The degree show at Chelsea was an exciting one. It was fascinating because the divide between there and Central Saint Martins was sometimes very clear. Chelsea seems to be very about the materials and the making of art objects themselves, not to say that the ideas for the works aren’t in place but that they are combined with material processes as opposed to the more ‘ready-made’ ideas at CSM. Again, this is not to say either approach is better or worse, it’s just establishing difference. Attending the Royal College exhibition was an incredible display of a huge range of ideas and practices. All the pieces were thorough and very well thought out. For example, there was a performance all based on an interview and the spaces in which she that had been involved. And she had created a seating structure, which mimicked these and the journey she’d been on.
The people organising the show in Brighton replied to our email but were very polite therefore unentertaining so we’ve decided not to pursue it any further.
Whilst reading ‘An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding’ by David Hume we were particularly interested in the topic ‘Of Liberty and Necessity’ and his thoughts on freewill. Here Hume tackles the problem of how liberty may be reconciled with metaphysical necessity (otherwise known as a compatibilist formulation of free will). Hume believes that all disputes on the subject have been merely verbal arguments - that is to say, arguments that are based on a lack of prior agreement on definitions. He first shows that it is clear that most events are deterministic, but human actions are more controversial. However, he thinks that these too occur out of necessity since an outside observer can see the same regularity that he would in a purely physical system. To show the compatibility of necessity and liberty, Hume defines liberty as the ability to act on the basis of one's will e.g. the capacity to will one's actions but not to will one's will. He then shows how determinism and free will are compatible notions, and have no bad consequences on ethics or moral life. Whilst reading this we also watched the film ‘Ex Machina’, in which there is a point where a character is forced to question his own freewill because he has seen others who believe their own consciousness but appear just as human as he does. They have memories and thoughts and feelings, which are just as ‘real’ as his own. The combination of these ideas brought on a third, being a quote from Scroobius Pip’s song ‘Broken Promise’ – ‘is a lie really a lie if you mean it at the time?’ This is about knowledge and if knowing something (or thinking you do) makes it true. So bringing it back to freewill, if something believes it has freewill then does it? We then took this idea to practice with the video game ‘Sims’. Filming the characters carrying out illogical task or even attempting impossible ones. Eventually we discovered the artistic element of our creations – the Sims can create paintings, which are specific to their personality traits. This creates a whole range of new questions with regards to ownership and who the maker of these artworks is. Technically the Sim has made the painting so do they belong to them? But we were the ones who combined the personality traits, so is it ours? But even further back, someone has to have designed the painting whilst making the game, so does it belong to him or her? This is a question that is certainly prominent in the work of Santiago Sierra, who regularly employs people to be his ‘live-in’ artworks. Jeff Koons and Damien Hirst are also constantly being critiqued for these notions of ownership. However, this is different, people seem far more comfortable when a machine is making the work of an artist, such as a printer or laser cutter, than when it’s another human. The test will be if a virtual human is closer to man or machine. Another element is that the skill level attached to painting supposedly increases the more painting your Sim does. Initially the paintings are inaccurate or primitive representations of landscapes or people and eventually they become accurate and much quicker to be produced. To be fair there are times when skilful abstraction comes into play but more experimenting will have to be carried out to ascertain more knowledge with regards to the scope of the paintings. It’s beginning to say something else about how art and artists are represented in popular culture. This is backed up by the fact that the size of the paintings dictates the value (bigger = more expensive). Films and television shows are other areas where art tends to be seen, whether it’s about an artist or not there is likely to be a painting or sculpture somewhere. This then contributes to how art is represented and consequently how the general public sees it. This is also shown through search engines since they are determined by what the public sees and wants to see, we can see how art and artists are epitomised through this medium.
