Steven Carter and Professor Garold Barton, Fine Art
My primary purpose in pursuing this research project has been to enhance my ability to communicate specific ideas through my artwork. It seems rather evident that the contemporary art scene has become increasingly devoid of morals. Critics’ reactions to the bizarre and unwholesome (which seems to be the trend of much of the so-called “cutting-edge” work) are varied. Some would applaud such trash as ‘profound’ and ‘visionary’. Many boundaries have been challenged and discarded. During a trip to New York this summer I visited the Museum of Modern Art. I was not surprised to find some rather disgusting and offensive pieces in the contemporary exhibition area. There are a lot of varying motivations and purposes for creating art out there. As for me, I’ve long had the desire to make the content of my own artwork uplifting and edifying.
In my efforts to create work of this nature I became interested in the potential of symbolic imagery. All communication is based to some degree on the use of symbols (visual, audible, or tactile). For my purposes, I chose to explore the use of visual subject matter which, due to context, would become overtly symbolic. In this way I hoped to articulate meaning in a fairly legible manner. My initial desire was to employ symbols that would be universally recognized. However, there were some inherent problems with this approach. I naively hoped that I would simply find some very specific symbols that would represent exactly what I wanted to communicate in a manner conducive to my aesthetic preferences. This proved to be a more difficult task than I thought. Very few symbols are universally interpreted in exactly the same way, if there are any at all. Every viewer brings his or her own set of cultural biases, previous experiences, etc. to any visual experience. Each person’s response to an image or visual experience will be significantly influenced if not entirely determined by these factors. This makes it very difficult to channel the understanding of your viewers in any specific direction. However, it is not entirely impossible.
As I began searching for symbols that would suit my needs I had several perimeters in mind. First, I was focusing on the specific context of western society and culture (In other words, a primarily American and European cultural perspective). Second, I wanted the artwork (and hence the symbols) to carry similar connotations for both the seasoned connoisseur of the arts and the uninitiated novice. I also had hopes of discovering symbols that were currently in use.
What I discovered, however, is that Iconography is somewhat of a lost Art. George Wells Ferguson, the author of Signs and Symbols in Christian Art (Oxford University Press, 1989), explains that his purpose in writing the book was to help people decipher the meanings of symbols no longer understood by the majority of art viewers today. During certain eras of Art History, specific colors and objects had very specific meanings. Nowadays this is not the case. Additionally, I found that many of the symbols that were employed historically in western art were heavily biased toward Catholicism. I also found that many symbols have had numerous meanings, some of which are a bit contradictory.
In mentioning some of these concerns to my mentor, Professor Barton, he encouraged me to adapt my approach to my findings. For instance, he encouraged me to focus on what is it is that makes something recognizable as a symbol. He also suggested that I mesh some of the objects and elements that I had hoped to use in my work with older symbols in order that all elements be readily interpreted as symbols. This seemed to be a wise solution. Context has everything to do with how an image is interpreted. Also, one very small element can have drastic influence with regards to the overall significance of a piece of artwork. Hence, the genius of the work “The Fall of Icarus” by Pieter Brueghel (the title changes the content of the painting entirely).
I settled on the use of two very common symbols throughout the body of the work. These I combined with additional images, intended to be symbolic in their own right. The common symbols I chose to use are the ring (or circle) and the dove. The ring symbolizes unity, completion, wholeness, and timelessness. The dove signifies the presence of divinity or holiness. By combining these two motifs with other images which are commonly associated with a domestic environment, I attempted to create pieces which would reference the relationship between family and the divine. It would be a mistake to assume that the content of the work is specifically narrative. Rather, it is loosely defined, intended to be perceived rather than deciphered. . In other words the objective is not really didactic. My hope is that the finished work invites the viewer to draw his or her own conclusions about the symbols represented and what they may signify based on their context.
Along with the discoveries that I made as I sought to resolve the content of this body of work, I also discovered and learned a great deal technically. My primary choice of media was lithography, an extremely demanding process in terms of technical skill. The experience that I have gained while creating this body of work has been and will continue to be extremely valuable to me in my development as an artist. I feel that my proficiency in lithography has increased dramatically as a result of this work.
The project culminated in an exhibition which took place at Coleman Studios, a local commercial gallery on University Avenue. The exhibition was hung on Monday, August 1st, 2005 and remained up until Friday, August 12th, 2005. Completing an exhibition is a very difficult and time-consuming process. It requires a great deal of preparation and work, but is a very important aspect of the contemporary art world. The experience gained in carrying out this project is invaluable to me as an artist and has been an extremely worthwhile supplement to my education.
