“How Are Memories Explored in Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig's

IB Vis Arts with mz A Extended Essay in Visual Art “How are memories explored in Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig’s works?” Jeiel Natunay May 2013 Word Count: 3, 750 Number of Pages: 24 i IB Vis Arts with mz A Table of Contents Cover Page …………………………………………………………………..….……….. i Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………….. ii Title Page ……………………………………………………………………….……….. iii Abstract ……………………………………………………………….…………………. iv Essay Introduction ……………………………………………………………………….. 5 Rachel Whiteread ………………………………………………………………... 6 Peter Doig ………………………………………………………………………… 11 Similarities and Differences …………………………………………………….. 16 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………... 19 Appendix A ……………………………………………………………………………….. 20 Appendix B ……………………………………………………………………………….. 22 Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………. 23 ii IB Vis Arts with mz A “How are memories explored in Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig’s works?” Embankment, white polyethylene (Whiteread, 2005-2006) Orange Sunshine, oil on canvas (Doig, 1995) iii IB Vis Arts with mz A Abstract This essay examines the question “How are memories explored in Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig’s works?” Our present and future are built upon our past, which we mainly access through memories. Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig are two artists who focus on the personal and intangible subject of memory. Their work acknowledges the audience’s ability to impose their own memories onto individual pieces. They successfully convey their ideas, despite using different media and finding inspiration from various sources. Doig and Whiteread explore the possibility of memories being captured through surroundings, and mundane things. Whiteread collects evidence of human presence in the negative space surrounding objects, while Doig focuses on the landscape where memories are made. They embark on this topic via a variety of artist influences and media, which creates differences and similarities in the execution of concepts in their work. A relatable image of memory is constructed by Doig and Whiteread for the audience, to make their works effective. The audience’s own experiences fill in the ambiguity present in both artists’ works. This urges them to impose their personal thoughts onto the generic scenes that Doig paints and the negative spaces of domestic objects that Whiteread sculpts. I interviewed Mary Zompetti, a contemporary American artist, to gain insights from her perspective. She commented on one of Rachel Whiteread’s most popular work, House, and the implications of studying memory for the sake of art. I have learnt that Whiteread and Doig portray memories in their work through strategies specific to their own explorations. Although it is a topic that is incredibly personal, they distance themselves from the subject and consolidate memories with scenes or objects to make their pieces more relevant to the audience. iv Introduction Memories are important to all of us. They remind us of our past, which is the foundation of our present and future. Their significance to individuals is accentuated through the intimate relationship each person has with their memories. The study of the subject can be invasive and difficult to quantify. Two artists who attempt to reproduce the subjective and abstract nature of memory through their works are Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig. Rachel Whiteread is a top British contemporary artist who focuses on exploring memories through her sculptures, putting emphasis on the solidification of negative spaces (Gagosian Gallery, 2013). In turn, Peter Doig, a Scottish painter, paints memories which are evoked by generic images, leading to his method of “painting…by proxy” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 30) reflected in his work. Despite Whiteread and Doig’s focus on the topic of memories, they use different media and gain inspiration through diverse original sources for their work. Assorted techniques are also used by both artists because of their own mediums, in order to present their personal views. By approaching the subject of memories in an open-ended way, they manage to successfully evoke subjective reactions from the audience. Both artists present their recollections in different ways, but in the process of doing so, they apply various strategies. Doig centres on the landscape surrounding events, while Whiteread highlights the forgotten traces left in domestic objects. Along with their artist influences, this establishes a degree of similarity and difference in the two contemporary artists, which lead to my research question, “How are memories explored in Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig’s works?” Peter Doig and Rachel Whiteread attempt to suggest certain memories to the audience through their chosen subjects. A sense of utilitarianism is evident in their works, as the two artists separate themselves from the subject with the intention of raising a personal memory within a viewer. Whiteread reminds the viewer of forgotten memories abandoned in everyday objects, while Doig induces a “dream- like” (O'Hagan, 2013) feeling in his paintings to show remembrance. 5 Rachel Whiteread One way that Rachel Whiteread captures forgotten memories is through the solidification of negative space. She recognised it as a way to physical and mental transformation, through its rejection of old attributes once solidified. The object is given new characteristics, which fascinated Whiteread, as it “transformed into something altogether different” (Mullins, pg. 8). The mental transformation is experienced by the audience, as we view the objects from a different perspective. Our previous perception of domestic objects changes when we see a physical representation of the negative space around them. As viewers, we are now able to see the non-tangible spaces that surround the objects, once Whiteread captures it with plaster. They become “eerie ghosts of their former selves” (Luhring Augustine, 2010). Initially, Whiteread experimented with wax, through moulding parts of her body. Wax may represent human skin, as its fragility and texture is mimicked by the compound. Historically, it has been associated with death, as it is used in the creation of candles and death masks. These two objects are used as remembrance of the dead, which references the pervasive theme of death seen in Whiteread’s work. Its morbid connotation causes discomfort in viewers, because of how Whiteread uses it to envelop the living. In her early years, Whiteread was intrigued by Eva Hesse’s works. Hesse used “delicate materials” (Mullins, pg. 8), such as latex, cloth, and masonite. Hesse created a solid piece, which highlighted its vulnerability as she played with the negative space, by the fragility of the media she used. Her chosen media was stained and “membrane-like” (qtd. in Danto, 2006). This eventually led to Whiteread’s interest in negative space and how it contains memories. Just as Hesse did, Whiteread reinvents the sculpture as she made the viewers see from the object’s perspective. Whiteread is also influenced by Alison Wilding, whose work had traces of humanity through its relationship with the carnal textures of materials. Wilding’s study of this correlation impacted Whiteread’s work, as she began to capture the imperfections and weariness of objects. Whiteread’s proficient use of delicate 6 materials to encompass the domesticity of objects reflected the importance of human presence. (Mullins, 2004). For the purpose of this essay, I interviewed Mary Zompetti, an American artist whose artworks are influenced by Rachel Whiteread’s use of negative space to encapsulate memory. Zompetti inverts the interior and exterior of a house, transforming it into a stimulating, thought-provoking landscape disturbing the familiar sense of “home”. This strategy is similar to Whiteread’s treatment of negative space in her pieces, by allowing the audience to view hints of an object’s past life, from its viewpoint. Whiteread aims to physically solidify what is abstract, such as memories. In our correspondence, Zompetti talked about how Whiteread captured the “non- tangible space…with the tangible” (Zompetti, 2013). This is evident in her use of plaster and concrete as solid physical representations of the negative space. Whiteread attempts to capture the traces of life in its existence among domestic objects. She highlights the role of furniture in our lives in order to reflect the “symbiotic relationship” (Mullins, pg. 11) between humans and furniture. Furniture has a life of its own, as it silently witnesses our everyday lives. Unknowingly, we leave behind traces on these objects, and they capture our presence. Whiteread considers furniture as a reflection of our lives, so her pieces were built on a human scale in order to liberate the audience’s experience. The audience is able to reflect on their own memories through her work. Instead of imposing her personal memories on the audience, she is “ambiguous” (Zompetti, 2013). The repurposing of the objects manages to detach the audience from their original use, highlighting the “absence and loss” (Nicholson, 2009). According to Whiteread, these are evident in the objects’ negative spaces, and these forgotten memories are what she attempts to salvage in her casts. Whiteread’s work is not an archive of memories, according to Zompetti. Rather, it is an “ongoing attempt” of “understand[ing] the space – both physical and psychological” (Zompetti, 2013). The artist does this to bring her message across to the audience, through exploring space from different perspectives. Zompetti’s work aids her in the

Load more