New information:

I started some research into the drawing transformation project; that is I google searched “square, circle and triangle”, which came up with an awesome page of pininterest full of images from all corners of the internet and a personal webpage of Nathan Sawaya. Who has three particularly wonderful figures made from lego pieces in red, yellow and blue, with heads in the shapes of a sphere, a pyramid and a cube. I want to try using something like lego, maybe kinect.

In the mean time, whilst i acquire some lego, I tried creating some of my own images by mimicking some styles from the pinterest site. Although I do want to try creating these sorts of things on illustrator. I also continued with the sticky dots, I tried to recreate the shaded squares with different coloured dots, im not convinced it worked. But it was still fun.

In the text and image project I did a little research to try and jump start it. The original names were ‘illuminations’ until Johaunes Gutenberg invented the printing press and independently developed a movable type system in Europe, he started adding illustrations to books using namely woodcuts.

Illustrations changed from barely being avaliable in the 15th century, to engraving and etching in the 16th and 17th century, until lithography allowed better illustrations to be formed in the 18th century.

There is the American ‘Golden Age of Illustration’ lasted from the 1880s until after world war I, although in Europe a few decades earlier newspapers, mass market magazines and illustrated books had become the dominant media type for public consumption.

I did try to find out why illustration was so popular and how it only grew more so as the years past, however google wasn’t human enough to supply the answer.

Recommended webpages: Central illustration, house of illustration and illustration cupboard.

Fly critique:

TSAM_1695he ‘assessment’ for the deconstruction project went well; they approved of the fly shadow cutouts and found the lightbulbs interesting, although the refocusing on the bare bones of the original piece “A thousand years” by damien Hirst, that is the choice between what we want and what we need, was a bad idea. They explained that i didnt need to stick to the original, it was supposed to be an oppourtunity to understand an image and deconstruct it to what is was actually about then build on that. Hence they liked the flies.

I’m going to carry on adding bits and pieces to the project as i move to the next project of “text and image”, which we get to choose a piece of text, any type of text, and illustrate it. I will admit i have no idea what to do, there is far too much choice. Do i use a book, a song, a score, a script? Something i’ve already read, or something i have been waiting to read? Something popular or an abstract indie book? Something already illustrated or not?

Either way i’m going to do some research into illustrations in books first, and why they began and how they became popular, and more importantly how they came to stick around. That is why did we appreciate them so much that they abandoned the whole hard-backed, fabric or leather casings to have images printed straight to their card covered paper-backs.

Anyhow, Ive started to create a few more ‘shadows’ which I made from cardboard to help with the whole squashed fly effect, because i am going to place them on the floor and walk over them for a few days, absently. As people tend to do with fly bodies. Their corpses arent given graves, nor treated with any reverance, which is what brought me to them in the first place, as even Hirst abuses their bodies in the masses.

Also, sticky dots are my new favourite medium, its a little time consuming but its fun, especially when playing around in the drawing transformations project.SAM_1697

Deconstruction lecture:

1-fountain-_after-marcel-duchamp_web_672Deconstruction was not an operation performed on text, but was a method used to allow text its self to reveal its own otherness and self- undoing. ‘Otherness’ being what the text is aside from the natural assumpion that you have when you immediately read the text, as a single person rather than one author’s thoughts and imagination to another. The general gist of it is that  deconstruction allows us to assert our belief in the authors presence in the text as metaphsyical, that is we know someone wrote this and is therefore telling the story but it is also written by someone that is not there so we take each piece of text as a unified, coherant, rational statement with a pinch of our own understanding.

Whereas in post-modern theory, deconstruction is the undoing of an authors controlling intentions by time and audience reception. This works namely because of the pure fact that texts are parts of a coherant whole and are not whole in and of themselves; hence over time parts of the text starts to do their own thing, modified by timMalcolmMorley_RaceTracke.

The whole connection to art/text and deconstruction is that you can make it evident that ungraspable network of relations which sustains but is concealed by claims of self-presence, which in turn create misreadings. (If you follow Derrida or Foucault’s work) They also share the same problems; that is there is so many different ways of reading things; each symbol is something else to any other person, whether through experience or from intention, not every thing is seen the same way. This is true both in text, art and the ability to deconstruct.


(Sherrie Levine – Fountain, madonna)

(Malcolm Morely – Racetrack)

Interesting people you probably didnt know are awesome: Hilary White, Max Hattler, Sherrie Levine, Joseph Kosuth, Idris Khan, Fiona Banner, Zimoun + Hannes Zweifel, Dennis Neuschaefer-Rube, Mark Wallinger, Jeff Wall.

The creation of the new:

There are apparently four groups that line up under this topic; semiotic (the signs), which are ambivalent about structure of the world. ideological, the role in institutional orders; which either change society or try to contain it: which splits into three; image, conception devices and special orders and subcultures. Then there is the cognitivist which are common structures to assist the structure of humanity, they are pro-structure. Lastly there is the materialist or affect group, which is the relation between a stimulus and the emotional recognition.

Kant is recognised as a cognitivist, as he has a series of conditions of experience relating to the sublime. ‘The critique/ruin of representation’, which is how we view the world and therefore frame it, through all our perspectives.

Although in the explanation of the production of the new a quote from Deleuze: “Style in philosophy strains towards three different poles: concepts or new ways of thinking, percepts, or new ways od seeing and construing: and affects, or new ways of feeling. They’re the philosophical trinity, philosophy as opera: you need all three to get things moving.”

It involves the idea of having to seek or otherwise creating new ways of ; thinking, seeing and feeling through different manipulations in different areas of variables that can effect such an outcome. This gave way to the problem of reproduction, the fact that we lose the specificity and individuality of things as they are more and more mass-produced, or otherwise repeated or re-represented.


Squares, triangles, & circles:

The drawing transfSAM_1683ormation project now has several small 3d objects to accompany it; a square made from tissue paper and wood, a ‘circle’ from cardboard SAM_1686and a triangle from newspaper, wood and flocking. They are rather more useful than the previous images, as they provide first hand what each of them has a requirement to be freestanding.

I also undertook the suggestion of one of my tutors and created a page filled with a 100+ drawings in various shapes, sizes and orders; the first time I did this I produced the different ways the three aforementioned shapes can be organisedas 2d objects. The second time was for the deconstruction project: where I filled an A1 page with drawings to depict things we want but don’t really need, or things we have but don’t really need. This was due to the standstill that the deconstruction project has come to since I managed to boil it down to its bare bones, I hoped this would provide another bolt on inspiration. The first one didn’t.


The second page, howSAM_1688ever was another thing altogether. The second map of drawings was to be about what we need, specifically and only what we need, without any SAM_1694situational influence or possibilities of ‘if’. This was a very short list of drawings. But it gave me the necessary kick to start trying to incorporate this mass amount of stuff that we all own but don’t actual have any need for, into some style of art piece.

Since I have just created the shadows of the flies legacy on the walls I want to do the same thing for humans – except make an actual humans silluette instead of forging it from black card. I’m going to try to create the siluette from these objects we hold dear. The only problem is i am very short on time and supplies, and it is going to be very awkward to make. Along with the idea that want to include the things we do need; health, safety, the earth, the sun, food and sleep, and other people. Which is still something I know i don’t know how to do. SAM_1690SAM_1693











Flies legacy:

Of course siSAM_1672nce I’ve now managed to peg down what the piece is actually about, I’ve found a thousand more questions to ask instead.

On friday morning the note I made became a rant about why the piece worked – because it played off the fact that flies will go to the light. “But what will a being go through for the object of their desire? The risk of pain or death… for a fly is was death – but are they aware of its possibility when they fly straight for the beautiful glowing light? Could we possibly have anything of equal value as that mesmerizing gaze the fly looks towards unflinchingly, unfailingly as a whole race? I doubt humanity as a species could ever agree on anything being that valuable to everyone. But perhaps there is the same ‘trial’ to get thing they each desire – the same possibility for pain or death for any individual that does SAM_1679try. It will seperate the people who will risk all for one ‘desireable’ thing: each to their own. And those that find the ability to say “this isn’t worth it” although whether they believe that honestly is another matter entirely, but is they did actually think the object of their desire wasn’t worth the risk to their life means it wasn’t really their honest desire as they would have otherwise found an instinct or other method to avoide clinging to the desire to ensure their survival. Which brings us to the important question of whether survival alone is good enough; in all ways, particularly since you will die anyway, in which case why not have the desired object in the time you have. Although this is not to convince you or judge you, there is no right or wrong answer, after all this… the time you have, where it comes from is another matter we shall not go into, is yours alone.”

This generally all spawed from the fact that the flies just accumulate on the floor, they have had no real experience, no real chance of survival, but their shell lies there and gives us a witty insight into our own lives before being swept up, presumably, and thrown in the bin. I wanted to try and capture the flies part within this mini-play, this orcatrated event which always ends in tragedy. SAM_1674 SAM_1677


“A sign is anythat can be used to tell a lie” – Imberto Eco, n.d.

Semiotics is the word given to the meanings that are made through the interpretation of signs; semiology is the study of this. Semiology was a theoretical framework coined by Ferdinand de Saussure, a swiss linguist aropund 1907-11, although the theory was based more on language that any visual representation; which gives the use of ‘sign’ a broad area to work over, as it can mean literally anything from language, images, objects. This is because a sign is something with a meaning, hence anything can be percieved as one as we give them the meanings through our experiences and thought processes.
However the term ‘semiotics’ was coined by American philosopher C.S.Pierce, who claimed we only really think in signs, although the term is applied across the board. Roland Barthes, however, is claimed as key thinker in the progression of semiotic theories, as he relates the theory to art work and images of the 1950’s and the laguage of mass culture. It was explained that he aimed to take in signs and their limits and cross connect them to each other.

Saussure defined a sign as being compossed of; a Signifier – the form the sign takes, and a Signified – the concept it represents. There isnt a sign that has only one, as any sign is the whole that results from two being associated.

Pieres, split the concept of a sign into three different parts; a Symbol – where the signifer does not resemble th signified but fundamentally arbitrary or conventional, meaning that the relationship must be learnt; an Icon – where the signifer is percieved as resembling of indicating the signified, it is common sense that provides the meaning; and the Index – where the signifer is not arbitary but is directly connected to the signified and can be either obsevered or inferred.

The other things about signs is that they often have more than one meaning, there is the Denotation – a simple first meaning, commonly the literal or otherwise most obvious meaning; and then there is a Connotation – a second meaning that is often hidden, as they are usually constructed by human intervention (normally soci-cultural associations). Although is should not be taken to be understood as that all connotations are the same for each sign, with each viewer; as each viewer will not have the same experience or understanding of each seperate sign as each seperate human.

The easiest example of this is the Pioneer Jaques from 1971, they are engravings that were attached to ‘pioneer I’ and ‘pioneer II’ spacecrafts, the first explaining what and where earth was and what humans were, the second explaining how to play information based on a cd; all through pictorial representations. However this was rather ill-made due to large amount of assumptions they have made; that they have eyes for starters- if they exsist, that they have the same meaning to pictures as we do – which is not very likely as most humans do not even have the same meanings to pictures as others humans do, and that they understand scale as each engraving has different scaled images all over each one- meaning they would have to know what scale is and how to seperate each image.

Then there is perceptual codes, Derrida claims that our perception of the everyday world around us involves a code. That is that there are certain universal features in human visual perceptions, which means in semiotic terms as consituting a perceptual code. The media this universal feature or sign is representated in, contributes to this code.

The last thing we talked about was ‘culture jamming’ which is often referred to as “semiological guerella warfare”, namely meaning that it is used to manipulate and subvert the meaning of a certain area (cororations, social situations or even just the media). The only thing culture jamming really needs is a recognisable image to change, even if the chance is slight- just changing the text will do sometimes. The point of it is that it interrupts the normal social cultural experience by consumerism.