In my ordinary perception of objects I often derive imaginary hierarchies wherein specific objects are assigned the role of guardian, overseer, or outright menace over their surrounding object fellows.
I’ve always been drawn to the imaginary dual-motif of the object as ‘patroller’ as it implies both tyrrany and a humorous futility. A military tank is an overtly literal example of a tyranical object. Yet curiously, it seems to me that ornately decorated wedding cakes, grandfather clocks, rotating fans, mall escalators, hospital wheelchairs, faberge eggs and mic stands (among other things) also seem to perform in this capacity in spite of their more reticent nature. . .
Which begs the question: What are the qualities that imbue an object not only with a sense of autonomoy, but with a sort of domineering presence over their environment? Is it an object’s scale, it’s form, or it’s proximity to other objects that makes it seem imperious?
This is the question that has been driving my experimentation in the studio over the past year.
I am continually fascinated and bewitched by my observances of objects native to my own everyday experience as well as those discovered via my research into lesser known territories and environments. More on that to come..