Skip to main content

Six of the Best, Part 5

Part 5 of an interview series in which I invite artists to respond to six questions about art, process, and creativity. Today's artist is photographer Ian Talbot, from the UK. Click here to see his thoughtful and absorbing blog.


"Oak"

Philip Hartigan: What medium/media do you chiefly use, and why?

Ian Talbot: I am a photographer, my medium is photography. I no longer use film and all my work is, therefore, digitally based. It is of little importance. A painter makes marks with paint and a brush. I make them with the light that falls on a sensor array and then I make further marks with pixels on a computer screen. These are then transferred to marks with either laser light or ink on paper. As I manipulate the tools I use with my hands, all my work is hand made. Any further distinction seems utterly artificial and pointless. The most important tool I use is the one between my ears.

PH: What piece are you currently working on?

IT: Not a "piece" but a project: I am currently exploring the nature of myth. Or at least that is my starting point.

Although a subject, and type of project too, that I have shied away from in the past, it is one I have been fascinated by for, well, as long as I can remember. This fascination has, for me, always gone deeper than the mere storytelling aspect, though. What really intrigues me is the mindset that produces the specific myths that all cultures, including our own, create. Questions, for example, of how aware is/was each culture of the "mythical" or symbolic nature of such stories? Did they actually "believe" them? Well, after all, a lot of people are quite prepared to believe our own current myths.

The images I have produced so far represent, I think/hope, the layers of meaning and interpretation that attach to all myths, which is to say, my interpretations, associations etc. All supposing, of course, that purely visual means are capable of bearing such weight.

As a visual artist, however, there is inevitably a degree of "illustration" involved along with considerations of more symbolic meanings. As this is not the main thrust of my intent I am currently struggling to detach myself from this. But it may be unavoidable. We shall see.




PH: What creative surprises are happening in the current work?

IT: More an observation than a surprise, but the depth and possibilities of my chosen subject are proving to be virtually limitless. So no great surprise there, as I said. Yet this is proving to be a little overwhelming and therein lies the problem. In fact, this project has moved along at a pace I am unused to—so much so that I am finding myself having to introduce a sort of "hiatus" while I ponder progress so far. Virtually all my work is fairly tightly pre-conceived. Visually that is. I rarely, if ever, go out "hunting" for images. For me, the images already exist in my mind and so the actual execution is more or less trivial. This project has proven a fertile one in that way. Images have presented themselves in my mind in a virtual torrent. Having them convey the layers of meaning and association that are clear in my own mind is another matter.

PH: What other artistic medium (or non-artistic activity) feeds your creative process?

IT: The answer is "everything". The reading and deep research I do for every project I undertake (more for this current project than any previous one, incidentally). Normally the percentage of time I spend on this and just thinking as opposed to the actual execution would be around 95%. But that's when I can say I'm actually engaged with the project in hand. As well as that there's watching TV, online activities, conversation. The list goes on but you get the idea I think. Living in general, really.

But just to show I literally mean "everything": the best time for ideas, problem solving etc. is when I'm distracted and hardly thinking at all. It's exactly then when solutions and the BEST ideas will literally pop into consciousness. I suppose it's the same for most people.


"Wheat Dip"

PH: What’s the first ever piece of art you remember making?

IT: That's easy: I don't remember. As a photographer it never occurred to me (or many others, for that matter) that I was making "art". They were photographs, is all. It was enough. Well, the images are still the same but it turns out someone moved the goalposts and we photographers were making art all along. Who knew?

PH: Finally, and you can answer this in any way that’s meaningful to you: why are you an artist?

IT: I can't say I spend much time thinking about being an artist, let alone asking myself why. The slightly less flippant answer, I suppose, is this: I have a background in commercial (fashion) photography. At one time people would commission and pay me a lot of money to do it. As they no longer do, and I'm still doing it, it must, I guess, be for the art. In any case I do what I do and viewers are perfectly at liberty to call it whatever they want.


If you liked this interview, and you'd like to keep up to date with the series, why not Subscribe, or sign-up via Google Connect, using one of the options over on the right? Thanks, and keep creating.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On my 300th blog post

Crikey!

It's my 300th blog post. And I seem to remember that in my 200th blog post I said that I would start quoting from John Ruskin's "Praeterita", after which this blog was named. Well, better late then never, so quotation number 2 is below.

First, though, some thoughts on this blog and blogging in general. I started Praeterita at the end of last year after reading a book by an art-marketing guru called Alyson Stansfield that recommended it as a means for artists to publicise their work better. But from the start I thought it would be more interesting to talk in a discursive way about my wider interest in art, and artists, and the history of art. After a desultory beginning where I only posted once a week, my blogging habit has now grown to the point where I am posting sometimes twice a day, and more than 45 times per month (helped enormously by the Blogger feature that lets you save blog posts with a post-dated timestamp, so that you can put posts in the bank to …

My worst open studio

Most open studios are notable for nothing really happening. You sit there waiting for people to come into your studio, eat all your nibbles and guzzle the free drink, and then leave after a cursory glance at your work. Usually, the worst thing that happens is that you get stuck in a boring conversation with a dull person,

But there was one time a few years ago when I got into one of these conversations, and quite quickly the person I was talking to started to make homophobic remarks about another artist in the building. After a few minutes, I decided I'd had enough and asked him to leave. He seemed genuinely surprised that I had any objection to what he was saying, which in retrospect makes me even angrier if he thought he had a sympathetic ear.

He asked me why, and I told him I didn't like people talking that way, and I said: "This conversation ended 30 seconds ago." So he left.

So, nothing dramatic like Jackson Pollock getting drunk in a fancy New York apartment a…

Van Gogh on Degas

From a letter dated July 31, 1888:
“Why do you say Degas can’t get it up properly? Degas lives like some petty lawyer and doesn’t like women, knowing very well that if he did like them and bedded them frequently, he’d go to seed and be in no position to paint any longer. The very reason why Degas’s painting is virile and impersonal is that he has resigned himself to being nothing more than a petty lawyer with a horror of kicking over the traces. He observes human animals who are stronger than him screwing and f—ing away and he paints them so well for the very reason that he isn’t all that keen on it himself.”
Subscribe to Praeterita in a reader