Feedback about my crit

My Crit


Image 1 Image 2


This piece of installation art comprised:

A model house with a leash attached , situated on a small chest of drawers

A bed made of pallets , a mattress, blanket and pillow

A curtain hanging from a piece of horizontal rope

A modern projector on a plinth

An armchair

Two small boxes filled with smaller boxes positioned on the wall at ceiling height

A stencilled painting of a train.

A film projected onto the model house.


The installation was created with the idea the viewers would stand in a place , much like the photographer in image 2 , and look into the space as a whole.


Early crit 9.30 am – good turnout – about 13 people.


As there was not enough space to view and discuss comfortably – I allowed the crit to take place with everyone seated inside the space.

As the film played people spoke about the installation.

The film is set in Paris and on the snowy journey back to London on the Eurostar.



1. The work comprises a timelessness as there are no real references to the present time.

2. The modern projector sets the time as

it brings the viewer back to the here and now .

3. There is an elegance to the piece as a whole.

4. The minimal choice of items all speak the same language, The resulting work doesn’t look like it is

trying to imitate or replicate something else.

5. The projection could be played from within the house.

6. All the items in the piece are of the same language – there is a roughness to them – like the first stage of a painting process- before the details are applied.

7. The film is mesmerising – like a fire. The film is positioned at normal height of a hearth.

8. Dreamlike.

9. The pallets and bed were seen to imply transit/movement.

10. House on a leash – implies movement/not static.

11. The leash attached to the house is seen to be an incidental detail- these are considered to be important to my practice.

12. The room is seen as something resembling a hospital/therapy room.

13. Reminds of dying grandmother – the waiting and the conversation before the end.


This piece is about place as an imaginary construct. As one perceives place – memory and imagination intervene and create a transmutation of experience resulting in something personalised and unique. No two people experience anything in exactly the same way – raising questions concerning the idea of reality. Trying to record reality is difficult as it is ephemeral and cannot be captured exactly as it occurred .As everyone experiences everything in a way which is individual to them – then any representation of the past ,present or future in art is personalised and represents only in terms of the artists take on things.







The Impossibility of Painting

The Impossibility of Painting

The prospect of starting to work on a blank canvas can be a daunting one. The pressure to create a masterpiece can stand in the way of the artist . Some contemporary artists work in terms of negation – rejecting a sense of fine finish in their work. Raoul De Keyser would be a good example. Provisional painting is according to Rubenstein (Art in America:May, 2009) ‘the finished product disguised as a preliminary stage’. Or ‘major painting masquerading as minor painting.’ He also suggests that the adoption of provisional painting by contemporary artists is perhaps an indication of the’ impossibility of painting and the impossibility of not painting’.

Provisional Painting

I have been coming across this concept of Provisional Painting for a while now and have noticed that the work of quite a few of the artists I particularly like come under this catagory. For example  the artists Christopher Wool ,Richard Aldrich and Raoul De Keyser .Their work has a freedom which for many artists is difficult to achieve.Often seemingly unfinished- the so called errors and corrections left visible to the viewer.To me their work is interesting and more importantly, unburdened by centuries of tradition.The idea of the painterly masterpiece rejected for something much looser and lighter. Provisionality deliberately turns away from ‘strong’ painting towards something that risks collapse.Artist and writer Raphael Rubinstein speaks in his 2006 article ‘ A Quiet Crisis’ of a foundational scepticism in the geneology of modern art which began with Cezanne .

Raoul De Keyser asserts the impossibility of painting free of touch ups by leaving in the mistakes and accidents – or you could say – the failures as part of the work.Albert Oehlen manages to create images of force through  akward forms and  painterly abandon.Christopher Wool obliterates his painting as he makes them – the resulting erasures become the finished work.

Mary Heilmann treats paint as a medium free of weighty cultural expectations.Michael Krebbber approaches paint with a certain disdain.

Historical figures who relate to this practice would be Joan Miro and Martin Barre. Miro’s work can often suggest an artist at war with his chosen medium with the use of crude figures and doodling and corrections.Barre’s work is almost a form of anti-painting – unburdening it of figuration,colour or form.

Provisional Art is art at the preliminary stage – perhaps it can also be said to be  great art – great art  masquerading as the opposite.