In choosing
the title O-AR I indulged in some word play
with the form and function of 'oar', seen
to be relevant as it gave an insight into
what the work was about. In this particular
context as an 'in' and 'out' of synch with
meaning - meaning which is stretched, like
an active membrane, expanding and contracting.
O-AR (1974)
was an installation work conceived in two
parts. Part 1 was presented in the Barry Lett/RKS
Gallery and Part 2 in the upper two galleries
of the Auckland City Art Gallery contributing
to the then current project programme. The
two parts were interrelated in concept but
because they were separated in space and time
Part 2 can be regarded as an epilogue to Part
1.
The Part
1 installation included two large white sheets
laid out on the gallery floor. On one sheet
was a bundle of manuka sticks, on the other,
a collection of gridded, purpose designed,
steel and plastic, commercially available
structural materials. They ranged from gardening
materials (plastic) to structural form-work
(steel). Superficially the two layouts could
be regarded as an apposition between the organic
and the inorganic but their role was much
more than that when taken in context with
the remainder of the installation. This consisted
of an array of texts enlarged to varying dimensions,
purpose designed graph paper, and mathematical
calculations (originating from structural
analysis of stress factors related to a large
outdoor sculpture made for the Christchurch
Commonwealth games) pinned to the gallery
walls.
In tying
together the conceptual stance of the work
I started off by laying the manuka out haphazardly
all over the sheet until I realised this was
related to another concern, about undifferentiated
fields, an anti-form situation which didn't
have a central bearing so I threw all the
pieces back into a bundle indicating potential
rather than fact. The other layout had a much
more obvious relationship to the graphs on
the wall, mathematical calculations etc. even
though these elements were not structured
in their relationship or in any sort of form
semblance
In many of
the texts the line ends with a broken word,
in some cases the end letter is displaced
to the next line. Obviously this is something
different to the formal consideration of laying
out text; it had more to do with setting up
a break in continuity and the reader having
to make the effort to establish the visual
and verbal link. This (as a strategy) was
consistent to the whole - breaking the normalcy
of statement and the viewer being placed in
a different situation to promote a free or
more varied possibility of association. Even
so the residue of meaning remained in the
statements and in the various elements. The
graphs themselves suggested possible constructs
of relationships. Overall, the even plane
of understanding was broken and carried forward
as an indefinite capsule - a capsule with
holes in it if you like.
A key aspect
of the graphs, objects and linguistics was
that they were signifiers for systems and
system thinking. The engineering resolution
to stress was applied system to problem solving.
Once the viewer had moved to the point of
perceiving the work as system thinking (as
well as other issues) then it became possible
to focus on the breaks and inconsistencies
to render the incoherent coherent in their
own terms. I was also interested in the dichotomy
between the stated (the installation) and
the unstated (the resulting possible mindsets
arising from the given). In this sense it
had a relationship to the previous work Arena
in that it had an outer barrier (installation)
separating layered inner core (unseen) of
possible meaning outcomes. Again, there was
a plane of thinking which related to what
sculpture is about, a question of what sculpture
might be about. Philosophy, poetry, engineering,
Darcy Wentworth's "Growth and Form"
etc. introduced as position elements, important
aspects to thinking and evolution of ideas.
Click
on images to see enlargements
please be patient, some of the images will
take a little time to download
)
)
)
)