Test Bed 1

Thoughts about Making and Reading the Image

Within pictures the object (what happens) can only be verified by how it predicates the subject (what it is), and the personal choosing of a subject dictates to what extent the object is going to be normalised or modified. By this I mean that the signified (the underlying intention to communicate a particular meaning) is either conventional in cultural terms or is oppositional as an individually held ideological or creative position.

Subject and object show difference and locate their respective structural positions according to beliefs. If the notion is that difference reveals subject to be controlled by external constructs, and not personal convictions, then the object might be compromised. However, distinctiveness overrides wider influences by virtue of the phenomenon of individual existence, allowing subjectivity to decide what the subject is and its impact upon the object.

One position regards beliefs as cultural constructions, and the other, that the human condition allows uninhibited thought processes. They can be connected, on the one hand, by the idea that objectivity relies upon there being (or not being) actual freedoms of thought and expression, bearing in mind that cultural and ideological apparatuses are in control. Individuality, on the other hand, can be asserted regardless of these realities, but the impact of latent acquiescence, and how it changes values from independent thinking to dependent positions suggests that deference, and a degree of critical docility, can create subjective judgements that are unconsciously tied to mainstream thought.

The impact of this is to limit the quality of discourse, and to dilute the properties of signification. If the denotation of a subject is weak, then the connotative potentials become narrow and conformist. Similarly, if the discursive modes use language which express meanings that stay within what is only acceptable, then they mask potential inequalities.

These thoughts do not necessarily reflect my creative approach, but are worth stating at the outset as my work is going to be read/viewed by others. What follows is an analysis of my work that assesses these foregoing remarks. Specifically, I will keep in mind the following -

At the most basic level the subject is predicated by what is happening.
The object can be, especially with manipulated imagery, ambiguous.
Pictures have compound predications.
The language of images is more complicated than written text.
Rendering is dependent upon connotations as well as physical context.
Abstraction turns everything on its head, and is latently oppositional.
Narrative structure has additional pictorial properties due to significations .
The frame holds meaning within and without, implying and inferring.
2D images can produce three dimensions and time through indexical references.
Colour and tone affect the interpretation of form.

Light Machine.

At first glance this picture, as an index, could be a machine for generating a light or a flame. It could be a cigarette lighter or a beacon, possibly a lighthouse of rather unusual design. It might even be a cosmetic or medical appliance, as it has a degree of similarity to things you might find in a bathroom cabinet.

I created it with my usual method of being as random as possible, putting together many elements without any idea where they were leading (It was very unlikely that I would have thought of the form in the first place).

The first things I noticed about the Light Machine was how the background rendering and the slightly low angle affected the size of the subject. I noticed that the light/flame was white suggesting a machine for illumination, but the form looked more like a lighter, perhaps for igniting a giant gas hob. So the image already had ambiguities and strangeness. This was a compound predication, which would create complications for the subject.

Utilising difference it became apparent that the meaning was metaphoric, and this opened up other possibilities. I was thinking that it could be about notions of energy and/or spirituality, given the size and form of the machine, the action and its setting. Also the machine looked futuristic, but in a retro way such as would have be seen in 1950's Sci Fi films. How it would function as a machine remained a puzzle, yet fascinating in respect of its unusualness as a concept, which allowed me to connote the metaphor along a traceable critical path. I eventually narrowed it down for it to be a ritual artefact of alternativism, but finally opted, on account of the index -white flame- for it to be industrial and carbon neutral, signifying the cleaning up of our environment.

I would speculate that the general viewer might start off along similar lines, but at the junction of considering difference think the image was to do with the function of the image in, say, advertising, or technical illustration. It is very unlikely that some viewers would read it as an aesthetic statement, and try to unpack it. They would understand it (sub-consciously) as being dependent upon the forms and practices that objectify certain things, thus setting limits against their potential interpretations. The practical properties of the image would take precedence over any other form of appreciation, with cultural constructions defining the subject, and causing the object to come into line with customs and conformity.

However, many would have identified the image depicted as an ecological reference.

Patchwork

The subject of this picture is Patchwork, because that is the title the work has been given. But it is definitely not patchwork, and not a reproduction of a traditional fabric craft.

The subject is a formal distribution of shapes and colours, and is required to be experienced in a conceptual manner. It is safe to describe it as abstraction, but in spite of the complexity it reduces the difficulties of reading the image because it relies on an emotional impact before any analysis. Take the hit and move on, or start to interrogate what is seen and get drawn into signification and discourse, and get lost.

I subscribe to the emotional moment, but also like the idea of drawing out scepticism. What does it mean? It is a hermetic, bounded image that displays in addition to its overall form, pockets of shapes, tones, and colour that juxtapose whatever can be perceived within any saccadic moment (when the eye's rapid movements dwell on a particular spot).

The icon of the image, where none has been the intention, is what is objectified by the reader. The index is something within the domain of chaos, or order depending on whether you try to make sense through verisimilitude, or regard it for what it is, an entropic distribution of graphical bits and pieces. My intention is that it should not be unpacked, but given the viewers' right to produce their own meanings, I cannot ignore their impulses.

Recognising things familiar within the picture might be the most common reaction, and it is here that the indexical referents are interesting when considering critical approaches. If there is a section of the picture, let alone its whole, that looks familiar physically, it will have an effect on the rest of the image. More importantly, if the possible recognition of an element, or the whole, mobilises a sub-indexation of relationships then we are into what I call 'the garden path'; a progression towards self-conscious interpretation, or a false trail leading to nowhere.

In essence the picture is no more than being the picture of artistic intention to make a picture. Through transference, of subject/object and denotation/connotation, it might be appropriated into new ownership that I can do nothing about, but could reveal something I had really not considered.

Sea Grasses.

Sea Grasses has all the characteristics of a vignette, except that it is not. It is a consciously composed minimalist photograph. The image suggests what is outside the frame, in that we do not see the sea, but know it is there. Also, the grasses go beyond what is depicted, but the picture, unlike other of my works, is consciously constructed to force its exegesis.

It is, at first glance very simple, with the subject and object clearly stated, and little to obstruct connotative interpretation. Furthermore it is a photograph, slightly manipulated to accentuate the movement of the grasses. Nothing seems to be happening beyond the pattern of the grass, the existence of wind, the furrow to the right and the colour and tone of the scene. The apparent sparseness hides complexities that go beyond the analyses of the previous two images. The prevailing wind is verified by the flattening of the grass due to the consistency of the weather. The ground cover is grass and not cereal crops, because the place would be inappropriate for farming. The furrow's direction indicates the direction towards the sea.

The colour suggests good sunlight, but as the illumination is not as dominant as the hue and saturation, it denotes a chilly atmosphere. We can extrapolate that the wind is coming from the north, and the direction of view to the east. The subject and object tells us what it is and what is happening - 'The grasses are being blown by the wind'.

The next thing to consider is index. The signifier of index needs corroboration by the signified. This is where it becomes very difficult for this picture to anchor a specific idea as there is not enough information there. The wind is invisible, even although it has an active effect on the image. It is obviously there, but can it be deemed an index? I have wrestled with the problem of discerning an index for this picture without much success.

Connotations are, however, more easily found, and this is why the exegesis is revealed in a specific way when dealing with minimalist art. The texture suggests wrapping up the earth against the cold. It shows waves coming ashore, transformed from water into grass. It is an exposed, but good hiding place; dangerous and safe in equal measure. As a scene of drama it could be about romance or crime. It has ecological connotations. It might even be regarded as pure concept.

I think of it as a nostalgic moment, capturing memories of youth and signifying what the Norwegians call Friluftsliv. Finally, for one could cite many connections, it is as Glen Gould said "An Idea of North". In this case, the North East of Scotland.

These three examples show how different image categories are conceived, made and read. They also acknowledge that although the world view constrains what we produce and communicate, there is still room for self-conscious creativity and objective thinking.

I intend to publish on an intermittent basis more articles about how my work is made and read. They will all be featured on the pages titled TEST BED, and I welcome readers views.