Torn between two ideas

Hello all,

So, for the final project, I want to continue an exploration of the circular relationship between folklore and cognitive pathology. During a conversation with a family friend, I came to realize that there is a kind of chicken/egg thing going on with mythology and hallucinations occurring in sane people. People claim to see ghosts or demons or ‘little people’ all the time, and sometimes this is because of different kinds of hallucinations related to dreaming, drug use and even poor vision. Oliver Sacks (The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a HatAwakeningsHallucinations) is a huge influence on this concept. I have two ideas for this piece, which I have not decided upon, that both talk about this subject in different ways.

The first one would be a series of sculptural installations placed in corners and other ‘peripheral’ areas, a la my first project. They would be clothed human figures, about a foot high, standing facing away from the viewer obscuring their features.

The second would be a found object installation. There would be a twin mattress, placed directly on the floor, with a sheet and pillow on it, and a ‘quilt’ of black wigs, out from under of which would protrude various human limbs, arranged in an impossible way.

I love them both, but I’m having trouble picking.

Any thoughts?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Torn between two ideas

  1. ryanginter says:

    Hey Keegan,
    I like the first idea, mostly because I am a large proponent for the existence of a hidden kingdom of gnomes and “shadow” people that are only visually observable through faint glimmerings around the edges of our vision (tongue in cheek, of course). I believe one or more Doctor Who episodes touched on the use of peripheral vision as a method of “seeing the unseen” as well (the Matt Smith incarnation, first episode)

  2. jalexanderson says:

    I’m also in favour of the first idea, as it might be disconcerting for people to (when/if they notice, and hopefully they do) happen upon these strange little persons. How would you clothe them? Would you bother giving them facial features? Let’s say that someone takes a peek…what face, or no face, should look back?

  3. Though I really like both ideas, your first has captured my heart more! I agree with what they said above, and I think the first idea is almost like a continuation of your first project, except amplified a lot! I would love to see the peoples reactions to them. I know I personally would be taken aback and maybe even weary to near them?

    What are they going to be wearing? Will you clothe them like our idea of gnomes or..?

    Can’t wait to see this!!

  4. It would be interesting to see both those ideas in an installation.

  5. I’m kind of leaning towards the first idea as well. Your second idea is intriguing but I also think that if you’re discussing how your projects from this class work as a series, the first idea would fit better. Since I think our projects are supposed to have some sort of serial aspect to them. A question I have about the first idea is if the figures will all be in the same position or will they be set doing various actions?

  6. Yes, the first idea seems better able to communicate what you are thinking about. There’s a playful and engaging aspect to the disturbing nature of the first; the second seems to be just more disturbing. (Not that there’s no place for the disturbing in art…)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s