The Wednesday Guest Lecture
October 13th 2021
Second year, Willow Fisher
.Through artmaking Emily investigates the relationships between buildings and bodies.
Work explores themes of gender, architectural design, domestic dwelling, histories of shelter and protection.
.Believes artistic research is how an individual compiles their own psychological space.
.Emily has an extensive exhibition record. Uses images and fabrications of spaces that are overlooked, like: stairways, corners, thresholds, or even spaces where its people’s experiences that are overlooked.
.Her bookwork shows how she structures her research interests.
.Uses mainstream processes and principles from wide range of disciplinary forms: filmmaking, performing/performance, installation, sculpture, bookmaking. Uses these different processes to facilitate new experiences between herself and her subject matter.
.Work at Tate Liverpool is called “Flatland”
.Likes to be led by situations and ideas, could come from an artist’s book, a drawing, a performance.
.Institutions typically commission big things, performative things, things that look good in photos.
Book "Flatland" inspired her as it had an interesting insight on Victorian society. The book described women as straight lines, whereas men were increasingly complex shapes. (Like squares, rectangles, triangles, etc) Priests on the other hand were circles. It was suggested that the more angles you had the higher up you are in the hierarchy.
By being a straight-line women were actually quite dangerous the latent power of being simple, lowly, have two points, Emily depicted this as women being underestimated of the strength they hold, solely judged on their initial appearance, which at the time would have been straight lines. Assuming the female's status on this and not expecting the hidden possibilities they hold amused Emily and I myself find it quite interesting. This outdated preposterous outlook on Victorian society provides us with the kind of mindset and politics the different social classes and genders were faced with.
.To look at this now as a female artist must have been initially shocking but when reading more into it interesting as itself has hidden inclinations. Females being straight lines, although at first seem uninteresting and harmless are actually the most dangerous of all, almost weapon like in their sharp exterior. One could even analyse it further and suggest the straight line reflects the females interior, implying their sharp minds and strength.
.Whereas on the other hand men are more complex shapes, despite them being complex and initially bolder and more powerful they only offer more faults, suggesting the males at the time problematic tendencies and overall assumption of the man being the strongest. When Emily was discussing this I found it interesting, she even commented that she found it amusing.
.This was her response to the original Flatland book.
.I really like that not only did she take inspiration from an alternative source to incorporate into her practice, but she also actively created her response to it. Further illustrating her passion for the narrative she is intending to orchestrate for her audience in her artwork.
.Flatland, in BSL, translates to equality plain. Bits of BSL in the main film.
.It acts as a metaphor for Flatland expanding out of the book but also quite literally in the performative approach Emily took. She revealed that there are actually lots of different ways of interpreting flatland in BSL.
.Kept with equality plain, flattening things is about getting rid of hierarchy, and flattening things out in terms of what a community could be, how you might choose to live. .Important part of the film for Emily.
.Her family member is deaf so used sign language in her film. I find this interesting, she's the first performance and visual artist I have come across to excel in this inclusivity in her work, I find it very significant and educating.
Work I favoured the most
This piece of work is called "Human Castle", Emily revealed that this piece of interactive work was for the Edinburgh Art Festival. The piece which was performed by acro balancers was positioned under the real Edinburgh Castle, she worked with a total of ten acro balancers. I find the placement of the artwork compelling as it is making that unconscious link between the real piece of architecture and the reimagined. In this case I think location was of most significance. The artist is re presenting the castle through her own eyes within an artistic perspective, aligning it within her inner intended narrative through the performance. This new arising context the Edinburgh Castle has been placed in transforms the narrative, also bringing with it personality. When talking about this work she explained that "the performance was shaky and unstable" with being an improvised vision of the castle made of people next to the original sturdy one, a fun juxtaposition for everyone to experience. Emily revealed that the piece eventually collapses which is fine, its understandable that the acro balancers can only hold the structure for so long, in this case a couple of minutes. The absence of predictability appeals to me, it could self destruct whenever, strengthening the subject of the artwork. Inevitably she looked back to the experience positively, claiming it to be a work full of joy but also stress.
.Overall I found this Wednesday Guest Lecture influential, although I do not work in any of the ways Emily does with performance elements, I admire her realistic expression of her work and experiences she's encountered in the art world. I am also drawn to the fact that she currently has an exhibition in Liverpool in the Tate Gallery, I will definitely be visiting it to experience her work first-hand.
.Again what stood out to be was how real she was and how realistically she talked to us, she kindly explained that its not easy, there can be moments of not creating and moments of dread. Art is expensive which I think a lot of people don't understand, but this artist made sure to reinforce this to us.
.Therefore I liked this lecture a lot and found it very informing.
The Q&A 11am
Question: Likes honesty about money and time and investment. Did you have a job, how long did you have the job to fund your practice? Do you have to fund your practice in other ways?
.Had last year of education free, BA in Scotland, this gave her a different start into the practice she thinks. A very different reality.
Is from a working-class background, doesn’t really have anyone in the arts in her family. .Felt she was naïve and optimistic at the start of her career, thinking if she worked hard and did good work things would be okay.
.Advice to us: Do look after yourselves financially. Don’t feel as though things are happening too slowly, things take time. It’s a marathon not a race.
.When she graduated, she had a job, worked in a chicken factory after graduating doing admin, graduated in 2001, moved to Japan to teach English for 2 years.
.Didn’t really understand how to make a living as an artist. Was at home for a few years caring for her dad, he was terminally ill. Says she had a slow and weird bumpy start to her career.
.Went to London to do a master’s 2007, this was when she actually started working as an artist.
.She earns a living in lots of different ways, doesn’t really earn much over 10 grand. Thinks it interesting we can appear to be successful, but we are always hustling to make money.
.She teaches a few hours a year, it’s not a regular contract, does guest lecturing, does consultancy for things, on panels. She does as much as she can.
.She lives very low risk. Sells prints and books, applies for funding.
.Tate commission £6000 fee, that was a 2-year project, so basically £3000 a year which is not viable, so commissions are not really viable.
.If you do enough commissions to earn a living you get burnt out.
Notes from Q&A