Following on from my tutorial with my tutor regarding Assignment 4 - Body of Work, I have listened to my tutor and I'm posting here my two pitches for text used as anchorage and relay with my images respectively.
Following on from Showing Not Telling – Text and Image to Form Diegesis , I've been inspired to make 9 more poems for the remaining diptychs. In my opinion text has been used in a totally different way (relay as opposed to anchorage) to inform the images.
I requested feedback off my fellow students doing my module and other artists as well. I got some responses and have recorded them below along with my thoughts on each student/artists feedback. Doing this has allowed me to pause and reflect on where my project is going. It has also allowed me to see what others see when they're looking with fresh eyes and from another perspective at the diptychs.
Kris Belden-Adams in Beyond "This-Caused-That”: The Temporal Complexities of Before-and-After Photographs (2017) re-articulates the account of how a diegesis works in a comic strip in Barthes' Rhetoric of the Image (1964). When both text and photographs supplement each other under the same idea, a diegesis is formed (Belden-Adams, 2017). A diegesis is a kind of overall narrative consisting of the like-minded fragments that make it up.
While I had been researching Gill Golding’s work, particularly Welcome to the Fake (s.d.), I became very aware of the concept of hoarding being a place of imagery within the developments in any town undergoing regeneration. More specifically I began to imagine my imagery appearing on hoardings as part of my project. The imagery could be somewhere on the spectrum between affirming the slick, glossy facade of regeneration or refuting it in a dystopian nightmare; showing its true colours. I have created the beginning of a diptych or grid which I think falls somewhere between these two extremes and is a direct example of how my Contextual Studies has informed my Body of Work.
As I alluded to in the post Showing Not Telling, I have decided to make a post detailing how I make a map-based approach to titling the diptychs for my body of work. One of my concerns with map-based titling was that the project should have something to do with a map in the first place. I feel in retrospect that this isn't necessarily true. The concept that drives the project doesn't have to start by drawing a circle on a map for instance in order for the project to be titled this way. Instead the map can be a tool that embellishes the project, by inviting the viewer to delve deeper into the map or coordinates that point to the map.
Some questions have been floating around in my head concerning my project for Body of Work so far. These questions are based around how/if it relates to regeneration and these questions inevitably lead to more questions! I have therefore jotted some of them down in an attempt to provide answers to at least a few of them.
My photographs in the past have been quite literal; not leaving much to the imagination. In other words telling, not showing. Often I’ve left the text anchor out because I thought it wasn’t necessary. For me if text is there as an anchor it should help inform the viewer, inviting them to dig deeper, without just describing the image. Conversely, if text is there as a relay it should have a rapport with the images, bouncing back reflexively. I feel I am quite an imaginative person and strangely this reflects back to the viewer as not leaving much to the imagination. Perhaps because I have tried to squeeze a lot of information into the image, there isn’t much more room for interpretation.
I have decided to make what seems will be a pretty boring post concerning the logistics of my composite making and the selection of location from which to photograph from. I feel this is necessary because it is useful firstly as a reference point to remind myself of why I’m making the choices I’ve arrived at. Some of these reasons are practical while others are more thought out. The other use for making this post is that I might arrive at realisations I hadn’t conceived before writing this down.
At first glance, when looking at the original composite and the composite I’d just made, not much has changed in terms of place. However, upon closer inspection the composites reveal change which took place sometime in the 5 or so months since the original was created. I feel the time between composites allows for change and it is up to the viewer to look for the differences. It is also up to me as the artist to entice the viewer in. I’m beginning to think this will come with how I eventually present the composites (including text) as well as framing the composites as similarly as possible so these differences are more discernible.