We live in the era when everything that we do can be filmed and heard, transmitted and viewed, recorded and edited, anywhere and anytime, with or without our knowledge, and the technology once controlled by governments and large corporations can be acquired by anyone.
Because the urge to exhibit and view is natural to the child, it is parent, school, church and society which places inhibitions on this biological inheritance, and over the past decade, because of the technology and a change in what is social acceptable, more and more people, from unknown individuals to international celebrities, are opening their lives, and their inner selves, to public scrutiny through 24 hour TV channels and internet web cameras. Some two decades ago, at an international residential management course, I suggested that people would pay to watch others performing the basic of living, and was ridiculed. To be ridiculed, sometimes with justification, is the lot of the contemporary creative, although ridicule is preferable to what happened to those who challenged and shocked society through their art in past times.
It seemed to me, in the autumn of 2002 and the spring of 2003, that following on from the brave activities of Sarah Lucas and others, anyone wanting to be considered a contemporary artist should be prepared to out their working lives under the same kind of scrutiny. Originally I envisaged a website, and a web can, but it was not just the technology which defeated me, but I found that I lacked the courage to expose myself in this way. There was also a practical problem in that I knew that the more effective I was in communicating my work, the likelihood would be less time to concentrate on its development and completion. While I was trying to work out my position I came across the information that Tracey Emin had attempted to open up her working environment only to find that the amount of public interest made the concept impractical, and she retreated to putting herself, body and soul on camera.
This remains a possibility, as I live on my own, and it is time for everyone to understand the realities of the aging flesh, and mind, before it happens to them, so they can prepare and take action to prevent or limit some of the more negative aspects. It was OK when most of us perished one way or another around three score years and ten, but it is estimated that there are 11000 people aged 100 years and more in England and Wales, including my mother, and the evidence is that this number will double every decade over the next half century.
I have always shared the view of the media that if someone courts publicity, if they hold a public position, or if they seek to affect, or influence the lives of others, then who they have been, and who they have become, cannot be excluded from being of potential public interest. However this should only apply to the individual, and not to their family, friends and work colleagues. Consequently there is no justification, whether as an artist, or not, to use information gained in confidence, protected by law, or under natural justice, and this includes relationships with a partner or partners, with children and their children, and whoever, unless there is not only agreement in advance, but those affected have understanding of the potential implications of any such agreement. There are two acceptable exceptions to such an approach. If the individual, or the matter, is already the subject of publicity, or in the public domain, but even then, one should take account of what effect anything said will have the individual, their work, their family and friends.
The second is if the individual is no longer alive, although the responsibility remains to take account of the likely effect on others and potential consequences. I was brought up a Catholic where my understanding has been that one should take full responsibility for ones conscience and ones behaviour, ones soul; but not for anyone else. Obviously this does not apply if one holds a position which involves others; although I accept each of us has to take responsibility for what we do and for its consequences and this means leaving others to guard their own interests.
There have been some matters where it was immediately clear cut what could be made available to the public and what could not. I signed the official secrets act at one point in my life which covered information provided in confidence by the state and information and decisions shared with colleagues as a second inspector of social services for the Department of Health in relation to the prevention and treatment of the misuse of drugs (legal and illegal substances). In my main occupational activity information is protected by a large number of statutes and through contracts of employment, and in relation to one matter my position has been clarified through an agreement in the High Court. Recently I was studying the new constitution for the citizens of Gibraltar and noted that privacy protection was being given to private correspondence.
Other aspects of the rule have been more difficult to apply in practice to a work which attempts to cover a life comprehensively, much like Lipsynch appeared to me to try and be a work of total theatre.
I decided that I would include confidential material as part of the work but it would be kept under lock and key and five large, four door filing cabinets were acquired, and later the number was increased to ten. The idea was not just to keep confidential and sensitive material under lock and key but to place the cabinets around the home, at the end of my bed, in the middle of a living room, and prominently in the kitchen, so that they would be a constant reminder of my responsibilities and obligations to others.
And then I made another visit to the Tyneside Baltic and discovered the work of Eva Grubinger and felt an immediate affinity. I had chosen black for the colour of the filing cabinets. This reflected my mood and inclination although I could have selected red, the traditional colour for confidentiality and the colour of the volume binders used for the first 1500 sets or so. Eva's Baltic exhibition was of black sculptural forms and in the accompanying notes she made reference to secrecy associated with the colour and also that it could indicate something sinister. Sometimes there is a flash of what to do next, and there is not need to reflect further. I could put confidential work on display, but only if the cabinets were properly sealed with welded black covers. This created subsequent problems in addition to the fact that I did not have the funds to carry out this solution, because one sealed I would no longer have access to the contents along with everyone else. There were other reasons why the idea of exhibiting the work as a project in development, was put into abeyance, but the overriding reason was that the step would only be taken when I was satisfied I would no longer need access to the confidential aspects, and without which the work would lose significance.
I have visited the Baltic several times, and since then there have been two exhibits where I felt WOW, but Eva Grubinger was the first.
No comments:
Post a Comment