On Tue, 2 Dec 1997 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> There's also the issue of time which is
> hard to incorporate with visual work. But time is a material too, which
> even linear often writing forgets.
- yes, couldn't agree more - seems to me that any "reading" is over time,
requires the articulation of time as music does, in ways which much visual
work apparently doesn't, or does differently. Cornelia Parker seems to me
to be one whose bigger work does read across time, I'm sure there are
others...
How grumpy and ignorant my first posting on this was - there's so much I
might've mentioned. Tom n Laurie Clark. Finlay. Phillips. And more. Perils
of e-mailing with a sandwich in one hand over lunchbreak.
Alan mentions "illustration" - one way or the other - that's certainly
useful practice, the links between the two parts never so fixed that they
can't be teased out. A "poet-artist collaboration" I was involved in in
the 70s was the Ceolfrith series of shotgun weddings between NE poets &
Sunderland artists - being young and enthusiastic I expected hours of
"preparation" - discussion, shared research, willingness to alter my
"texts" as the work developed etc. What happened was, I met my
collaborator for 10minutes at a reception, and then nothing till the
publication came out! Not surprisingly, I don't feel very close to the
visual element of the resulting work...
RC
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|