MA Week 78 – Curation as Disruption, the pains of aquatint and endless writing up

Reflection on the past week, 24^th July 2017

 Curation as Disruption

The early part of the week was taken up with the “Curation as Disruption” exhibition. My pieces were hung on Monday morning, so on Monday lunchtime I went over to college to stick some of the small acetate squares on the wall, as Sharon had agreed the previous week.

I then ended up cutting more squares in the evening as I’d more or less run out, and I nipped back into college on Tuesday dinnertime to sprinkle these on the floor. The show opened that evening.

Almost 20 artists had responded to Sharon’s call out for work, resulting in a real mix of pieces on display. Textile pieces, a massive oil painting, a single photograph, a sound installation – all of these were there. Some artists had sent existing pieces, and others had responded directly to Sharon’s call out. The curation was also a mix. Some pieces had been hung in the classic way – in rows at eye level – and others were displayed in more disruptive ways, such as a photograph stuck on the floor, some ceramic pieces on a windowsill, and of course my own acetate fragments down the wall and onto the floor. The pieces were united by the relatively small group that had received the call out and their desire to support Sharon’s venture. There was a lot of visual interest due to the disparate nature of the work – areas of visual rhythm punctuated by areas of visual discord.

With my pieces - the top two and the bottom one

I had agreed with Sharon how my pieces would be hung. By chance I’d put the square and rectangular framed pieces next to each other on the kitchen table when I’d just framed them, and they seemed to work well immediately next to each other. My idea had been for the poem to hang underneath them. I’d envisaged them to be on a section of wall on their own, but Sharon suggested incorporating them with the other artists’ pieces. This then started a narrative with the neighbouring pieces, which contained a lot of greens, yellows and browns. I’d therefore tried to stick acetate squares of these colours nearby, to form a link with the other artists’ work. The hanging of the poem piece very low meant people had to stoop to see it, which was subversive, but perhaps not inclusive for less mobile people, which I hadn’t thought of.

View down into the exhibition space, showing my three pieces in a narrative with other artists' work

As a thank you, everyone received a badge – curator, disruptor, warrior, professor, artist. I took “disruptor” because I felt this was the most disruptive I’d ever dared to be with my art. I thought my pieces worked well, linked as they were by the acetate fragments. Each piece was strengthened by the presence of the others, and by the fragments. It was a departure for me and something that gives me food for thought. By sticking the fragments to the wall and scattering them on the floor, three fairly unremarkable pieces became an installation, something more to look at, something that stood out. . Food for thought. What else could become an installation? What wouldn't this technique work with?

Fragments of my practice

It was a lovely evening. I knew many of the people there and it was great to have a catch up and a drink. It was a celebration for Sharon, too, her last exhibition before she leaves. I am so pleased I made the effort to contribute.

 

Printing: aquatint

I’ve pressed on with the new version of the Royal Park plate and it is now more or less at its final state. The aquatint was frustrating. Having done the test strip, I had decided to do a second aquatint bite for 7 minutes. However, the result wasn’t nearly as dark as I expected. I’d had real trouble spraying the aquatint solution onto the plate and it seems I might have sprayed too much, effectively blocking the plate from biting. I’d found it really difficult to get an even spray, although the test sprays onto paper seemed fine. I took several prints from the plate not withstanding this, then stopped it out again. I had intended to do a final bite for another 10 minutes, but I decided to go for 7 again. I re-bit some of the areas that should have gone darker at the previous stage, plus some new areas. Again, I had difficulty spraying – I got half way down the plate and the airbrush suddenly stopped working. I think the nozzle had become blocked with the solution. I switched to another airbrush and managed to get a full layer on, though it took me quite a while to convince myself that there was a layer on. When I bit it this time, it went much darker than the previous time, and much darker than I expected (or desired, really).

 

First print from the plate after the second 7-minute bite

The final stage was to apply another liquid ground and etch some detail into the foreground. This didn’t work quite as well as I’d hoped and really the foreground needs more detail still. I also got quite a bit of foul bite in the sky, despite cleaning the plate well beforehand. I now suspect that the plate needs to be cleaned with Cif or similar before applying another ground if it has already been printed many times. I am toying with the idea of drypointing some more detail as I don’t think the plate will take much more biting.

This piece will form the last part of my final submission. It shows a journey from a relatively simple line etching to a more visually complex version. In some ways it is a metaphor for the MA journey, as I have grown in confidence in the techniques I’m using.

Writing Up

Less than three weeks now until hand-in, so the weekend was spent blogging and writing up. The writing up still seems endless even though I am approaching it differently! I’ve also now caught up four further blogposts:

Week 72 – Selling at the Art Market and looking ahead to hand in

Week 73 – Monoprinting with Movement!

Week 74 – Submissions, Submissions

Weeks 76 & 77 – Preparing Submissions, and time management to the fore