project47

Hello everyone. The images above are from the ‘Art by Offenders: secure patients and detainees’ exhibition at the Southbank Centre. It was really interesting but I don’t want to say too much because I think everyone should go an make of it what they will. I’ve put the pictures up (sorry for the crap quality) for anyone who thinks they might not make it or if people do want to have a browse out of interest. Also, while I was there I met the director of the Koestler Trust who gave me her mobile number and invited us to the trust to have a look around. She was there with one of the artists and their parents but unfortunately I did not get the chance to speak with them.

There are a couple of thoughts that have sprung to my head so far and stuck.

Firstly, when sat chatting with James, Paul, Theo and Kate about ideas for the tunnel an idea of Rickshaws along the tunnel was batted about. ALthough this may not be an ongoing idea I couldn’t help but recall a quote from Muhammad Yunnus referring to Globalisation:

“Global trade is like a hundred-lane highway criss-crossing the world. If it is a free-for-all highway with no stoplights, speed limits, size restrictions, or even lane markers, its surface will be taken over by the giant trucks from the world’s most powerful economies. Small vehicles – a farmer’s pickup truck or Bangladesh’s bullock carts and human powered rickshaws – will be forced off the highway.
In order to have win-win globalization, we must have fair traffic laws, traffic signals, and traffic police. The rule of “the strongest takes all” must be replaced by rules that ensure that the poorest have a place on the highway…”

I know this has no relevance, but it lead me to question why Rickshaws were flagged up as possible spaces to spark conversation with those passing under the tunnel and if this relates to their exclusion from capitalist forces. Does this tie in with the idea of capitalising on football and how this has maybe reduced one’s expressive spheres.

Secondly, in our discussion around Millwall the other day something sparked in my mind. My notes are a bit hazy, but John was talking about the ‘rules’ of artwork. In my notes I have made a link about the rules of artwork and the rules of football and are their basic rules that exist outside of the institutionalisation of the game. For example, rules such as the height of the goal and the length of the game. When we play with a football in the park the dimensions of the goal do not matter, however the outside markers do – jumpers scrunched up on the floor. There are basic rules of football that matter, but many of them are most important when the game becomes institutionalised. Is this similar to art? Do the rules of art become more important when it is in an institution?

Thirdly, in the seminars I find there are often debates around ‘what is art’? However I feel these debates keep going round and round and maybe the question is not -’what is art’? To me, it feels this is an inexhaustible question that we could always debate, and maybe it should be tackled contextually as we get into the nitty gritty of the projects rather that repeatedly at depth.

Finally, in the exhibition one piece reminded me of when Kate spoke about time it’s relevance to the projects. Entitled ‘Dead Time’, the caption read:

“Everyone likes the finer things in life but they come at a cost and for me it’s time; time away from my wife, time away from my family, time away from real life, dead time.”

For me, this made me think about how time can be dead, and how it can be living. In the stadium, is time more alive than in the prison? How does this relate to the museum? Is the museum time that has been lived before? What does it mean to cross time that has been lived with the living? It also reminded me of what John’s friend the wrestler said about making the most of our time, and how these are crucial times. I think I have exhausted the word time, but it does seem to be threading it’s way through.

I haven’t proof read this so I do apologise if it makes very little sense.