It doesn’t make for much spontaneity or impetuousness, this
way of working. All the risks have to come at the beginning.
I think with this one I was taken with the idea of what the
letter/character does, sometimes functioning as a metonym (part of the whole
standing for the whole) and sometimes not. I think you have to know the
language, and know what the use of the language implies, just as you would have to know that the original sampler, probably
late nineteenth or early twentieth century, was intended to show that the maker
had acquired digital craft skills. It’s a sort of code message saying ‘I
can do this’. Maybe that proposes a sampler that says just that – Look I can do
this, with my name, age, and the information that it hurts my eyes (like some Roman
inscription).
There is, of course, a direct reference to the age and gender difference between myself and the (supposed, projected, imagined) first maker, and to ideas of exploitation, abuse, power, control, insertion, authority and the nature of language.
No comments:
Post a Comment