NADIA HEBSON, the uncanny valley

In this morning's Seminar we embarked upon a crazy journey attempting to delve into various topics surrounding issues of the sublime, the portrait, artistic intention, and robots.....

Perhaps because all of these issues are so complex we were left with more questions than answers, but will attempt to summerise what was touched upon below;

Sublime and the Contemporary Sublime: A strand of thought very evident in Nadia's work, however something we all agreed is hard to define, or even attempt to capture. This concept is perhaps restricted in the present day due to it's associations with the enlightement, but could be thought of as the 'blankness of nature'.

The Portrait: A problematic mine-field that continues to entice artists and viewers alike. Does the portrait still have a place in contemporary painting? and if so how should this be tackled? what place does identity have within the idea of portraiture? does it still remain to be a vehicle for emotion, in comparison to other mediums such as film?

Artistic Intention: A heated debate exploring whether artists should set out with a clear outline of what they wish to convey, or if this must be handed over in it's entirity to the viewer.

Robots: Welcome to uncanny valley!

Many thanks to Nadia for bringing some very interesting points of disscusion forward.

Laura Napier

Laura Napier’s lecture was followed by a seminar on time. Chaired by Daniel Jagger and Kelly Murray.

“Time is a relevant issue to be considered within Laura Napier’s Work. It is raised on several levels from the different “times” or timelessness she creates in her work. This ranges from her physical instillations, to the audiances own perceived and real time as the space is explored.

This opened up the discussion for looking at time in a broader sence in relation, not only to instillation, but also sculpture + painting. The role of the gallery + institutions that often create a false sense of permanence + fixed sense of time to art+art objects also opened up an interesting trail of thought.

Laura is also interested in the way it is possible to control or even manipulate viewers to move around her installations in particular ways. This seemed to provoke conflicting responses with often viewers resenting being controlled + when left to explore freely, every viewers experience being different.”

Neil Bromwich- The aesthetics of social engagement.

Does art get in the way of social change or can it be used as a vehicle for social change? Can art contribute to social change at all or is it hindered by the fact that it is called "Art" in the first place?

These are some of the issues we discussed in the post-lecture seminar. With relation to "Sci-fi Hot Tub" we considered the affect of an art work in a social environment i.e Kielder reservoir, as opposed to the white walled gallery setting. In the discussion Neil suggested that although the art work "lost something" in the gallery space, it also allowed for a new critical perception.

How did you feel about Neil's work? What draws you to his work- the spiritual utopian aspect, the aesthetic documentation or the social engagement within a more public realm.