Some time ago I created a fired sculptural piece. I had never done anything like it before. I wasn’t following any rules and I had no expectation of a result other than my acceptance of what would emerge from the kiln.
My piece was about the natural atomic process of Spallation, an explosive reaction between high energy charged particles and solid matter. The collision expels particles from the object hit.
Taking this as a starting point, together with the wider background of global warming, Joanne’s work and our collaboration, I chose my materials carefully. A ceramic paste which I created using only ingredients that represent our project and some metals which signify the industrial (a contributor of emissions) and its damaging impact on global climate. The creative process was important too, involving intense heat, the unusual pairing of materials, melting, the risk of explosion, cooling and the transformation from something into something else.
I was, and still am entirely happy with the result, it encapsulates all I had wanted it to and works well assembled with further bits to form its whole. However, there are technical ‘improvements’ I could implement if I were to do it again, tiny tweaks which would make it even better.
Or would they?
Giving up control and embracing the accidental is not always straightforward. But replacing expectation with possibility is exciting and can be exceptionally rewarding.
The alternative is to fabricate particular results, making certain things happen to engineer what you want. But at what point does refining chance become a ‘manufactured’ outcome?
To see if I can find out, I’m making another version using knowledge gained from the first process to advance and ‘strengthen’ the second. So will it be a too-precise-imitation of the original, lacking authenticity? Or will it keep the true soul and all that I love about my enabled-but-largely-random piece?
Find out next time 😊