The Symbolic Potential of Form, Material, and Objects

SAMPLE THESIS TITLE WITH A CONCISE AND ACCURATE DESCRIPTIONby
Fine Art Diploma, Red Deer College, 2005
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF FINE ARTS
(Visual Arts)
(Okanagan)
ii
The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the College of Graduate
Studies for acceptance, a thesis/dissertation entitled:
The Symbolic Potential of Form, Material, and Objects
submitted by Rylan Broadbent in partial fulfillment of the requirements of
the degree of Master of Fine Arts.
Dr. Aleksandra Dulic, Faculty of Creative and Critical Studies
Supervisor
Supervisory Committee Member
Supervisory Committee Member
University Examiner
iii
Abstract
My research for this master’s degree started with a single intuition. I had a gut feeling that the
image of a gun is powerful, although I could not articulate why. In order to find out, I embarked on
journey to create a body of work that would move towards a deeper understanding of the object
and its meaning. And while this thesis does not propose to answer definitively how the gun, or any
object, can be defined as powerful, it does describe a means to further investigate through a
creative practice. Over the course of the thesis, I weave together semiotics research, art theory, and
personal experience to demonstrate that the creation of work meaningfully contributes to the
collaborative intellectual process of building new knowledge.
iv
Lay Summary
This support paper describes the method in which I use material and process to investigate how
meaning is linked to objects, and the degree to which I can engage with the former to reshape the
latter. I began with an intuition that firearms are powerful, not just the object itself, but also the
mere facsimile. I came to discover this is because there is a shared body of meaning between the
functioning object in the world and its symbolic likeness. The bodies of work created over the
course of this research aim to tap into the collaborative process by which knowledge and meaning
are created in order to open new avenues of investigation.
v
1.1 Chapter Summaries ......................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Working Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 3: The MFA Journey From Intuition to Knowledge ................................................................. 15
3.1 3 Things ............................................................................................................................................................ 16
3.3 Violent Winds ................................................................................................................................................. 26
3.4 Fake News ....................................................................................................................................................... 30
4.1 Objects of Contemplation .......................................................................................................................... 41
4.2 Propane Cylinders: On The Capture of Impact ................................................................................. 45
4.3 Constellations: Slow Motion Video ....................................................................................................... 48
4.4 Title: The Tension Between Us ............................................................................................................... 51
4.5 Everyone Speaks Gun ................................................................................................................................. 52
vi
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................................... 59
Figure 5. Bullets ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 6. Revolver ................................................................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 8. Three Things: Sex (Detail) .............................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 9. Three Things: Religion ..................................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 10. Three Things: Religion (Detail) .................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 11. Three Things: Politics .................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 12. Three Things: Politics (Detail) ................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 13. Sticks and Stones ............................................................................................................................................. 22
Figure 14. Sticks and Stones (Detail) ............................................................................................................................. 22
Figure 15. Sticks and Stones (Detail) ............................................................................................................................. 23
Figure 16. Violent Winds .................................................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 17. Violent Winds (Video Still) .......................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 18. Violent Winds (Post Performance) ........................................................................................................... 27
Figure 19. Trump Bust 1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 20. Trump Bust 2 ..................................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 21. Trump Bust 3 (Detail) .................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 22. Fake News (3 Channel Video Installation) ............................................................................................ 32
Figure 23. Objects of Contemplation 0001. Peaceful Blue .................................................................................... 41
Figure 24. Objects of Contemplation 0001. Peaceful Blue (Detail) ................................................................... 41
viii
Figure 25. Objects of Contemplation 0002. Ultra Pure White ............................................................................. 42
Figure 26. Objects of Contemplation 0002. Ultra Pure White (Detail) ............................................................ 42
Figure 27. Gun Outline ......................................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 28. Propane Tank 1................................................................................................................................................. 45
Figure 29. Propane Tank 2................................................................................................................................................. 46
Figure 30. Propane Tank 3................................................................................................................................................. 46
Figure 32. The Tension Between Us .............................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 33. Immolated Monk .............................................................................................................................................. 56
ix
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Aleksandra Dulic. Your
guidance, belief in me, and unwavering support made all of this possible. I could not have been able
to navigate the turbulence of this journey without you.
To my committee members, Neil Cadger and Briar Craig. The encouragement and critiques were
invaluable for the development of this research. And the commitment to demonstrate to your craft
is an inspiration and highwater-mark to stive for.
My work would not exist in its current state without the guidance of Philip Wyness. Our frequent
and wide-ranging conversations continue to inform how I approach my creative process. Most of
all, thank you for your trust. I will not soon forget the doors you opened for me.
There are far too many friends, family, and fellow artists to thank individually. The importance of
community is impossible to adequately capture, but it suffices to say that no person is an island. I
owe a large part of what I achieve to the people who propel me forward.
I stand on the shoulders of giants in order to see further.
x
Dedication
To my grandmother, Dorothy.
You could not have known it at the time, but all of those hot summer afternoons of my childhood,
spent drawing at your dining table, would alter the course of my life.
1
Chapter 1: But What Does It Mean?
“The objects which surround us do not simply have utilitarian aspects; rather, they serve as a kind of
mirror which reflects our own image. Objects which surround us permit us to discover more and more
aspects of ourselves.” (Dichter, 1960, p. 91)
The research for this master’s degree began with a single intuition: firearms are powerful. On its
face, the statement seems obvious enough; of course, they are powerful. Guns are designed with the
express purpose of expelling a projectile at an incredibly high velocity, capable of causing enormous
damage. This force exerted from one object to another, from projectile to target, is perhaps the
most obvious and straightforward aspect of the gun’s power. Having been raised around firearms,
and shot numerous models of rifles and handguns, I am familiar with the bodily sensations of touch,
sound, and smell produced by shooting; I have witnessed the action of bullets at a distance and the
potential for danger. But there is an element of the gun’s power that is less tactile, less tangible, and
less rooted in the physical function. I had a feeling that even the image of the gun is powerful, but
for reasons I could not explain.
Over the course of this MFA journey, through a combination of research, material experimentation,
conversation, and reflection, the basis for an intuition began to reveal itself: it was not just what the
gun could do, but rather what it means—the ideas attached to the thing give it power beyond
kinetic potential. (Johnson, 2017) (Metzl, 2019)
En route to building a thesis exhibition, I set out to create a body of work, utilizing objects,
technology, and materials, that would help me better understand my initial gut feeling on the
nature of the gun’s power. I learned that I was able to tap into, modify, and re-present the interplay
between the physicality of the object and the layers of meaning that branch out beyond it. Part
personal exploration and part invitation for a willing audience, the pieces described below are a
2
product of my own internal creative and intellectual urges, but also an opportunity for viewers to
participate in the collaborative process of meaning-making.
Throughout this thesis I pull together semiotics research (Peirce, 1974) , bricolage, found object art
theory (Rogers, 2012) (Mäkelä, 2007), and personal experience to contextualize the body of work
that leads up to and comprises my graduating show.
My Masters of Fine Arts thesis exhibition, The Tension Between Us, consists of a multi-
disciplinary body of work that interrogates aspects of symbolism and meaning through a physical
language of objects, materials, and gestures. Including sculpture, video projection, and sound, the
work contained within is the culmination of a two-year exploration into the world of firearms and
shooting. I spent a considerable amount of time visually exploring the form, visiting spaces where
firearms are sold and serviced, and the places where they are shot, collecting conceptually related
objects along the way. Throughout this time, I actively sought to converse with a substantial
number of people who had something, anything to say about the gun. In an effort to understand
how other people thought about firearms, I made a concerted effort to listen (as much as possible)
to their thoughts, experiences, and general take on the issue. The resulting exhibition is intended to
function as a collection of work that engages with a highly divisive topic, but does so in a way that
intentionally avoids the dichotomy of a simplistic pro-gun or anti-gun stance. While firearms are
controversial and capable of generating intense emotions, triggering past trauma, and raising a
number of difficult questions, by presenting this work in a gallery setting I created a quiet, safe, and
contemplative space for the viewer to sit with their own reactions.
Much of the other work described in this thesis covers the journey I embarked on to select,
experiment on, and think with objects, while honing a bricolage working methodology to create
pieces that touch on elements of sports, politics, masculinity, and violence— topics that are all
personally significant and reflect how I move through the world. I approach these subjects, not with
3
a desire to needlessly provoke negative reactions, but with a genuine ambition to engage with
difficult and important facets of identity, intellectual discourse, and human interaction.
I use this supporting paper to describe the journey from a personal intuition to a place of
knowledge. I present grounding research and outline a working process that moves found objects,
both physical and digital, through a diverse creative practice in order to investigate the layers of
meaning, material possibilities, and new knowledge (Hamburg, 1952) generated through the
process of creation and contemplation.
1.1 Chapter Summaries
Chapter two discusses bricolage and found object theory as a historical grounding for the research
conducted over the course of the degree. I then provide a semiotic framework to describe how
meaning is attached to the objects and images used throughout my artwork, followed by a brief
overview of my working methodology and pertinent prior research.
Chapter three describes and analyzes a diverse series of projects completed throughout my MFA
journey: 3 Things, Sticks and Stones, Violent Winds, and Fake News. Each artwork contributes
conceptually, materially, or technically to the final body of work.
Chapter four focuses on the research and work generated for my graduating exhibition, The
Tension Between Us, which is comprised of three works that each explore different symbolic
aspects of firearms: Objects of Contemplation, On the Capture of Impact, and Constellations.
Chapter five concludes the paper with a short personal reflection.
4
Chapter 2: A Richness of Connotations
“The paradox I want to point out is that these objects which always have, in principle, a function, a
utility, a purpose, we believe we experience as pure instruments, whereas in reality they carry other
things, they are also something else: they function as the vehicle of meaning. …there is always a
meaning which overthrows the object’s use…there is no object which escapes meaning.” (Barthes,
1988, pp. 169-170)
In this chapter I give an overview of the two art theories that ground the work produced over the
course of this degree: found object theory, which represents the material being worked with, and
bricolage, a way of working. I primarily rely on Carl H. Hamburg and Roland Barthes to frame the
art pieces as knowledge and provide a semiotic analysis, respectively. From there I describe my
personal working methodology and two previous bodies of work that are integral to the
development of the current research.
Beginning with the material, Found Object is, as the name suggests, work created with objects that
were not originally meant to be art, (Stribling, 1970) and has its roots in the practices of Duchamp,
Dada, and the Surrealists. (Waldman, 1992) The movement began as a reaction and challenge to
established norms of art production in response to the “…absurdity and horror” of the First World
War, where “…materials not previously considered for inclusion in visual art, such as newspaper
adverts, bird cages, rusting bits of metal, stuffed animals, kitchen utensils, rope, wire mesh, nails,
bottles, empty cigarette packs, buttons, hooks, tools, wooden boxes, pieces of ceramics, pages from
books, mannequins, bullets, feathers, fish scales, photographs, shoes, cosmetics, empty cartons, and
other evidence of human detritus, were explored, exploited, and juxta-posed.” (Camic, 2010, p. 82)
And while the roots of the movement stretch back to the early part of the twentieth century, there
are a great many artists still working with an ever increasing number of man-made objects.
5
I have found the work of Wim Delvoye, Esmaa Mohamoud, Hugh Hayden, and Emilio Vavarella,
which are all examples of artists currently working in the found object vein, particularly influential
for either the type of objects they are working with and/or the process by which they work.
Between them, they exploit a wide variety of objects and use a diverse range of traditional
techniques and modern technological methods to modify aspects of the form, materials, and
presentation. But what ties each together in my mind is their ability to modify objects to varying
degrees without completely losing the original form. The work is completely new yet also accessible
and familiar.
We are surrounded by an ever-increasing number of man-made found objects, each with their own
form, material properties, meanings, and possibilities. I, however, also extend this definition to the
digital space, in that I consider digital photographs, and other types of files harvested from online
sources, as found objects to be used throughout my practice. In particular, photographs of firearms
and three-dimensional model files factor into the production of several of the key pieces over the
course of the research.
Once the objects have been selected, Bricolage is the working methodology that most accurately
describes the diverse approach to artistic research conducted over the course of the degree. The
word itself comes from the French language and roughly translates to “do-it-yourself,” but the term
took on a wider cultural significance with the writings of Claude Lévi-Strauss. In his 1962 book, The
Savage Mind, Strauss argued that “…the ‘bricoleur’ is someone who works with his hands and uses
devious means compared to those of the craftsman.” (pp. 16-17) And while he was analyzing the
nature of myth-making and ritual, contrasted against the work of the “engineer,” or scientific
thought, where mythical thought was a sort of “intellectual bricolage,” the term has since come to
describe a mode of research “… that encompasses a diverse collection of complexity-sensitive
methods and theoretical positions used in qualitative inquiry across a wide range of research
6
biology, and remix studies.” (Yardley, 2019, p. 2)
Bricolage also describes a mode of creation that most accurately captures the breadth of my artistic
practice, in that it emphasizes a diverse approach to process, “…transdisciplinary practices, and …
multi-textual communication.” (Yardley, 2019, p. 2) In order to create the work described below, I
move between the digital and physical space, employing numerous different design programs and
equipment, traditional and modern techniques—at times employing knowledge from previous
experience in the trades, and often improvising with the tools at hand. So rather than filter all the
work through a single channel of production, for example painting, or sculpting out of a narrow
range of materials, such as stone, I let the interplay between object, concept, and available means
dictate the direction each project will take.
And when the pieces are complete, what are they then? According to Carl H. Hamburg, in an essay,
published in the autumn of 1952, titled “Art as Knowledge”, the answer is a type of knowledge. The
analysis in this work is constructed as a comparison between two opposing ways to frame the
definition of what is considered knowledge: rational (scientific) and embodied (artistic). Hamburg
consistently uses dichotomies to illustrate the different ways in which each framing method
seemingly exists at opposite ends of a spectrum: Perfect/Imperfect knowledge; Emotion-Reason;
Imagination-Concept; Fiction-Fact; and Passivity-Activity. In all stated cases, artistic knowledge is
framed within the former concept, with its antithesis, science, in the latter. But it is precisely
because each exists on a spectrum together that they are not separate, but in fact linked. Each is a
type of knowledge that functions differently.
Hamburg goes on to describe each type of knowledge as a language, and that those languages are a
“faith mediated by symbols.” (p. 7) Returning again to the contrasting analysis of scientific against
artistic, Hamburg characterizes the former as fixed in meaning, but allows substitutions, and
7
facilitates translation between languages, while the latter “…owes its very success to the richness of
its connotations.” The artistic symbols can have a multitude of meanings, and because they are
imprecise, will better convey tone, rhythm, and proportion, and as a result of their intimate
relationship to the medium in which they are presented, be less translated between different
languages.
This understanding is key to how I produce the work, in that I always seek to create it in such a way
as to allow room for a multitude of interpretations, which is to say that the pieces can resonate
differently for each viewer. The selected objects, materials, and/or images have, for me, a personal
meaning that can take a number of forms. I may be responding to an intuitive urge, or an
intellectual connection, or even just a material property. But I am only one side of the equation. The
object that I choose may have a very different meaning for each person that views the work—
varying from none whatsoever to deep symbolism—but that is the point. I intend the work to
operate as a question. The work is continually asking “what do I mean to you?” The answer may be
nothing, quite a lot, or anything in between.
Of all the different methods to analyze the meaning of art objects, I turn to a semiotic approach
because it speaks broadly to how objects can function as signs or signifiers without having to wade
into the sociological aspects of “what” they mean specifically. It is enough to state that objects can
act as signs and signifiers, or sign systems (signs with a multitude of signs contained within), but
whose meaning is arbitrary and derived from the network of relationships in which it is situated.
(Berger, 2014, pp. 50-52)
To return again to the author of the quote that opens this chapter, Roland Barthes points out that
objects not only operate as singular symbols but also reference much larger bodies of meaning. In
his words:
8
“I am granting a very strong sense to the word signify; we must not confuse signify with
communicate: to signify means that objects carry not only information, in which case they would
communicate, but also constitute structured systems of signs, i.e, essentially systems of differences,
of oppositions and contrasts.” (Barthes, 1988, p. 168)
This last point is important for understanding how the symbolic aspects of my work - be it helmets,
books, or firearms - function as multifaceted symbols for many different people. The specifics of the
objects can and do change, which is to say the size, surface, material, and form can be modified, but
unless completely obscured, they will continue to connote some degree of the previous meaning.
And because they simultaneously exist inside a larger body of symbolic systems, including
ideologically opposed ones, the objects can be interpreted very differently, depending on who is
interacting with them.
2.1 Working…