Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
My name is Gil; I'm PhD 3d year,
international student, Portsmouth University, School of Art, Design and Media.
My interest is the process of art-making; I'm interested to see how -
art is produced. I'm not looking at the final product, that is to say -
the final artifact, the final painting and trying to understand the work of artists through the painting,
I don't do that necessarily;
but I'm taking one step back and trying to understand the process
by which artists are inspired through the creativity of art, through the making of art.
The idea of inspiration is not new,
but it's really problematic because it's intangible - you cannot touch inspiration,
therefore you cannot show it.
So it's therefore very difficult to communicate it.
Some people would disagree that there's such a thing as inspiration.
I'm making works of art as part of this PhD,
which visualize the process of inspiration.
Now if we're thinking about inspiration, we're thinking mainly about
the discussion of ‘irrational’ and ‘emotional’ within the rational practice.
So the literature is trying to tackle inspiration through trying to understand how the elements of irrationality,
how the elements of emotions actually work within the rational practice.
I was trying to take the idea of the irrational
and make a small installation exhibition where I took bowls of water,
3 simple bowls of drinking water, nothing funny. I put 3 words, one word in each bowl.
One said 'calmess', the other said 'love' and the third said 'fear'.
And I was asking people to come and taste the water; what the water feels like.
People were invited to taste 'calmness', to taste 'fear'
and to suggest if they feel any differences.
And indeed, people were telling me that calmness is much more smooth,
there is much more texture to fear...
Now Carl Jung, the Swiss psychologist,
he takes this idea further by talking of a 'collective unconsciousness'.
He said if there is an irrational, something which operates before the rational,
if there is something, Carl Jung called it the collective unconsciousness;
and he said this is something that is shared by all people, actually,
the collective unconsciousness. And he said something else;
he said that this collective presents itself through symbols,
through actual shapes and images.
I was trying to make a film that illustrates the idea
of the a-priori category in the source of inspiration that flows through the poem.
The English Romantic poets indeed accepted that notion of inspiration which is beyond any scientific understanding;
and they were also trying to visualize it.
The next work by William Blake, we see here the Creator -
contemplating his own creation.
Now the main problem, the main issue that I've observed
with the literature about the English Romantic poets is that
they would usually tell you that the Romantic poets themselves were inspired through 3 factors.
One: dramatic historical events that the the poet, the artist observed in his life,
like the French Revolution and in the time of William Blake the American establishment;
Two: psychological issues;
mainly, the English Romantic poets are described as crazy people;
and the third is family issues.
Mainly, the English Romantic poets
are described as people that had some family problem in their childhood.
This is what the literature thinks or believes is the cause,
or explains the inspiration that the English Romantics perceived.
Now that is a bit problematic,
because it tells you that you cannot have inspiration because you are normal gentlemen.
You are all denied of inspiration in this room if you are normal people...
What we're trying to understand is how inspiration is embodied through the artwork,
in order to help us take it further and help other people to take it further.
So, we have the great Piet Mondrian.
He said: I'm inspired by nature like the English romantic poets; indeed I'm inspired
but I'm not going to describe the subject and the mythological element
but I'm trying to abstract nature; I'm going to abstract reality.
Piet’s most famous work is composition where there's nothing from nature, although that was inspired by nature,
there's only the basic element, the small line, the small column, the small shape
which make nature and allow him to approach inspiration.
So the romantic naturalization of inspiration and symbol and myth are abstracted, by Piet.
We go even further, we go to the Russian constructivism movement with Rodchenko,
which says something even greater; they said: there is nothing at all to represent...
We don't need to represent anything, we just need to create and to make;
That's Rodchenko.
This is basically one canvass with red paint;
another different canvass with yellow.
and another which looks black but is blue.
The whole canvass was completed with colour.
He does not represent anything with this work.
But the plane, the actual surface of the painting is in itself a surface, a form.
So we don't need to represent anything; we don't need to abstract anything
because the work iself embodies inspiration. It is a work of creation in itself.
Since then abstract art seem to have lost the connection with the viewer.
because people were laughing at that; people don't understand it.
So what I was trying to do, I was trying to create another film which is both aesthetic,
(which could interest you as a film),
and also describes the process of inspiration,
It's called 'Interview with Authorial Self' where a poet interviews his own Muse, his own inspiration...
I'm honoured to introduce my own authorial-Self.
- Thank you very much for joining us. - You are welcome.
The authorial-Self is my own higher creative self, that which inspires me to write poetry.
So you are my authorial-Self, my creative self which is also me.
Yes.
So what is the difference between you and me?
Well you see, what is the difference between Gil who writes,
Gil who runs,
and Gil who likes to cook?
But Gil who runs and who cooks and who works - these are things that I'm doing, activities,
whereas poetry is something that I am; I was born a poet.
It's an activity...
Kadinsky was also trying to bridge the problem;
The problem of artwork, the artists, and the audience, the viewer.
Kadinsky in 1912, in his work Concerning the Spiritual in Art,
He was saying, let's accept that there is something; there is a matter
which is invisible to the human eye...
and he defined it as an inner call.
He said the connection to that matter is through an inner call that artists
feel and think.
Now Yeats gave us a great example of this inner call.
He wrote a book called The Vision, where he described his method
of communicating or contacting this inner call.
So I thought it would be a great idea to make another short film which describes such an inner call,
such an experience of a visionary world.
As I was walking down the street,
suddenly I felt light in me and around me,
as if someone pushed me above the water from deep within. I said,
- "God!" He answered, "I'm not God."
"And any word limits me."
Well... "Lord?" "I'm not your lord nor am I a peasant."
- "All that is?" - "Oh, that's better."
I felt light, almost weightless both in my body and mind.
Does the atom ask the molecule who creates what?
It does not.
Instead, they just play together.
The element of emotion is what artists seem to be very much focused on.
and that is how they open up inspiration.
So I thought to tackle that point of emotion, and make another short film.
Excuse me, can I ask you what is love? What is love?
What is love? for me it is... 'I love you'.
Love is... I don't know.
Good question.
Love is very essential.
I have no idea.
Caring for somebody else, I suppose.
Everything...
I don't really know what love is.
- I don't know - That's a difficult one
The bond between a man and a woman.
Excuse me, can I ask you what is love?