Thursday, March 09, 2006
work, part four
What I know about the government of the Netherlands increases. For instance, I know that Parliament consists of two houses, the eerste kamer and the tweede kamer. The tweede kamer is a directly elected group of about 140 representatives, and the eerste kamer is like the Australian Senate, also representing the interests of the states - but in the Dutch case, the representatives aren't directly elected by the people, but proposed by the provincial organizations. Here, my knowledge gets foggy ... I'm trying to clear it through asking questions of each person that I draw with, but this is usually the occasion for some embarrassment, foot shuffling and bemusement. I guess this would be like me or one of my peers attempting to explain the finer points of the Australian electoral system to a visitor from another country. But I am not always sure whether it is my questions that cause the embarrassment, or whether it is a case of people feeling that they need to come up with the right answer.
The drawing in progress below was made with a graphic designer. The conversation was really great, and the drawing conveys some of the sense of the way that that the conversation progressed. It also shows, I think, the process of learning that the conversation and the drawing became. There was an interesting back and forward discussion about the media being the thing that you see - and how much political debate is represented graphically - but I wanted to push beyond this and find the mechanics of political process that underlie the representation in the media.
I have tried a tactic of pushing things along by asking more questions. This works, but I am not interested so much in the work being purely description.
I think about my friend Stephen's Doctoral research into the practice of sand drawing in Vanuatu. The drawings are symmetrical abstract designs, a kind of template that is both a representation of the particular story that is being told and a means by which to remember the story. The drawings that I'm making in this project are a trace of an interaction, always partial and subjective. What do I want from them? I return to the idea that the accurate representation of the subject of the conversation (how does government work?) isn't the aim of the project. It’s aims are aesthetic, it seems to me, or an investigation into aesthetics.
The drawing that is shown in progress below took up some of these questions. Why this topic for conversation?; why drawing?; why collaboration?; how does the process relate to the topic of conversation?
I am thinking about ways to push the project forward, to make both the process of interaction and the process of drawing more structured, and ways to carry the knowledge from the previous works into each new conversation and the drawing.
As it stands, the project is interesting to me. It could carry on this way for a long time with no or little change. To take the work into a more exhaustive examination of government would require a change of method, I think. Like making drawings with more political scientists or with politicians. I actually tried this in Melbourne and observed an agony of indecision from the person who I asked to make a drawing with me, firstly about drawing, then about being photographed. In the end I got the feeling that the problem may have been that they didn't want their opinions to be revealed in the drawing, and made public.
The work will be displayed as planned, a further development of the project will have to wait for another opportunity like the residency I am doing now.
The drawing in progress below was made with a graphic designer. The conversation was really great, and the drawing conveys some of the sense of the way that that the conversation progressed. It also shows, I think, the process of learning that the conversation and the drawing became. There was an interesting back and forward discussion about the media being the thing that you see - and how much political debate is represented graphically - but I wanted to push beyond this and find the mechanics of political process that underlie the representation in the media.
I have tried a tactic of pushing things along by asking more questions. This works, but I am not interested so much in the work being purely description.
I think about my friend Stephen's Doctoral research into the practice of sand drawing in Vanuatu. The drawings are symmetrical abstract designs, a kind of template that is both a representation of the particular story that is being told and a means by which to remember the story. The drawings that I'm making in this project are a trace of an interaction, always partial and subjective. What do I want from them? I return to the idea that the accurate representation of the subject of the conversation (how does government work?) isn't the aim of the project. It’s aims are aesthetic, it seems to me, or an investigation into aesthetics.
The drawing that is shown in progress below took up some of these questions. Why this topic for conversation?; why drawing?; why collaboration?; how does the process relate to the topic of conversation?
I am thinking about ways to push the project forward, to make both the process of interaction and the process of drawing more structured, and ways to carry the knowledge from the previous works into each new conversation and the drawing.
As it stands, the project is interesting to me. It could carry on this way for a long time with no or little change. To take the work into a more exhaustive examination of government would require a change of method, I think. Like making drawings with more political scientists or with politicians. I actually tried this in Melbourne and observed an agony of indecision from the person who I asked to make a drawing with me, firstly about drawing, then about being photographed. In the end I got the feeling that the problem may have been that they didn't want their opinions to be revealed in the drawing, and made public.
The work will be displayed as planned, a further development of the project will have to wait for another opportunity like the residency I am doing now.
Labels: studies for the shape of government, the netherlands
# posted by amcqu : 3:09 am
