This specific artwork rose a lot of questions in my mind in terms of my identity. What makes me a conscious being? Why it matters that I am? What is the mind? What is the body? Am I unconsciously conscious? What is physical reality? It is because of consciousness, that we experience — but we also experience dreams while asleep, so are we conscious or unconscious while asleep? I realised my identity is provisional, for a matter of fact it is for everyone. Identity for all is temporary and at times highly malleable too. We are highly influenced by what we see, experience and hear.
Since you transform your experiences into your artwork, we are curious, what is the role of memory in your artistic productions? We are particularly interested if you try to achieve a faithful translation of your previous experiences or if you rather use memory as starting point to create.
As with time, memory and space has a greater impact on identity. This idea has been discussed by Yi-Fu Tuan in his book ‘Space and Place’. It is said in the book that identity plays a vital role in the relation of time and space and that they are opposing in nature. “If time is conceived as flow or movement then place is pause” (Tuan,1977,p.198). The example given in the book being that ten years of childhood is not equivalent to ten years of youth or manhood. It is the duration of time spent in the place which is more important than the attachment to the place. My installations are largely related to memory and place, leading to a creation of a make-believe environment. Aspiring to become an installation artist, through my sculptures and prints, I wish to create and alter the viewer’s experience by altering their surrounding environment.
Daniel Kahneman, an influential living psychologist has spoken about the “experiencing selves” and our “remembering selves”. Here he addresses the confusion between memory and experience - “It’s between being happy in your life, and being happy about your life or happy with your life’.(reference) The experiencing self lives in the present, while the remembering self, which is related to memory maintains the story of our lives. He argues how our notion of happiness is entangled by getting confused between the two selves.
My constant battle between the remembering self and the experiencing self leads me to the source of my artworks. Thus memory plays a great role in my artistic productions. Every artwork differs in context. The source could be my translation of a memorial experience, or it could be about what I am feeling strongly at that moment relating to an experience or personal issue. The starting point is when I translate my feelings in terms of mark making onto paper.
What is the role of technique in your practice? In particular are there any constraints or rules that you follow when creating?
Techniques followed in any artistic production should be similar to the thought process involved in the artwork. Since I transform my experiences into my artwork, techniques I follow are an experience in itself. Likewise the age-old technique of printmaking is more of an experience from an artist’s point of view as there is an entire process involved, whether it is from making marks on the plate or to treating the plate with acid. It is an overwhelming experience, as the end result is not in the artist’s hand entirely - hence an element of surprise is always there. I feel it is the same with all techniques I follow. My constant attempt is not to have a direct effect on the exposed surface of my base artwork. An indirectly related technique is employed which has a direct bearing on my artwork. I’m soon going to be experimenting with mark making on a plastered platform. The usage of plaster is relevant to our identities, in the sense that as plaster is a mixture of elements, similarly our identity is a mixed bag of experiences and memories. As plaster is spread onto structures, our notion of happiness is spread all over our identity- almost like a masked appearance.
How do you see the relationship between emotional and intellectual perception of your work? In particular, how much do you consider the immersive nature of the viewing experience?
I am a method artist in practice, my start point is purely based on an emotional perception. As I gradually escalate in the process of reassessment, my intellectual perception helps in determining the end result.
It is how viewers perceive your artwork and what they make out of it, that determines their experience. If one does not relate to your art on an emotional or intellectual level, then the experience is an unsatisfying one. For example if an atheist views a work revolving around religious norms, the experience for him/her would be an unpleasant one. The point I am making here is that a viewer judges his/her experience on the basis of their personality. In that case he/she lacks the capability of backing the artwork with good reasoning - this does not mean that it is a failed piece of artwork, even though it is for him/her.
An experience quite fails in its true nature if it is not immersive. The audience should be surrounded by what appears to them. A successful experience evokes within us emotional reactions and manipulates our thinking in a way that it makes us perceive what is good or bad. If you retrace every experience back to its source, it will lead you to nothingness, and to find something in nothingness is more than overwhelming.
We artists have the ability to manipulate our audience, but it is up to us to decide whether it is for the good or the bad. Our artistic creations influence people around us as we direct people from the world of reality and release them into a world of idealism. Artistic creations relating to memory and place, leads to creation of a make-believe environment. In an attempt to reshape an environment as per our perception, are we simply just trapped within ourselves?