Fine Art is delighted to present a public weekly programme of research lectures and seminars from some of the most interesting and original artists, critics, curators, historians and Art professionals working today.
The Lecture programme is open to the public and other educational institutions. We welcome you to argue and explore the weekly themes posted by students and speakers.
The transitions and growth David Kefford made in his artworks were directly linked to his approach to found objects. As interesting as his process and his artworks were, there was another aspect to David's lecture I'd like to focus on. David mentioned his need to constantly search for opportunities and his sacrifices all in order to keep making work. I caught up with him afterwards to ask him what this search entails: He asserted there is no real set standard path an artist can take (and maybe we're lucky to have such variety in occupation). This lack of direction and the nature of self-employment means artists must work even harder and be much more efficient at finding opportunities. An example David gave of this approach: Proposals come across better with a project built unique for that particular gallery/space/company. Once your project is accepted, you then apply for funding (Arts Council, etc…). This sounds so simple; we may have heard that before! But this constant search and boldness in asking for opportunities are skills we need in order to afford to keep making our artworks!
The object is lost in a way because your attention is drawn to the painted surface. The whole composition of the pieces within an installation also works a bit like painting as Katie Cuddon's do. But on the other hand they seem object-like for being completely enclosed solid forms. Also the separate fragments of found objects are united together into an object with a strong unified form. I think the object was lost more in his later installations which were more about relationships between things than autonomous objects.
Although I think that Davids painted sculptures had a comical fragility about them I agree with Julie that you are drawn to the surface rather than the object. His earlier works where the shape of the original object is still very clear have a more strength and personality especially the shopping trolleys which seem to be steadfastly hanging onto their original function even under all that tape!.Im not sure I would be as comfortable as he was turning a gallery space into a studio and then exhibiting in the same space. I think your work gains something once it is moved out of the area of production into the exhibiting arena.
A belated "thank you" for your comments. It is always useful to receive feedback from other artists about issues related to contemporary art practice. Can I also say how much I enjoyed my experience at Newcastle University. Best of luck with your future studies and Degree Show. cheers David
4 comments:
The transitions and growth David Kefford made in his artworks were directly linked to his approach to found objects. As interesting as his process and his artworks were, there was another aspect to David's lecture I'd like to focus on. David mentioned his need to constantly search for opportunities and his sacrifices all in order to keep making work. I caught up with him afterwards to ask him what this search entails:
He asserted there is no real set standard path an artist can take (and maybe we're lucky to have such variety in occupation). This lack of direction and the nature of self-employment means artists must work even harder and be much more efficient at finding opportunities. An example David gave of this approach: Proposals come across better with a project built unique for that particular gallery/space/company. Once your project is accepted, you then apply for funding (Arts Council, etc…).
This sounds so simple; we may have heard that before! But this constant search and boldness in asking for opportunities are skills we need in order to afford to keep making our artworks!
The object is lost in a way because your attention is drawn to the painted surface. The whole composition of the pieces within an installation also works a bit like painting as Katie Cuddon's do. But on the other hand they seem object-like for being completely enclosed solid forms. Also the separate fragments of found objects are united together into an object with a strong unified form. I think the object was lost more in his later installations which were more about relationships between things than autonomous objects.
Although I think that Davids painted sculptures had a comical fragility about them I agree with Julie that you are drawn to the surface rather than the object. His earlier works where the shape of the original object is still very clear have a more strength and personality especially the shopping trolleys which seem to be steadfastly hanging onto their original function even under all that tape!.Im not sure I would be as comfortable as he was turning a gallery space into a studio and then exhibiting in the same space. I think your work gains something once it is moved out of the area of production into the exhibiting arena.
A belated "thank you" for your comments. It is always useful to receive feedback from other artists about issues related to contemporary art practice.
Can I also say how much I enjoyed my experience at Newcastle University.
Best of luck with your future studies and Degree Show.
cheers
David
Post a Comment