Here are the three versions of my exhibition proposal I submitted before the show:
Ramona Sharples Exhibition Proposal
Ramona Sharples Exhibition Proposal 2
Ramona Sharples Exhibition Proposal 3
Although I was pleased with the level of engagement I had with the curation team, as I can see this is crucial to the success of the exhibition, I found the process of writing and submitting the proposal quite performative. It highlighted for me that I am not really at a stage where I am thinking in terms of polished final outcomes, and am much more preoccupied with building confidence in my method of producing work.
Here is my finished artist statement as it appeared in the exhibition zine:
Discarded materials have become increasingly important in my practice, and I find most of them in the street on my walk to the studio. They strike me as amusing, sombre and oddly profound, offering a kind of subconscious method for collective self-portraiture. I am interested in how art is connected to historical and economic change and the oppressive distinction between ‘high’ and ‘low’ art. I use these rejected and unwanted items to make drawings, sculptures and photographic images, from which I select material to develop through a variety of printmaking, digital and collaging processes.
How far it changed since the first draft is a testament to the benefits of giving yourself time to revisit and edit written work as well as the benefits of showing it to peers an tutors and asking for feedback, despite how over the top, intimidating or pointless this may seem, it does work.
The risk assessment forms I have attached here may seem unimportant or over-particular, but as we were repeatedly comforted, they are useful ways of thinking through the practical details of exhibiting work. I can see how they would be very beneficial in the smooth instalment of work and running the exhibition if proper care and attention is taken when filling them out.
Overall reflections on the experience of the exhibition:
The most pertinent moments for me came in the last week of preparation before breaking up for Christmas, and during the week that the exhibition ran. Once the proposals were finalised, the preparation and instalment of the piece was relatively simple. I think overall I was quite organised with transporting and hanging the work, although this would not have been possible without the hardworking technicians and my parter who kindly drove my larger piece to the gallery. I can imagine that without these assets it could have been a much more stressful operation.
After the first proposal I began to work on the prints I intended to put in the exhibition, only to find that similarly to the actual writing of the proposal, carrying out what I proposed felt strangely empty and out of line with my studio practice. I think an exhibition inevitably carries with it a bundle of expectations and imagined demands which can be quite difficult not to conform to. This problem is bound to be compounded when we are at the formative stage we are with our art education, an still mired with anxieties which have not yet been dissipated through experience of showing work in public. Luckily Jane was available for tutorials as much as possible, which I took full advantage of. I think what I need to get better at is seeking help outside of the given structure, which I think I struggle with due to my stubbornness and fear of authority. Anyone else’s opinion of your work is interesting, and I found that during these tutorials Jane was very sensitive and supportive, which enabled me to confidently develop the work she suggested I keep looking at. Someone mentioned to me that the current third years frequently used to hold their own group crits, and this would undoubtedly be a hugely beneficial thing to try and organise. It takes a strange combination of swallowing some pride and allowing yourself to have some to show your work to others and ask for their honest opinion, but we are told again and again and experience for ourselves how much this can push your work forward to the next level; don’t work in isolation; it is always a choice.
During the exhibition, after the private view (which I can never really remember), we had a chance to step away from what we had accomplished. During my tutorial in the gallery I felt I talked too much, and ended up not taking in what others had to say about the pieces. On the contrary, the following day on which we held tutorials in exactly the same way with Tony, our new Critical Studies tutor, I felt so affronted by his art historian manner that I could not concentrate on what he was saying. Both of these incidents I am sure were my own fault, but making the most of situations is not my forte (yet).
I still feel conflicted between the goals I want to move towards with my work. On the one hand I want to produce skilfully rendered work, which clearly contain in the surface the hundreds of hours of labour taken to be able to produce them (CITE JOHN BERGER ESSAY HERE). On the other, embarrassed as I ended up about them, my shoddy readymades did in a way speak to the subject matter of ‘high’ and ‘low’ art which I was trying to. This would have been a lot less effective without their title(s), ‘The Frightened Squeals of the Children of Hyper-Capitalism’, which I am very glad I went with my gut instinct and chose. Marrying these two seemingly divergent goals will hopefully become the challenge that allows my work to grow from this point. I couldn’t help but dwell on the thought that most, if not all my pieces for the exhibition nicely fit the bill of ‘irritating contemporary art’, which I am glad I now have out my system, and I’m sure is not an entirely fair summary, but nevertheless is what I find myself repeating to people, and so I feel I must include it here so that I can look back and disagree with it later.
