My project proposal is to explore the relationship between simplicity and complexity. In Unit 1, I’ve spent much time on research and development of my project. After some practical works during Unit 1 and getting reference of some artists and their works, such as Andreas Gursky, Chris Jordan and Powers of Ten (Charles and Ray Eames). I’ve got a quite clear direction to develop my project.
In the feedback of Unit1 assessment, tutors let me continue looking at broader range of artists, ask more questions about their works to myself and reveal my thinking. In my opinion, the key reason of their works in the balance between simplicity and complexity is they are made of lots of tiny small things and constructed in a whole simple shape. The clear contrast makes a simple but strong visual impact. For example, Gursky’s May Day V, 2006 (as shown in figure 1), at Matthew Marks. We can see hundreds of people walking, standing or sitting through the windows. It seems like these people are in a huge grid box, and when it’s in a large scale, every detail is seen clearly by us. What a busy and complicated scene. Because of the position where the photographer in, we look at the photo and feel as if we are standing outside the complicated scene. It’s a simple feeling behind the image.
Not just visual contrast, Gursky’s work has a clear theme in it. He is always drawn to large, duplicate and visually complicated spaces, such as stereotyped buildings, stock exchange and 99 cent retailers in the high speed developing time. In one of his best known photos, 99 cent II, it depicts an interior of a supermarket with numerous rows of goods which are bold and rich in colour and detail. The vivid colour of these orderly goods reminds me of a grim and machine-made modern society instead of a colourful world what it should be.
Gursky's May Day V (2006), at Matthew Marks
1.May Day V. 2006
99cent II 1999
2. 99 Cent II.1999
His works reminds me of one point in John Meada’s book Simplicity where he talks about sometimes technology make our life more complicated instead of simple. It reveals a relationship of simplicity and complicity in this high-tech time. And the point is one of the original inspirations of the relationship I wants to research on as well.
Inspired by the interesting comparison and layout in Gursky’s works, I had a clearer direction that I should find something not just visually express the relationship of simplicity and complexity, but also deeply in meaning like issues of modern society.
I tried to find out a subject which could be used as presenting my idea about simplicity and complexity. I walked through the high-rise buildings with my camera looking at the rush of modern life. These buildings under construction and newly-built architectures provoked my interest. One was very complicated because of a tangle of the steel bars, but sometimes was covered by a huge cloth which made it look better. Another one, new office buildings, was clean, simple and similar in appearance. They are all a presentation of the high-speed modern life. I took some photos of these different buildings, and chose two floors of them and cut off rest of buildings to clarify the comparison. The remaining parts of the photos are long scrolls which should be a strong contrast to the simpler work in my thought.
At the same time, I was trying to use a digital work to present the relationship better, because the media I used was only photography. In the MA term, Processing was an interesting program I learned, and it’s very simple and complicated as well. The reason that I think it’s simple is because of the tiny, easy operation. The amount of all buttons of the toolbars is only 6: run, stop, new, open, save and export. What I need to do in the only workspace is typing codes. However, the application requests me to think every command of every step it should do. It’s all about writing logical algorithms which is a sequential list of instructions. It never automatically operates anything you don’t write in. So actually it’s a complicated and difficult program. But if familiar with the algorithms, just enter some simple words, the visual output could be amazing complex.
Because of the interesting features that match my theme, I chose Processing as the program which can process my pictures and present my theme. In Processing, the photos were transformed to linear moving images based on the pixels of them. The linear moving images reduced much information of my original photos. The only connection is colours of every pixel of the photos. All the subjects constructed by these tiny pixels are disappeared and restructured.
During the Symposium 2, I showed several pictures about this development of my project. Tutor and peers said the image constructed by the long scrolls and the Processing work in small size looks interesting, but there were more deep thinking that I should add in my project.
Andy suggested me to think about the relationship of simplicity and complexity of two buildings in both two dimensional and three dimensional. The complexity of buildings which were under construction is external, so is the simple glass wall. Actually there was another dimension behind the glass wall, the working space. It had another meaning of complexity which is three dimensional which could make my project deeper. I need to know how audience understand my project, do they make scene of what I try to express.
I emailed Paul Coldwell whose research was about digital surface. He was kind and recommended several artists to me, among them I noticed Tim Head whose artworks were clearly associated by me with my project. Especially in his work Treacherous Light 2000, each pixel of the computer screen has been enlarged to become a distinct visual element. Audience can see lots of clean and ordered squares in front of his work, and a complicated illusive screen’s surface which is formed by great numbers of light-emitting pixels when they stand back.
During the tutorial after Symposium 2, I saw some artworks of Rachel Whiteread whose sculptures are interesting and casts of ordinary domestic objects which were never seen before. For example, her work House 1993 (figure 3) shows the interior space of a house. We live in a house, walking, looking at the space of it, but actually we never know what it looks like if the walls or ceiling disappear. Her sculpture transformed the inside space to outside, which gave audience a chance to know the inside space of a house which is always covered by the surface. It’s impressive and imaginative. The work showed inner space through casting the house, and breaking the original walls. Audience can see the big sculpture from street (outside) where is in front of the original house. It’s standing outside to look at inside.
House 1993
3. House.1993
I considered way of presenting my project with the direct idea of showing the house. In my work, the windows or glass wall of new building covered the inner space that might be a scene of busy life. The key to express my aim is glass wall covering and simplifying the busy scene behind it. Whiteread’s house showed the inside of a house to the people who were outside of the house; I want to do a project to show people in a building what the space they are in looks from outside, which is transformed by glass wall.
Because my project is about complexity and simplicity, which exist in many object. I’ve chosen two kinds of buildings as the objects to express my aim, and I shouldn’t add too much information in my project to present my aim directly to audience. “Less is more” should be considered again and again in my final process. I found my previous Processing works of linear moving images were too much when I saw some brilliant works and reconsidered my work through audience’s angle. The linear moving images made in Processing were a kind of complicated because of flickering linear images when much information had been reduced than the original photos. Besides, audience may ask, “Why is linear image, not quadrate, or circular image?” So I need to make a closer connection between Processing work and the pictures to avoid misunderstand.
After the consideration and inspiration of other artists’ works, I think about the way to capture a live video and convert it to the simulated scene could be seen outside of glass wall. I wrote some codes and experimented in Processing to see which output fits my aim better. And I went to the ground of our degree show which was a room with only one skylight. I imagined as if I was an audience passing, and seeing two long printings of a part of building under construction with many steel bars and a clean glass wall of a new office building. The contrast is obvious, one is messy and another is simple and new. But I may understand it as representing influence of high speed developing in modern life; or comparison of developing and developed, that is thought in term of an audience who knows nothing about my project. There is no any connection with the busy inner space behind the glass wall which I’d like to let audience notice. So when the live Processing work of simplifying the inside scene like pretending to be seen outside shows, I will know the project is trying to focus on the glass wall and the three-dimensional space. The interactive work shows images that can be seen in the street outside at once, and it gives a chance to see the appearance of people standing in inner space from outside a building. It’s an image in a photographer’s eyes and can be considered the effect of the glass wall which separates and simplifies the complicated inside from outside.
In the beginning of Unit 1, some of Hiroshi Sugimoto’s photos were reference for my project, which had deep thinking behind the works of simple visual language. Through the research and developments of the two units, my works has been improved to a similar state that contained a deeper meaning under the surface of them, instead of some shallow moving images I tested in Unit 1. I’m so glad to see the progress, and hope it would continue.
Because of the aim strongly interested by me, I want to keep focusing on it. The aim of my project is broad and can be developed in any media and subjects. What I’ve developed through this year was a beginning of exploring relationship between simplicity and complexity. From presenting it visually and outwardly to meaningfully inside; from photography and film to interactive Processing work. It has been changed and progressed much, and still has much space for development. As yet, I’ve found the relationship from the buildings of modern life, and expressed my aim in this theme. There are still many more subjects containing the relationship I’m interested in. Take an example mentioned above. Processing is complicated but simple software, which contains the relationship, and can be explored as well. And another example that I interested in and talked in a tutorial was about earthquake-stricken areas in China. There are numberless collapsed houses, which are made of a chaos world. Thousands of people lost their families, homes. Meanwhile, there is only one simple wish among them—to rebuild their homeland. When they face the messy place, how simple their dream is. I hope that I can go there to look for something can be explored.
At the same time, the project work can be developed more. I have explored the relationship of the surface and the three-dimensional space covered. The clean and simple surface is separating outside and inside. Actually, there are many pure surfaces covering the complicated truths. For example, parents always like shutting the door when they are quarrelling, which is covering up for their kids. The relationship among the parents, the door and the kids can be explored and presented. I may ask these questions for development, “Dose the surface works, or what’s the real function of it?” “What’s the kids thinking when they see the surface but know the facts?” “Is there any other surface covering between parents and children?” The issue is broad, not only exists here, but also many relationships. My project still has room for future developments. And if it be continued, the key for me will be keeping simple. Because I was good at making it complicated which I’ve found in my previous development.
In the interactive or digital media field, there is much more room to continue. Like my project, photos of architectures were not fresh, but after combined with the interactive work, they presented my aim better and understandable than only themselves. The technique will be an important tool, especially the significant Processing. I need to learn more and experiment more about Processing. The transformation by it is close to my theme sometimes. Like input a great number of data, and get simple visualized output. Anyway, technique is still a tool which can help presenting my thoughts well. In my opinion, developing and digging into a subject is much more important than technique in my future development.
Hongzhang711's Blog 