Description of "Tropos" from Art 21...
In the article on Blackboard, the author discusses the way that Ann Hamilton uses language in a very physical way in her installations. How does this material representation of language invite both symbolism (based in the intellectual and rational mind) and emotion (based on irrational and instinctive human response)?
Ann Hamilton's installments represent language as symbolism based in the intellectual and rational mind because her installments are using language to "evacuate a space for non discursive ways of knowing." She is using language as a tangible material in order to achieve a new symbolic meaning, which is strange to most viewers because we do not immediately associate language as a material object. One example of this use is in her installment, "The Space Between Memory," where she uses the rhythm of the reader's enunciation, not the content of the text in or to achieve tangibility. Ann Hamilton's installments also represent language as an emotion based on irrational and instinctive human response because her installments are able to provoke certain emotions to the viewer through her transformation of language. She uses language, but as a transformation into ways that frustrate human comprehension. Some examples of the language in her installments includes whispering and "garbled speech." Ann Hamilton is challenging human emotions through language. Ultimately she believes that, "you have to trust the things you can't name...you feel through your body, you take in the world through your skin."
ReplyDeleteAnn Hamilton's installments challenge her viewers in ways that are unconventional and frustrating to comprehend. In an interview with Mary Coffey, Hamilton maintains that she is not trying to create a prelinguisitic language, but rather, Hamilton attempts to heighten the sensory perception of the attendent by "tilting" access to linguistics while comparing different modes of comprehension. In other words, Hamilton calls to attention the notion that humans instinctively trust the linguistic structure over other ways of comprehending. For instance, her use of garbled speech mixed in with morse code invoke an irrational and instinctive response. Further, she is able to invoke symbolism with her material representation of enunciation. The rhythm of the readers enunciation in "The Space Between Memory" form a tangible concept of linguistics.
ReplyDeleteIn the article we read for class, it talked about how many of Hamilton’s installations incorporate skewed perceptions of language that tend to evoke frustration. She uses elements like whispering and garbled speech, and when asked about the purpose of language in her work she says “you have to trust the things you can’t name” (p 80). This relates to psychoanalytical thinking because the mind becomes the subject. When reading her interview, I found it interesting that she wants her viewers to perceive the space of the installations- even down to senses like smell and temperature. To her, everyday produces a different installation because things are constantly changing even if these changes are not always very apparent.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnn Hamilton's installations "consistently undercuts language to evacuate a space for non-discursive ways of knowing." Hamilton's installations evoke a frustrated comprehension "such as barely audible whispering, or garbled speech." The materiality of language is emphasized through these actions and "the systematically, line-by-line, erasing, cutting or burning printed text." She claims that she is not removing the text to make a "prelinguistic sort of work." She erases the text because she wants to keep the space of perception open and if the text were to remain, our conscious mind and perception would feel confined to specific meanings. "You have to trust the things you can't name... You feel through your body, you take in the world through your skin."
ReplyDeleteAnn Hamilton explores language in a much different way than her viewers are used to. Hamilton's installations become symbolic when she takes something that her audience is used to seeing in one way and transforms it into something much more physical and emotional. Hamilton is quoted as saying "I'm very interested in the hierarchies of our habits of perception, and how, if something can be contained within the discursive structure of words, that we trust it will have more legitimacy than other kinds of information or ways of knowing" (80). In other words, Hamilton's work explores the idea of the viewer's dependence and security with regards to words and language. I love her concept of erasing, cutting, and even burning text in a way that not only generates frustration, but confusion. Words take on a new sense of importance and the viewer must learn to embrace this lack of clarity and normality.
ReplyDeleteAnn Hamilton’s installations use language in both a physical and psychological way, so as to bring “materiality of language” to the forefront of her viewers mind. In her installation the space between memory she has a graduate student enunciate a Swedish text. “It was not, however, the content of the text that mattered … but rather, the rhythm of the reader's enunciations that became of consequence” while the student is reading something that is logical and understandable, because Hamilton has taken it out of its context, and made it hard for people to comprehend, she creates frustration, because the viewer wants to rationalize and understand what is being spoken but cannot and feel uncomfortable because the language has become blatantly material. Instead of being something that is brushed aside, the language is brought forward and its incomprehensibility put into light stating that words like any other physical thing are material and mean nothing without the tied emotion/context that are interchangeable among different discourses and cultures. Words are superficial; it is the meanings and the actions of those words that make communication possible.
ReplyDeleteAnne Hamilton's unconventional use of language within her installation challenge and even frustrate her viewers. She states in an interview "I think that I am trying to take this access and tilt it, so that the felt-quality of the words is equal to, but not dominant over other kinds of sensory perceptions."(80) This idea of sensory perceptions is very interesting when it comes to the spoken word. Rather that focusing on what the words mean, something we are very accustomed to do, she focuses on the rhythms created by the speaker. By further transforming the language making it barely audible or garbled, Hamilton seems to break down the sounds of language into something much beyond the words it consist of.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting, almost ironic, to me that this particular artist is even the subject of one of our blog discussions. Through reading the article on Blackboard and the two articles posted above I got the sense that Anne Hamilton is attempting to get people to really experience her art and not necessarily define it through the use of language. Language as discussed in philosophical theories is incredibly fascinating, the question of to what extent language shapes our world and in large part our own minds is something that could take all your mental energy. It seems as though Hamilton is incorporating all the time and energy she has spent toying with the idea of language and the possibility that it may be something in life that must simply be felt, to inspire the viewer to reconsider their own ideas about language. I think the act of using language in the way Hamilton does very much coincides with the entire installation utilizing very surrealist visual forces which can be seen as propelling the viewer into a new way of thinking.
ReplyDeleteusing language in a physical way almost strips the meaning from it. Words have very concrete definitions but Ann Hamilton is trying to strip the definition away from them by breaking them down into individual letters and lines. The viewer then has to struggle with the tension between literal interpretation and emotional interpretation. This is not to say that the words are meaningless, only that the meaning (once understood) gives way to the much larger and abstract emotional response. For instance, the concrete theme of the textile in "ghost" can be literally articulated with spoken words or drawn text but breaking it down to a slow monotonous and layered whisper or a drawn line conveys this concrete meaning in an abstract way, adding an emotional factor.
ReplyDeleteAnn Hamilton in her installations uses language in an unconventional manner to portray complex metaphors to her viewers. In her more recent installations, Hamilton uses language in two ways, the literal and the theoretical. Both forms of interpretation are apparent in most of her works, yet interpretations of her pieces come more from the emotion derived in the viewer, rather then the clear cut meaning Hamilton is trying to install. Most of her pieces are quite abstract yet maintain a basic idea that can then be developed and expanded upon, depending on how far the viewer is willing to dig. Using different forms of language as an artistic medium is both bold and brilliant. The words she uses possess meaning, yet that literal meaning seems to be lost when such words are transformed and taken out of their original element. This then derives meaning, on a more emotional level, which can be hard to describe for a viewer, but can be easily felt. For instance, her installment “ghost” uses many different forms of language in layers. such that the meaning of the written words or the spoken words contains less importance compared to the overall experience of viewing the layers as a whole.
ReplyDelete