Siun Hanrahan (DIT) - the 6 questions
1. Has working on this subject/theme altered your drawing process in any way?
My art-practice has, at time, involved drawing and I had hoped to use this opportunity to work on a non-textual part of a long-running work-in-progress, Babel. This may yet happen. Meantime, the changes involved an opportunistic narrowing of sources and an explicit re-viewing of past work.
2. Has the experience of a possible collaborative outcome altered your thinking/working methods in any way?
Not yet, but the possibility is exciting. 'Conversation' is at the heart of my art-thinking but my art process is a solitary one, a conversation with books rather than people. Collaboration promises new perspective on my thinking and process, and a loosening of same through engaging with the thinking and processes of others.
3. How has the experience of your practice being reviewed and viewed by your peers in Triptych influenced the work?
So far it has been strangely encouraging. To my surprise, a humble effort thus far revealed points of connection to the thinking and processes of others. Building on this in Loughborough is an exciting prospect.
4. Have you discussed this piece of work/process with anyone else in Triptych while carrying out the work?
No... I would like this answer to change.
5. Has anything you saw at the Triptych IMMA symposium influenced your thinking or process in any way?
A conversation with Triptych colleagues may do. Can making a virtue out of hte constraints of circumstance (few stretches of tie in which to work in a sustained way) be made to work for me?
6. What collaborative outcome would you suggest as being appropriate for this reserach group?
A range of themes, activities and outputs built upon small-scale shared interests. A larger scale context for and perspective upon these productive points of connection should be easy to achieve. Beginning with a large scale project incorporating our diverse interests seems less promising in terms of focus and quality of outcome.
My art-practice has, at time, involved drawing and I had hoped to use this opportunity to work on a non-textual part of a long-running work-in-progress, Babel. This may yet happen. Meantime, the changes involved an opportunistic narrowing of sources and an explicit re-viewing of past work.
2. Has the experience of a possible collaborative outcome altered your thinking/working methods in any way?
Not yet, but the possibility is exciting. 'Conversation' is at the heart of my art-thinking but my art process is a solitary one, a conversation with books rather than people. Collaboration promises new perspective on my thinking and process, and a loosening of same through engaging with the thinking and processes of others.
3. How has the experience of your practice being reviewed and viewed by your peers in Triptych influenced the work?
So far it has been strangely encouraging. To my surprise, a humble effort thus far revealed points of connection to the thinking and processes of others. Building on this in Loughborough is an exciting prospect.
4. Have you discussed this piece of work/process with anyone else in Triptych while carrying out the work?
No... I would like this answer to change.
5. Has anything you saw at the Triptych IMMA symposium influenced your thinking or process in any way?
A conversation with Triptych colleagues may do. Can making a virtue out of hte constraints of circumstance (few stretches of tie in which to work in a sustained way) be made to work for me?
6. What collaborative outcome would you suggest as being appropriate for this reserach group?
A range of themes, activities and outputs built upon small-scale shared interests. A larger scale context for and perspective upon these productive points of connection should be easy to achieve. Beginning with a large scale project incorporating our diverse interests seems less promising in terms of focus and quality of outcome.
posted by TRIANGLE at
11:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home