Thoughts on artists collaborating following talk by Matthew Collings and Emma Biggs

Matthew and Emma gave a talk in Norwich to Paint Club East where they outlined their collaborative approach to working. Matthew is a well-known critic and painter, his partner Emma, is a ceramicist. The work they talked about was new work that was about to be exhibited at Vigo Gallery in London. What emerged during their talk was that they had developed a very process orientated approach to working which some artists in the audience found difficult to handle. Matthew revealed that he was, in relation to these works at least, little more than a technician or an automated drawing tool or paintbrush. Emma it appears decides what colours are used in what combination and the type of stroke or mark making that is needed.

Let me explain a bit more.   The paintings are large-scale canvases divided into many geometric diamond shapes that are then further divided into triangles. Each triangle is a different colour, and the colours are built up using many layers of colour glaze before a final combination of colours is arrived at. The paintings appear to be multi-layered, as if the geometric diamond shapes are obscuring some thing else be it a landscape or seascape of some sort, the colours vibrate off each other in a successful overall vision which does not allow for straight geometric reading of the Diamond grid.

Biggs & Collings

The pictures are not unlike Bridget Riley’s, although to my mind they work better than Riley’s.

Biggs and Collings’ exhibition in London opened a few days after the Paint Club East talk. I went to the Private view at Vigo.  The next day I went to see Bridget Riley paintings at Tate Britain to compare and contrast. I like the Bridget Reilly’s, but I prefer her collage mock ups to her finished paintings which I have previously seen at Kettles’ Yard in Cambridge.

 

Detail of Biggs and Collings’ work

I suppose the key issue for me with Biggs and Collings’ work is the one emerging around a collaborative practice. I found that their honesty in the way they talked about their collaborative work really refreshing. This was most evident when Matthew Collings talked about their sublimation of painterly or artistic ego. I found this both disturbing and intriguing and I would like to work collaboratively with more artists to explore its possibilities. It seems quite clear that there is enormous potential and I can’t fully know how I’d feel about it until I’ve done more. I have collaborated with the artist David Kefford at Aid and Abet on a tiny scale recently in Cambridge, or the limited outings I had whilst an undergraduate at NUA.

Bridget Riley

School of Saatchi – BBC series from 2009 a review

I thought it would be a good idea to watch the whole series as I’d only seen one programme originally when it was broadcast.  There was some good comments in it, for example, Tracey Emin said: ‘that the importance of life drawing was that it engaged the hand, the eye and the brain.’

In looking at a short-listed video artist, questions were raised as to what made a video art, and not a TV programme? This is a good question for me to consider, because recently I have been making a couple of films that I regard as video art from found film or sound. The question is why are these art films and not feature films, entertainment or some other form of documentary film?

The presenter said the contemporary art has rules that were calculated and considered. Tracey Emin said it’s about what you take away or edit out : ‘like around my bed piece – there were many things that I edited out from what was originally there so that the one left what and presented at Tate was my distillation of many objects from around my bed.’

In program two, Charles Saatchi is quoted as saying “the way to improve as an artist, is to make work.”

A question was also raised as to what is the reason for doing something? And what makes it accessible to an audience. Was it made accessible by reading the label or hearing about the story behind a work? A of these it was said, were important considerations.

It was also said that if you want to undermine something, say an idea or a piece of work, then you need to focus on it and “also do it in the boldest, most extreme way you can” says Martin Creed.

“Interacting with a public who have no understanding of conceptual art you need to make your work accessible.” Says Matthew Collings art critic and commentator. He goes on to say “things don’t have a mystery of their own when he was talking about the fishing net huts on Hastings Beach … Maybe, I should bear this in mind when thinking about how to present my chair piece.

Programme 3 considered replacing or taking a new look at an existing piece of art – it was suggested that work that is referential in this way and has a relationship with the past must also be able to speak of the now. Equally, it is important not to force a connection that isn’t there or is pretty tenuous. Check out Nina Saunders the age of reason 1993, she is an artist who works with and reforms chairs. A useful artist to look at as I have since done in order to help me think about my chair piece.

Question how do follow-up an idea or response to artwork Matthew Collings thinks that you must be sincere, thoughtful and energetic. In the preparation for the final exhibition where the work of the 6 artists would be judged a number of issues had resonance for me and raised concerns and many parallels with my preparation for any exhibition, and of course the degree show.

Be careful about ideas that are good but for which the execution is weak and also be careful not to leave things until the last minute. Don’t be familiar or polite or politically correct in your work. A work must have honesty and a sense of daring – don’t forget health and safety considerations – like the guy who had presented the Vandergrift generator but haven’t thought through the health implications. Equally, it was said that an artist should be careful not to lose the subject of their work in the love of the materials.

The piece needs attention, beware your work isn’t too literal it’s not good enough to argue or it to be apparent that ‘what you see is what you get’ when you look at the artwork. Equally, it was suggested that a well-polished piece is bad if it has no spirit in it.