I prepared a few sentences to introduce myself to the Sotheby’s students the other day:
“I am interested in the pairing or collage of existing imagery in order to create new compositions or subverting the functions of embellished ready mades. I am interested in the authenticity of objects relating to their spheres of interest or collectability before and after I have dealt with them. I enjoy the conversations created by merging cross-cultural norms both historically and stylistically. However I see the objects on an individual basis, I want them to relate to their historical significance without representing it.
Although the processes are sometimes laborious the decision making within my practice is impulsive. It is more interesting to me to assess the work after its creation in order to fully understand its innate nature. Art for me is a therapeutic way of trying to make sense of psyche. I am interested in the reasons why these types of images come so naturally to me and why my formative years still have an overbearing effect on my creativity.
I aim to define the subconscious rules of my practice by studying the influential sub and pop cultures on my earlier life combined with a vocational approach to sourcing ready mades of wider appeal for me to work with.”
Problem is I already completely disagree with it.
Trying to keep what I do coherent in regards to a preordained theory is limiting my creativity and confidence.
I need to learn to differentiate ideas and, contrary to my earlier definition, ignore any rules I have given myself subconscious or otherwise in order to be as creative as possible.
“I think of myself as a complete mystery. To myself.” Sun Ra