Abstract

I will attempt to articulate a particular potentiality which may be located in the dynamic and fluid relationship between Artworks and Artists housed and produced by an Institution of Art education and an Art Educational institution which is produced by the Artworks and Artists it houses. By locating my thinking firmly within a model of ‘continual becoming’ ( as opposed to, for example , progress, measurement and outcome ) which is emerging through my current studio practice I will, with a light touch I hope, map some of these tactics of becoming ( flexing, limbering, stretching ) which are central to current work onto an ( almost ) imaginary Office of Institutional Aesthetics which sits with an ( almost ) imaginary Art School. Following the perverse ‘logic’ of the studio practice I will present a model of an institution which prioritises multiple positions, subjective, temporal and otherwise along with overlapping and contradictory voices. The studio work itself applies multiple strategies in which different ‘voices’ are written, speed of application of material is consciously disrupted, the texts themselves are positioned up, down, and/or mirrored in an approach to get inside and behind the ‘text’ in a spatial/conceptual play. Despite their flatness the paintings (if that is what they are) are models of multi-dimensionality and agency. As such they are deeply uncertain and troubled, but also generative and productive. In short I will conclude with the proposition that the world which houses and produces art may also be considered as an art work in itself ( or art’s work ) , and thus perfectly open and responsive to aesthetic and affective demands and interpretations.