Inspiration- Dave Cole
Knit Lead Teddy Bear (2006) 
Knitting Machine (2005) Artist Dave Cole makes use of knitting to create sculptures and installations which question the utilitarian definition of craft, which has so often been used to separate craft from fine art. Cole questions the dichotomy of art and craft by thrusting knitting (craft) into what could be defined as fine art territory. Through his unusual choice of knitting technique, Cole removes the utilitarian properties of knitting. What I find most interesting about Coles practice is the idea that he transcends both craft and fine art disciplines by using knitting and sculpture simultaneously. This where my practice lies, Why can't craft be used in fine art? Who says that craft isn't fine art? My practice makes use of paint and knitting, to create pieces which cannot be categorised as craft or fine art. I create knitted pieces out of skeins of paint. my knitting is essentially a painting....
In Knitting Machine (2005), see above, Cole removes knitting from the domestic realm and instead makes the activity public, immediately questioning the aesthetic hierarchy which places craft of a lower aesthetic worth because of its attachments to the domestic. The Knitting Machine was a performance and a sculptural installation, in which Cole used20 foot knitting needles attached to excavators to knit the American flag. Cole states that it 'combines the feminised domestic tradition of knitting with the grandiose gesture of construction usually associated with masculine labour.'
Cole also removes the utilitarian properties of knitting through either the size or materials he chooses to use. For example, withing Knit Lead Teddy Bear (2006), see above, Cole uses handcut lead ribbon over an armature of lead wool to create what would appear to be a stuffed toy. The height and pattern are suggestive of a comforting stuffed toy; however on closer inspection the piece is anything but comforting, instead it is heavy and most importantly toxic. Cole subverts the comforting and domestic nature of the traditional teddy and also knitting.
Mini Exhibition- Review
During the week that the mini exhibition was up I had a crit session, in which I received feedback from both a tutor and my peers surrounding the presentation of my exhibition piece. I found this session incredibly valuable, not just with relevance to my own work but also to my peers work, as there were a number of issues which arose through the critiquing of the mini exhibitions. The issues brought up were key to note, especially for the curation of the degree show.
Issues relevant to everyone were trivial but important things like everyone having the same font, sizes etc on the information cards next to the work. Also the way in which foam board was used was an issue. After critiquing the use of foam board we found that if the board is cut correctly then it can look professional, however, if cut incorrectly then the viewers attention is taken away from the work and to the imperfections in the presentation of the work.
The mini exhibition was a chance for myself to critically reflect upon the way in which I present my own work, a chance to analyse and improve upon my presentation skills ready for the degree show. What I found valuable from the crit session following the setting up of the exhibition was not only tutor feedback, but peer feedback. The different viewpoints have enabled me to view my practice from different perspectives. The feedback I was given in terms of presentation was generally quite good, however the fact that I had used a plinth did raise some issues. It was suggested to me that a plinth is quite a masculine object and the way I had placed my work vertically upon the plinth suggested masculinity and represented the male genitals. I found this viewpoint quite interesting, however most of my peers argued that just because the work was placed on a plinth it wasn't suggestive of male genitals.
After debate surrounding this issue, it arose that the issue occurred in my statement rather than the presentation of the work itself. The context I had written about in the statement referred to a gender divide and feminist issues, therefore the connotations surrounding gender were automatically assigned to the work. Therefore what I found important here was to either keep the statement away from the work, and let the viewer proceed to view the work prior to reading the statement, or to manipulate the statement I have at present. I have realised that the statement and also information labels can impact greatly upon the reception of the work, therefore this is something I will be conscious about for my degree show.
In terms of my work, the reception of it was one of shock, not in a bad way, but in the sense that my peers had not seen work like it before. When they realised that the structure/painting/craft was knitted out of paint their reactions were all I needed to realise that my practice is innovative and blurring the boundaries of what can be classified as high art or craft.
Issues relevant to everyone were trivial but important things like everyone having the same font, sizes etc on the information cards next to the work. Also the way in which foam board was used was an issue. After critiquing the use of foam board we found that if the board is cut correctly then it can look professional, however, if cut incorrectly then the viewers attention is taken away from the work and to the imperfections in the presentation of the work.
The mini exhibition was a chance for myself to critically reflect upon the way in which I present my own work, a chance to analyse and improve upon my presentation skills ready for the degree show. What I found valuable from the crit session following the setting up of the exhibition was not only tutor feedback, but peer feedback. The different viewpoints have enabled me to view my practice from different perspectives. The feedback I was given in terms of presentation was generally quite good, however the fact that I had used a plinth did raise some issues. It was suggested to me that a plinth is quite a masculine object and the way I had placed my work vertically upon the plinth suggested masculinity and represented the male genitals. I found this viewpoint quite interesting, however most of my peers argued that just because the work was placed on a plinth it wasn't suggestive of male genitals.
After debate surrounding this issue, it arose that the issue occurred in my statement rather than the presentation of the work itself. The context I had written about in the statement referred to a gender divide and feminist issues, therefore the connotations surrounding gender were automatically assigned to the work. Therefore what I found important here was to either keep the statement away from the work, and let the viewer proceed to view the work prior to reading the statement, or to manipulate the statement I have at present. I have realised that the statement and also information labels can impact greatly upon the reception of the work, therefore this is something I will be conscious about for my degree show.
In terms of my work, the reception of it was one of shock, not in a bad way, but in the sense that my peers had not seen work like it before. When they realised that the structure/painting/craft was knitted out of paint their reactions were all I needed to realise that my practice is innovative and blurring the boundaries of what can be classified as high art or craft.
Mini Exhibition- 7th March 2011
As part of my degree both I, and my peers were asked to set up mini exhibitions, in which we displayed a minimum of one piece of work. These exhibitions were focused upon the presentation of the work rather than the work itself, in preparation for the curation of our degree show. Above is an image of my mini exhibition piece.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)