London. While before I was unaware of the influences towards my sculpture; I now recognise the complexity of such patterns and the convolution that it shares with Islam, but the meaning -for the moment- eludes me. I am aware that the lines, scopes and patterns that are formed through geometry contain a complexity that mirrors the Islamic ethos.