finished works and a new sketch

Firstly my apologies. This constant uploading of unfinished works and sketches must be annoying. I think its useful to upload works on the main section though as it allows us to see proper detail.

In regards to this last point...I am having a chat with my sister in how we can restructure this site. I think it serves its current purpose quite well, and we obviously need to be careful not to dedicate to much time and effort to something which is primarily a subsiduary to our work. Having said that, if a few easy(ish) changes can allow it too function, and fullfill our requirements, more sucesfully, than that can only be a good thing.

Anyhow, in regards to uploaded images. The map series 'Between Somewhere and Nowhere' are finished. Having said that, their completion marks the start of a new series of similar works. Anyway, I am happy with them...no need to say anymore than that. For those interested they are about a5 size. They work like thi9s but there is potential for these small paper works to spawn larger canvas works.

The attached sketch is one of the second batch of recent sketches I have done (first batch was uploaded the other day). I am particuarly happy with this sketch. It is called 'Ballet of the Nightingale'. To an extent the title can be ignored, I merely name them at this stage to provide identification for myself. Having said that, the titles do provide an idication of certina elements of content. I am interested in how what were previously seperate elemetns can become one. By that I mean that they are not seperate figures by a single figure at various stages. Or perhaps not, maybe its something vaguer. Fuck knows actually. I don't think I overly need to klnow at this point, these are designed to inform future works, not to be finalised works of clarity.

That said I tihnk the following is true: treat all sketches like major works and all major works like sketches. So the former can have the seriousness of the later and the later the freedome of the former. Or something like that. How depresingly simplisitc and didactic of me.

Merry Christmas.

Your new work

Right well i had a load of waffle prepared, but then you wrote your last blog and it made me change my mind so i'm unsure whether i need to put it down now.... hmmm..... i think i will, unchanged so that it gives an idea of what i originally thought.

Your last post really helped to raise some pertinent issues with regards to both of our practices. First of all i'll respond to your work (the receipt work), i think it looks like the most contemporary pieces you've made to date, but i don't know what i feel about them, i don't really know what you're trying to say. Perhaps they are somewhere on the way to making a poignant point but for my tastes they're a bit clinical. they seemto be saying something about the figures you're interested in, falling, and thus between states of mind, particularly when placed alongside maps. but this is my quarrel, they "say" these things, linguistically. I'm thinking here of mike lill's degree pieceand how it succeeded in doing some of the things that these pieces of your's are just falling short of. It made me feel as well as think of being inbetween physical and psychological states. However i am glad that you stopped titling your work after classical characters, particularly when baring in mind what you have said about not having clear narratives.
I think there is a lot of potential in this new direction (the newest biro pieces, i believe are another step forward along this line, in fact i'd say that these really are interesting and have a lot more potential in breadth of meaning where the earlier ones are limited). Yet looking at the work has made me realise how difficult it is to unify these techniques that you are employing. I think you should look at gordon cheung's work, he paints enormous apocalyptic landscapes on top of financial times records. I think what he does is a lot simpler than what you're attempting in terms of context and subject but you may learn a lot by looking at his stuff.
What you have been saying has brought me back to looking at gerhard richter's 'the daily practise of painting'. last time i read this was in first year of uni, and if you've not read it you really should consider doing so, its basically the everyday diary of a painter. In the preface it is mentioned how different artists have used writing in different ways to inform their practise, barnett newman's major works were preceded by a lengthy period of writing, hans hoffmans was a didactic impulse, whereas richters runs parallel to the act of painting, accompanies it, questions it and is corrected by it. I found this knowledge to be extremely eye opening, i suppose because it puts the brakes on our bombastic pontificating about how we should use writing for our practice. there is, rather obviously, no correct way of accompanying the work, only what is right for the individual.
here's an extract from his writing. "strange though this may sound, not knowing where one is going - being lost, being a loser - reveals the greatest possible faith and optimism, as against collective security and collective significance. to believe, one must have lost god; to paint, one must have lost art"
i love this quote and suspect that whether you're conscious of it or not, i think you're attempting this exact process, in a way, to lose the shackles of your burgeoning knowledge and empty out your style. maybe thats codswallope.

Batch one plus needless waffle

I have done a whole batch now of similar quick sketches to the one in the last post. I am not sure if I have already stated the intention of these sketches, if not then I shall do now. I have have then perhaps this will provide a bit more clarity.

Firstly it should be stated there existence is not explicit in terms of any deep seated meaning. They come from a current desire to manipulate imagery, so are in the purest sense nothing more than an extension of that fascination. They are playful, if you like.

Beyond this I do think they are touching on areas of interest and broadening certainly iconographic potential in my work. I should at least attempt to explain more clearly what I mean by this. Once again, I hope this does not appear to be a justification, more a written clariifcation of the process. I am not sure how much difference there is between those two things.

In terms of broadening areas of interest i suppose I am talking about what we like to call content, subject matter. I know I am increasingly interested in what is found when something else is lost. The construction of images, moments and suggested narratives from the destruction (partial destruction I should say) of another.

These sketches are nothing more than images from newsppaers drawn over with biro and white acrylic. Yet I enjoy the point where the specifics of a figure and his context is lost. Where a footballer jumping to head a ball beceoms something more general. No longer a crowd, opposition play eror footabller around. With these props of recognised meaning removed he transforms. He becoems a figures floating, rising, falling in mid air. Someone locked inside some unknown narrative of potentially heroic proportions (this last statment is tenuous at best)

In terms of image making/destruction, the acrylic biro process has interested me. I know this because I have had the desire (and continued desire) to continue with it. It has not been over thought, i am just finding myself constantly picking up images from the paper and wishing to work them up/down in such a way. Ithink what I like is how when reduced to these basic tonal eleemnts (with detail of fabric and limbs removed) the figure seems to take on a weight, a solidity. Beyond this the continuity of surface in the figure and his surrounds seem to allow him to occupy space in an altogether different manner. He becomes a kind of heavy floating form in the ether; I think.

When reduced to simple lines the movement, energy and power of the various forms can be kept while their specific identiy is lost. I like it when the animalistic energy of a horse is kept but its part in a race, or even it looking like a horse, is lost. I like the idea of finding some kind of horse/dog/bull creature. I don't think I am interested in purposelly abstracting the animal to become some kind of mutant fantasy creature. Its hopefully more subtle than that. I think I just want a particular character of the animal, of which its species is not necessarily relevant. I am not sure I believe this, but my brain seems to want me to when I translate the thoughts into written form. Thats the trouble with words, terribly restructiuve, terribly dogmatic, terribly literal. TERRIBLY? Not sure why I am using such a pompous word, shhhhhhhh.

In terms of iconography I see the potential for these sketches to provide a kind of cast of characters. Figures adn actors who can be called upon to act out parts in new stage productions in the flat. Still Movies and silent actors. Once a cast is built they will help me find stories as much as they will fulfill certain rols I decide upon. Due to the limitations of the process I cannot predefine the stories I wish to make, I have to be guided, to an extent by the cast I have.

Yet seeing as I have created the cast, slected the images to work on, chosen how to work them up and then chosen what contexst to put them in... I obvioulsy have a directors role. That means I know the kind of 'picture play' I am trying to make. I know I am interested in lose, in memory, in rising adn falling, in tragedy, in beauty and melancholy, in transcience and stillness, in moment, in drama, in the post and the pre defining moment. These are all vague terms, but I know they provide the framework around which I wish these figures to act.

Hopefully these various visual and theoretical coordinates provide me with a kind of unknowing direction. With a path which leads us somewhere but through the dark and into something as yet undiscovered (undiscovered by me, not suggesting any search for originality here...I dont really give a toss about that...perhaps i do a little)

Which bring me full circle back to the destruction of the image. Its about what is found when something else is lost.

All that said, these are just crappy little sketches which pass the time when I am waiting for my toast to pop.

(obvisouly the playing with newspapers has a whole history. It takes us from the Cubists through to Andys comment about sourcing from the detritus of modern day life. Between these points lie a ton of people who source photographs, newspaper imagery etc to find imagery) I make no claim to be original, therefore, or to be competing with these past figures. I am merely acknowledging the hgistory from which such a process comes. Bacon is perhaps occupying my thoguhts in this sense most obviously at the moment. A true painters painter.

FUCK- this last paragraph sounds ludicrous. It would be false to remove it now though.

Those who jump (a quick sketch)

Getting to grips with image making

Your post the other day really struck me. I think you had some very important points. I don't really want to systemmatically deconstruct it as that will not be an overly constructive process(thats either a pun or lazy english).

What interests me is the need, or lack of need, to justify what we do in words. I think I have, can and will be quilty of over talking my work. It is equally dangerous, as you suggested, to under talk our practise, to totally deny the need for reason or justification. What is important is the nature of what we say. Not so much in terms of quality, but in terms of its ability to feed rather than hinder our work. It should supplement its progression and interpretation, not justify or limit either.

In this forum (if we can call it that) it seems that a lot of talk is not so much about what has been done but what we are in the process of doing. A kinf o forward looking commentary. The danger of this, obviously, is that theory gets ahead of practise. What I hope is that I can find a level where I am finding some kind of linguistic clarity in my thoughts and processes which helps me to find a new visual clairty and direction in my practise. The kind of clairty I am searching for is of a poetic rather than scientific kind. I don't want to justify my every action, to fully understand or explain what I am trying to do. In stead its about finding the arena in which I wish to act out certain little painterly journeys. (if that does not sound too horrifically pretentious)

With that in mind I have had some thoughts over where my current batch of new studies is going...

In most of the new small works I have started imagery seems to be deconstructed rather than constructed. This has something to do with my choice to work from a photographic starting point, with a predefined image laid down on the surface. By its nature I then take this image in a direction (normally with definition and calirty being attacked to various degress). This is oposed to image making, which starts with a material and looks to lay in down in such a way to build up a sense of an image. One is the synthetic construction of images and the other is the analytical deconstruction. With one painterly absrtact parts are used to create, with the other to destroy. The extent to which we go on this journey relates to where we wish to sit in terms of pictorial clarity (clairty here meaning that of a recognisable image) I know that I wish to sit in the ether, somewhere between knowing and not knowing. Snippets of reality lost and found between more painterly tendencies. (trying to write honestly but sounding progressively more pretentious)

This play with image obviously has a role. Painting is more functional and pragmattic than mere random play; however much we sometimes try to tell ourselves it isnt. We always move to the next level of interpretation, which tends to be narrative.

Seeing as I am sometimes taking elements from one narrative and erasing huge parts I am seemingly destroying stories. All the props and actors which interrelate lose meaning if only singular, floating elements are left. But when something is lost something else is found. Perhaps this is what I am after, the forgetting of one story in order to remember another (which does not yet exist in this exact form). This is why I have moved away, in general, form exact subject matter.

What I hope happens is that I find narratives, rather than making images which fulfill preordained stories I had in my head. Obviously I have thoughts in my head. By bringing together falling or flaoting figures, recipts, maps etc I clearly have certain ideas. I wish to keep these vague and think discussing them would perhaps trap their potential to expand and surprise. Issues of journeys, memories, reality and the human condition are obvious loose reference points.

What I hope is that from this mass of 'stuff' stories evolve, that they present themsevles to me. That the painterly process takes over to an extent. I am aware this is a romantic notion, and one I have been trapped in before. Yet I feel, with a more strict framework in place, beyond mere painterly exploration, that the rewards will be worthwhile. What I am enjoying is the process of being in the dark, the adventure of it all. I like the not fully knowing that currently exists.

On a wider level I know the kind of stories I am looking to make. By the nature of the process these will not be clear narratives. The paintings will not be able to read in such a way as to know who is who, who did what to whom, who is where or when or any such other linear or logica sequence of events or relationship of parts. I am more interested in a whole which directs us, its musical...I suppose. I suppose by the unreal nature of such stories I am intersted in allegory over narrative. That is, in something universal not specific. That does not mean I am into philosophy over drama. It just means its a more poetic form of drama. The danger of vague and obtruse philosophical or social dimensions being read into works is not something I am interested in.

Havingt said this I except that as a product of our time our images always offer up some kind of indirect assesment and commentary, however much we seek to avoid it. Even the avoidance of direct association says something in itself. Yet this kind of meaning is the most prone to change and the whims of circumstance and context (historical, physical and social).

Anyway, just some quick thoughts. It might all be bollocks; and probally is, but its kinda of what I am currently thinking...I think.

A few from a new series

I have just started a large series of small works, literally in the first few days. These particular three have caught my eye at what was supposed to be a very early stage. I am considering not doing to much more to them. I am not so much seeking advise as to how far to push them, but more just interested in what you think of what is a shift in direction. It is one which has been working its way through for a while, but just been held back by other works being finished.

The large series of small works also sees another direction open up. There are a group of works which more consciously quote from and comment on past works. The commentary is not an art historical one (although that obviously informs it). I hope it is a more democratic borrowing, but one which considers memory, history, the destruction of imagery and the reconstruction of more universal narratives. The semiotics of images also interest me, taking a sign and then destabalising it, placing it in a new context (spatial in particular) to shift its reference. This is all obviously talk at the moment. Ill give you some kind of idea of how I envisage it visually when a few works from this series get further down the line.

I am, despite how it may sound, trying to avoid being to preconceived in the ideas. It is more about finding images that interest me and then finding ways to play with them to create new dramas, new narratives, new images. About harnessing that which already exists and transferrring it into a parrell world. I think.

New Pictures (titles at bottom)

In order from Top:

1) Ritual Dance of the Drummer Boy (attached to the bottom right is a small, manual music box which plays Pop Goes the Wessel)

2) Ritual Dance of the Drummer boy (close up to see details of maps. Close up with details of music score on drum to be added later)

3) The Sinner and the Child
4) Where did those stories go?

5) Danae IV

6) Danae I-V (not to scale)

7) Some photos of works in bedroom (no reason really)

El Greco: a reply

Mr. Foulds, sir.

El Greco is not someone who, to date, I have spent a great deal of time trying to digest. One thing I know is he has always felt like one of those artists who does not fit historically. There is a certain crude sophisticaion, which I like.

I think the comparison between your work's intentions and El Greco's work is a pertinant one. He seems to use figural line, application and colour in order to find his own indepenndant power. The curving line, which historians seem determined to call 'mannerist', seems solid enough to justify the term sculptural.

The main thing of interst is, as you pointed out, both the application and chosen colour of his flesh tones. It is an obvious point but I don't think this can be considered on its own, its relationship to the tones of the colours around it.

He feels, to me, to do a lot of similar things to Cezanne. This is over simplisitic, but the application of colour seems to be parallel but with Cezannes being of a more retangular type. The colour range is certainly similar in what it does. Perhaps El Greco' colour range is more consistenly cool, but its function seems the same. In applying the paint in palpably present strokes and in using colours which create and capture intangible space they seem to detach the viewing space from us. Yet there seems a dichotomy, becasue it is these exact same features which seems to drag us in, eat us up. Yet we end up floating in this inbetween space, not quite capable of getting into the stage, but not also sat entirely outside of its space.

Anyway, long story short. I think this is what you are looking to do in many ways. Or at the least what 'Mary the Queen.' seems to be moving towards doing. I think linear spatial plays also have a role to play in this.

In terms of how to do this, colour wise. Fuck knows. Your use and knowledge of colour puts mine to shame. It is only recently I have made an attempt to approach colour 'scientifically'. Progress, i tihnk, is being made. Yet at the moment I very much feel I am in your shadow (shivering and feel pathetic). So, Sir, the puzzle of El Greco's colour range is something I hope you crack and I can then steal.

ps Good luck today in the game. United to steal a 2-1 victory from the jaws of defeat.

The Greek!!

I was wondering whether you'd done much work on El Greco Mr De Fres. I was sat there earlier today looking at my paintings and a passage i read in a biograph of Luc Tymans came to mind. He was talking about how he wasn't really interested in many artists when he was young, until he came across el greco. Within his paintings tymans saw a power that was lacking in any other artist. Where does this power come from? Why does he appear so different from every one of his contemporaries? I think this perhaps comes from his use of cool hues, particularly within the rendering of flesh, it creates a sense of space or air existing between us and the people within the painting. They have an appearence akin to a cadaver, this drop in chromatic temperature separates us from them. We are in an internal space, a gallery, a home etc, these pictures exist in a different realm and the frame acts as a window into this realm. All other painters of the time were producing images that were warmer and parallel to the viewing conditions, veiled with a golden light that aped the dull light of a candle, el greco had the light of space/nothingness. Could this be the way to go for my own work? Problem is i don't have a clue how he produced these cool fleshy hue's.

A challenge....

Bloody hell tom you don't half love challenging my powers of concentration by shoving everything up at once.

First of all i'm gonna quote francis bacon again and say "if something can be explained in words it isn't worth painting". this is the biggest trump card painting has over all other art forms. unfortunately it seems to now mean that a painting can be deliberately obtuse, indecipherable for the sake of it, or that the artist doesn't need to contemplate its own meaning, this is far from the truth and it leads to neanderthals making claims that this thus makes painting easy. the difficulty i think is in understanding what we need to pin point in terms of understanding our own practice, how do we set ourselves along the journey of improving our work without overindulging intellectualisms that in actuality hinder the painting? communication is the first intention for all art forms, as painters i think we have to start from a very loose stand point, something which is simple, eg what is it about this image which intrigues me? Now, what next? Do we begin to ask why and what? I'm beginning to think no, perhaps this was a lingering misconception from studentdome, the need to over-vocabularise every little nuance (I'm thinking back to my ridiculous 30min end of year talk here). A more important question may be how? Painting is at heart a craft, and craft is built on the development of technique, painting being one of the more complex crafts incorporates a range of techniques. The next question we need to ask is, why has this bit of painting made me happy/unhappy? By asking this question we are attempting to refine what it is we are painting about without entering into the limit-defining belly of the talkybeast. In essence, we are listening to our feelings rather than our learning. when we begin to ascribe specifying words to an action, we are actually taking the easy route out because we are reaching defined dead ends, and these are satisfying because it makes us feel we've done something clever, we've completed something. but painting doesn't have dead ends, it isn't a narrative with a beginning middle and end, it just simply is, and this 'is' is open ended and mysterious. As with peter doig, you may be able to look back over his whole oeuvre and see a progressing personal narrative, but in a single image you do not. by asking how does this make me happy, we are trying to find a certain truth to our own practice and through that, to our own personal make-up and perhaps even to a truth about about the society we exist in. if we are successful we may just be able to peel away one of those pesky veils of untruth that cloud our everyday existence.
does this mean that when a painting is finished it is ok to analyse your subjective intent?

What is the most neutral way to view work?

I like the Kettles Yard aesthetic, where we can sit down, flick through books. The browse again, then have a sit, then browse again. It all feels very natural.



Studio enviroment
I like the idea of my work being in a space where [perhaps people could spend a good deal of time. Perhapsa sit and have a coffee (not in a shop as such), listen to some music, have some sofas or chairs which they could position in front of paintings to spend a bit of time. Perhaps have a load of related material around, book collections of the artist, music collection. I don't know how this could work without it feeling contrived. I suppose the best way is to have an artists studio where occasionally he presents a load of work for viewing but also leaves the space pretty much as it nomrally would be. Fuck knows, the current situation just feels a bit false though. ARGHHHHHHHHHHHH

Acrylic Mediums

Andy, as promised some info of the better acrylic mediums I have used.

Still struggling to find a really good hard molding paste. I want something similar to plaster but more felxible and possibly which will take colour. At the moment I still have problems with the texture, cracking and greyness of the ones I have used (both Golden and AV)

AV Acrylic artist medium (matt and gloss)- basically works as an alternative to water. The colour runs through it with more consistency and therefore the coverage is better. But I find it a tiny bit too sticky at times and have actually not ordered more as I will return to water combined with other mediums.

Jacksons Acrylic, polymer Varnish (gloss and matt) A thinnner version of alkaflow, but for acrylics...opbviously. Too shiny when glossy but I am tending to reduce my surfaces to matt in general anyway. Despite this is gives a great body and weight to the colours. It provides a beauituflly desne layer to run other colours thourgh and also is great for glazes. Again perhaps a little too sticky, i would like it to run, without the addition of water, at a slightly greater pace. Very good value for money though.


AV Heavy GEll matt- a cheaper version to the golden equivalent. The difference in quality is not hugely notable to my undescerning eye. Thcik and dries transparent. Great for anything from impasto pastes to transluscent glazes. It love half mixing my colours into this then laying it down, so the colour sit through a depth of medium. It seems to work. The matt version, when mixed down with watter and zinc white, provides a great mist like veil across the surface.

Image Maker- have decided I am more interested in the destruction of imagery than its construction. In losing it not finding it. Its a choice between a synthetic mode and an analytical one. So for the moment this provides a great moment to lay down a clear graphic image and then start to play with it. Receipts and maps are the current source of fascination with this particular devise. I have me reasons but am trying not to over theorise it during this exploratory stage.


Colours- I have been sticking with Golden as a rule as I want the depth of pigment they provide. At the moment I am working around these colours


Alizarin Crimson
Golden Transparent Yellow Iron Oxide
Golden Transparent Red Oxide
Daler Rowney Interference Colour-shimmering gold (can actually be used with real subtelty when added to a wash or glaze. Also great for a kind of kitsch interuption to the surface)
Golden Ultramarine Blue
Golden Colbalt Blue
Golden Burnt Umber
Golden Burnt Sienna
Daler Rowney Zinc White (not had a direct comparison but would get this one again)
Have just purchased an AV Titanium White as the Liquitex (I think) one I had was nice and thick but when you tried to reduce it down it did not break up very well
Hansa Yellow Medium

aghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Finally, at last... 'Drummer Boy', 'Dane IV' and 'The Sinner and the Child' are complete. They have been worked, reworked, killed, brought back to life and cahgned so many times that I have been driven close to despair.

I have no true comprehension if they are any good at the moment but they are finished. They ar not finished becasue i am fed up, or becasue I have lacked the bravery to push them the extra yard. Whatever their faults both those points have been well and truly past. They may be many things from shit to pointless, but they are definately finished.

Will photograph and upload soon.

Now awaiting the arrival of my paper to get cracking on a long awaited series of small works which I am most terribly excited about don't you know old sir me chap

What is beauty

Beauty in the traditional sense is, despite general claims, a fairly easy thing to describe. In art terms (and the logic spreads to other forms of culture) it is the ability of a piece of work to fulfill a set of values which society has decided make something beautiful.

This issue only gets complicated when the rules change or their foundations are fundamentally attacked. The rise of postmodernism and the progression of various theoretical disciplines in the later half of the 20th Century seemed to have been the final nail in the coffin of beauty.

In painterly terms the Modernist Canon had (supposedly) neatly replaced the classical canon with a new model of beauty. Yet once its values were showed to be bankrupt its process of measuring beauty became vacuous.

It seems slightly ironic that in a time when so much is centred on superficial appearances that we have lost any real sense of what true beauty is. In effect we have been told such a concept is flawed. That no permanent notion exists, that it is merely fleeting attempts to justify what one particular segment of one particular society at one partoicular moment in time believes to be beautiful.

I would like to suggest that there are actually more permanentr values. That beauty does exist in more permanent forms. The essence of beauty lies in mankind itself. We are inherently selfish. OUr conception of reality is formed by the existence of matter in relation to the self. That more transient forms of beauty have existed merely reaffirms that it is a concept inherantly linked to our own phyche.

To find more eternal forms of beauty, therefore, we need to search for certain qualities that remain permanent in us...and from their we can find values which last.

I want to dash off on a tangent here. I want to give an example of what I see as beautiful Why is thom Yorkes wobbling voice with its breaks is beautiful...


I started to write the rest of this then realised how utterly self indulgent and pretentious it was. It seems worthwhile to leave it at this point.

Sponge, swimming pools and paperwork

The source material for my painting is, thankfully, finally expanding. The process feels refreshingly natural. I have also learnt that I am sourcing things without seeing them as ever directly infilltrating into my work. The detritus of modern life, the mass of imagery we are exposed to, the frsutration with governmental systems, social/political and philosophical beliefs, my own current phycological make up and our everyday experiences are all finding there way into the fabric of my works creation.

I see this as being the final break from my idealistic belief, previously, in abstraction, autonomy and a solopsistic closed door on association. We are a product of our time and attempting to deny this is pointless.

This is not to say my work explitically deals with, describes or addresses the various speciifc sources. It is more a case that they provide a framework from which it emereges. I will give a few examples to try and illustrate my point.


1) The other day at the swimming pool I did a few lengths under water. A few always capture my attention when I do this; the sight of other shadowy figures cutting through the water, the backwards raining of bubbles as our hands slice the water, the glow of the underwater lights as we get cloers to one end. As I became consciously aware of this fascination I decided to do a few underwater tests. I dropped under water and brethed out untill I sank. The feeling of weightlessness, the moment when just enough air as left me so i float then sink, felt both relaxing and strangely moving. For that second, however pretentious, it felt like a kind of epic moment in an empty narrative.

The end of this little playful process saw me breathing out whilst on my back, untill I fel to the bottom of the pool, lying on my back. From there I watched as the bubbles from my mouth made their journey slowly to the surface. There they broke, a flurry of meaningless Icarus like forms. I raised a foot to touch the skin of the water, ripples and lines spilt across what appeared to me as a ceiling. It felt like cloud watching in some kind of other universe.

It strikes me, in hindsight, how this relates to some of my work. The direct links to upcoming floating and sinking figures is actually the link of least significance. The visual connection to my delght for bits of paint floating amoungst viscous varnished patches is also not necessarily relevant. It is some more continuous connections which fascinate me at this moment. The desire for non functional experiences and sensations over logical and reasoned thought. (yes, very Keatsian kitsh I know) The ability to find, in the most banal and unimportant of situation, a little temporary and fleeting escape from tangible reality.


2) Paperwork at college. I have already discussed this issue in some, boring, depth, in a previous post. In this instance I want to consider how it is part of my wider dislike for an over centralised government. Without Daily Mail like scare mongering I see this as a march towards a contunally more Orwellian state. Its a fucking disgrace. With power mad men at the top controlling what happens below them (well the hierachy consider it below when logic says it is beyond, its a horizontal relationship, not the vertical one New Labour has made it) They seem intent on creating limiting and restrive systemmatic blueprints. It results in a situation where you may as well have machines filling these posts. The cloining of a process results in a dumbing down of the work done, a lack of variety in approaches. in regards to lecturing and tutoring a grose irony exists. The systems are put in place to supposedly put the 'learning' (what ai disgustingly poliitcally correct term) first but actually result in them receving a narrow education. The long term prognosis is a dumbing down of the pupils as well. (and the fucking noisey moron sat opposite me does nothing to deter me from this conclusion) This is unfair to allinvovled.

This kind of connection is perhaps the most distnace from my work itself. Yet in some way, which i can't artiuclate at this moment, I see my work as emerging from such frustrations. Not as a direct commnent upon but as something which is formed from and responds too this kind of situation. A denial of this is unhelpful.

Some more to say on this but I need to get on an write my museums lecture. I have yet to decide how much to tone down its overtly anti establishment tone. Currently I am using it as the framework to comment on the ludicours beurocracy previously mentioned. The link is not as tenuous as it might sound.

Thanks Tom, those comments have been really helpful, they've given me confidence to go with the mask of mary, i've been questioning myself because there is no-one around here who can give me a comment that i feel i can listen to.

Was having more of a look at The drummer boy piece, and I'll reiterate that i think it's very exciting, that doesn't necessarily mean its brilliant but it does mean that there is something in it which makes you want to look at it for longer than just a few seconds. this is what i believe painting has to aspire to, i don't necessarily go with the whole painting should echo life and therefore we should all be producing the throwaway Warhol image. That said, we spoke briefly about beginning to use found images from mags, newspapers etc, in essence, the throwaway image, but i think the way these separate images are organised together should have a considered quality. Using the plethora of imagery that saturates contemporary society is certainly the way forward though. As francis bacon said "using the detritus from the studio floor", that slowly accumulated apparatus of imagery from everyday life, that an artist slowly gathers over a period of time and that has specific yet complex personal resonance.
I think the presence of the drummer boy as protagonist has real contextual clarity, it adds an extra impetus to matisse's dance, that famous symbol of freedom has now soured, the dancers are not free, liberated but in fact under the influence of the 'other'. as the great bob dylan says, everybody's gotta serve somebody!
on another subject, really, how good is Bacon! i can't think of a painter who surpasses him for power of image, others may be level but surely non surpass on a regular basis, and try to think of a painter who is so different from any other and so impossible to base any of your own practice on. he seems to have travelled as far as painting can go down his own personal path, the only way to use him is to back track down the path.

Mary comments

Firstly, congrats. I am so impressed how brave you have been. You have worked on this piece, I tihnk, longer than any other. Added to that you seem to believe, and I think I agree, that its your best. That dedication of time and attachment to its quality means that making any alteration takes bravery. To totally alter sections of the painting shows you are prepared to push into the unknown, to step over the edge. The success or failure of that move is actually not to important, the fact your prepared to do it is key I think.

I think you have be rewarded. I think it is a far better picture. My gut instinct says it has a colouristic clarity and weight which was lacking before. Without seeing it in the flesh that is hard to elaborate on.

The change to Mary's face is fantastic (i think). From actual specific character to a more mysterious, mask, ethereal embodiment of a wider concept. She is more challenging, more obrassive... she causes a greater interuption in the visual spectacle. The weight of focus has shifted.

The dog seems better, or am I going mad. It seems better painted and even wittier because of it. I see wit as a growing concern in my own work and soemthing you seem to be finding with great ease at the moment. Your own personal dark wit has filtered into areas of your painting. Long may it continue, as long as it remains uncontrived.

The floor is great. I love the unreality of it. It works in terms of spatial depth but then denies total entry. It seems capable of falling apart, its very construction revealed. Christ knows what I mean, its excellent though.

I am actually shattered and so therefore incoherent. I have a load of blogs to write but no time. I wanted to make sure I wrote this one tonight though, so apologies for lack of quality.

I am jealous as I think this is a really good painting.

On another point. I think I might have finished my best two paintings to date tonight. I might wake up in the morning and think they are shit.

I still need to finish drummer boy, I have a feeling he will continue to frustrate me. Particuarly as it is the closest (in style not quality) to your work, and I will feel inadequate whatever. Oh well. 'Happy days' (as my friend Tim Snaith says)

brave- impressed. willing to stand on the edge. The success or failure is actually unimportant, its that bravery that is key.

conception of the painting is the same, so I wont comment to much there

the masked face- its great. It turns her from an actual specific character to a more mysterious, ethereal emobodiment of something wider.

The rise of beurocracy

Awaiting me on my desk is a list of blog posts I have been meaning to write. Rather than gradually work my way thrrew them the list has grown by the day. I would love to say this is a result of a fervent imagination, unable to keep pace with the ideas which pour out of my head. It isn't. Instead I have been delayed by the paperwork which comes with my lecturing role.

I understand and appreciate the need for paperwork of this kind. It enables the teacher to plan ahead, the students and college to be aware of what you have planned and for wider institutional accountablity. All very well in theory.

Yet the purpose of such activities should be to support and enrich the quality of lecturing and, therefore, learning. Yet it seems to have arrived at a point where it is doing the exact opposite. Hours are dedicated to the painstaking details, political correctness, codified and structured nature of the mass of forms. Schemes of work, Lesson Plans, Project Briefs...all more anal in format than a monkeys arse.

I make no bones about the fact that I see this as a direct result of governmental over managemenet. The last ten years has seen us move towards what at times feels a near Orwellian state. Such scaremonggering terminology might sound Daily Mailish, but the reality is just as stark. This government seem obsessed with over controlling the individuals, organisations and instiutions below them. Its a near dictatorial approach to management.

This fails becasue it leaves politicians (who lets face it are normaly people who have failed at something else) to structure systems they know nothing about. Power is centralised and those who understand their profession are left powerless.

The knock on effect is that people are not in a position to dedicate their time and energy to the fundamental aspects of their job. As a lecturer I find myself having to spend as much time on functionless paperwork as I do on actual preperation and delivery of the lectures. The later is surely what I am paid to do. Yet those at the very top (the government) are obsessed with being able to measure our acheivements.

The irony is two fold.

1) The form of measurment is invlaid on a number of counts. Firstly as the very systems themselves seem flawed and the mode of analysising the infomration tends to be statisitical. Statisitcs are, I believe, flawed by their very nature.

2) So much time is taken up by the paperwork which provides the foundation for assesment that eventually no one will be doing the very thing they are meant to be being assesed for. We will be measuring nothing and using statistics to say how well we did that nothing. Brilliant.


End note: as a more specific example to my general rant I would like to reference the form I have to fill in for lesson plans. I think it should be essential to have lesson plans but the format and structure of them should almost entirely be left up to the teacher. Inrea lity I almost have my whole lecture planned for me. Ten Minutes at the start to recap from last week. Five minutes after to tell them what they can acheive today. You then need to split that into three levels for the range of ability in the class. They are even specific about how to display the information. At the end of the lesson you have to recap what you have just learnt, again with clear guidelines of how to do this. Its as patronising to everyone invovled as those programs on telly which insist on telling you before and after every ad break what you have seen or are about to see.In the end the seeing takes up about five percent of the hour.

What happened to trust? What happened to autonomy? WHat happened to variety and flexibility? What happened to the idocincratic approach? If you insist on your lectureres becoming machines or monkeys, with no ability to think for themselves, then it is only logicazl that the students will become a weak reflection of this depressing vision.

Progress? Don't make me laugh.

more work on mary

so these are the changes again, in summary i think that the background to the queen is an improvement, however i just can't make up my mind about the reddening of the pillars and the whitening/makeup of the queens face. what do you think, my minds all over the place at the min and i need a critical comment from someone i trust.
I also think your drummer boy looks very exciting, perhaps better commenting on it if i aver actually make it down to your neck of the woods.

Ritual Dance of the Drummer boy (almost finished)