Ambiguity
I am really interested in this theme because I enjoy it and feel compelled to create work that resists closure. Its like a poignant and intimate way of encouraging relationship between the audience, your work and yourself. It is also a mechanism that doesn't cloud or distract through an overstatement of the artists opinion; rather the viewer is left holding the power and responsibility for their reaction because they have more ownership of it. Giving "no correct answer" as an artists makes all answers possible. It requires that the viewer look at themselves, at their own life's path and all its influences, to imagine their own answer.
I feel like the first time I connected with this idea was looking at the Mona Lisa many many years ago. I remember wondering, why does she have that expression on her face, is she smiling, if yes what is making her smile, what is she thinking about, what is she looking at? etc. It is such an iconic image that has fascinated people for centuries and I think a huge part of that power is because of the ambiguous quality it possesses.
To explore this idea more I will look at 1 literal piece of work and 1 ambiguous piece of work.
Janneke Hooymans and Frank Tjepkema XXL chair is the first piece I'm looking at.
Roman Signer is an artist that deals with moments, action and what's left behind afterwards. The idea of process and how know that something has happened.
'Swiss artist Roman Signer has been redefining sculpture for more than 40 years and is now regarded as one of the finest representatives of Process and Conceptual art. He produces elementary dynamic sculptures and installations, also known as time sculptures for their preoccupation with the transformation of materials and objects through time. In his actions, acceleration and change are part of the creative process and he uses photography and moving image to document his work.Characterized by processes and potentialities, his work takes into account the concepts of Minimalism and Conceptualism, and with this Signer occupies a unique position in the recent history of sculpture. Signer exploits the possible uses and limitations of everyday objects, such as umbrellas, bottles, tables, chairs and candles, through a process guided by both curiosity and discipline. Like the director of a thriller, he makes use of tension and surprise—with the distinction that in his case everything takes place in the here and now. The works are the direct result of processes initiated by the artist.'
Tony Cragg sculptures are both utilitarian and sculptural, refusing closure for use and object description.
His work isn't about a thing in particular, yet it's not work about nothing. It is work about many things and this is a part of his intrigue.
He sits in a space where a total something is bigger than the sum of its parts. He tells us that not everything can be reduced. That you cannot distill the essence of all things.
Lastly I'd like to mention titling, because it can be really important and add to ambiguity and amplify intrigue.
