Tuesday, 7 October 2008


This afternoon we had a lecture by Louise Valentine, she talked to us about the deviant exhibition.


We had to visually evaluate the artworks displayed in the exhibition. To choose one piece and critique it.

I chose Freddie Robins Hand of Good, Hand of God piece.

I noted...

at First Glance I thought this was a comical piece that served no purpose, as it is a functional everyday object that has had the function removed due to mutation. I didn’t view it as an object of great beauty, and the colouring is grey/blue, which is often linked to signs of depression or sadness.


Why was it created and what was it trying to tell us, is there a hidden message? How was it made? It is knitted and technically accurate although it doesn’t appear to be anatomically correct.

After reading Robin’s history and what she was trying to convey my initial reaction was changed. She presents her theory’s in a playful way, but to me it is about how you intemperate the world and the things you see. The relationships between conventional and unconventional.
The glove is a very conventional object that is a given and a certainty-it has a clear function and always can fit into its neat little box of why it exists.
Robins offsets this given by making it into something uncertain and questionable.

Should we question everything, even the things in our life’s we deem as certain. Can anything ever be certain, is there a right and a wrong or just different perspectives and views.

What it says to me...

Question everything, nothings a given. Always try to find a meaning and purpose. Look at objects and situations from different angles. Don’t always go on first impressions and snap judgements.

Discussions are valuable to gain different perspectives, can use or adapt these ideas and theories along with my own to get a better overview and outcome.


Would we view the object differently if it weren’t behind glass, would our experience and relationship to it change if we could actually touch it. It is a tactile everyday object that is normally worn, enveloping a form which animates it. But here it is left empty and flat. In its static state it appears sinister and strange like an abnormality of nature that has been put in a jar to be analysed... a 'freak of nature.'

Ultimately I think I was drawn to this object above the others in the exhibition because I identify with it, it is tactile and to me it didn’t seem cold like the other objects. I like the initial humour I felt upon seeing it and the wonder that followed.

No comments: