How Can You Images

THOUGHTS ON "HOW CAN YOU LIKE WHAT YOU HAVE" 09 at MAKE IT!

The work “How Can You Like What You Have” 2009 consists of a split screen DVD presented on a 24” I Mac, either side of which are 3 mobile phone photos, printed on Somerset paper. The two films are earlier works “1 Minute on the Street” 2007 and an unresolved studio work which assumed the name “Studio Squat” 2007. The mobile phone images are of pavements with arrows superimposed, suggestive of direction markers or instructions.

The division of the screen allows the two, possibly linked events to occur simultaneously. These may be viewed symbolically as left- right, conscious- unconscious, intellect- emotion, or any of many more dualities, but this is not a prerequisite for understanding the work. They are obviously two separate scenarios and were chosen because they suggested a relationship with each other, although this relationship has not been defined as part of the work. The two videos were not paired to allude to, or represent any traditional or established metaphor. There is no intention for the work to be read as an expressive or romanticised view of the artists’ view of the world in spite of the suggestion of this in the title.

The images, set either side of the screen have been placed so that they could be considered to suggest a concurrent set of instructions that relate to the events taking place in the video. Again there was no pre-defined relationship between the video and the images. The work contains both conceptual and empirical elements (language, imagery, sign and time specific), all of which combine to question and evaluate the title of the work.

The title of the work comes from a misquote of the sentence
“How do you like what you have. This is a question that anybody can ask anybody. Ask it.”

--- GERTRUDE STEIN, Lectures in America, 1935

This misquote was an error on my part when initially transcribing notes into my sketch book and the initial intention was to change the title mid exhibition. However on reflection the work makes more sense with this error than without. With the error the title now asks about future possibilities rather than seeking to reinforce established present and past methods.
As with many of my earlier works there is a deliberate under emphasis of the emotional content. This is not done to deny or disregard the existence of the emotional, but rather to subtly use this element to react to and emphasise the dialogue between its self and the theoretical elements of the work.

This work may be considered as Empirical Conceptualism.

WATCH THE VIDEO HERE