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 understanding of the physical and psychological space, as can be seen in her House/Home Project (2012). She juxtaposed photos she took, and placed them back in their physical space. She describes this process as “almost like

7

projecting…[them]…back into the house in a physical way”, which may also be what Whiteread experienced as she replaced the object’s existence with its negative- spaced counterpart (Zompetti, 2013).

Zompetti studied the transition of her “home…to an installation space within a house” by “paying attention to the details…observing the space more carefully”. Whiteread processes her chosen objects in a similar way, as she carefully plans how to effectively remove traces from the original and transfer them to the casted negative space. In Zompetti’s case, this strategy altered the purpose of a structure which held cherished memories and time passing. Likewise, for Whiteread, this tactic managed to give the negative space a purpose.

Camera Obscura #1, with grid, mixed media (Mary Zompetti, 2012, House/Home Project)

Shallow Breath was exhibited in 1988, in Whiteread’s exhibition at Carlisle Gallery. She created the piece a few months after her father’s death from heart failure, implying the theme of death more heavily. It can be seen that the plaster cast of the bed parallels the physical appearance of a frail old man, and the title itself insinuates that the bed symbolises the ribcage protecting weak lungs. She anthropomorphises the bed by filling in a mattress she did not use personally. Her pieces become communal rather than individual.

8

Alongside Shallow Breath, other pieces were exhibited for the purpose of replicating the “feel” of a typical bedroom from Whiteread’s childhood. By using objects that she merely found, it allows the audience to make associations with their own childhood in response to a view of an artificially constructed generic bedroom. She includes a wardrobe (Closet), a dressing table (Mantle), a bed (Shallow Breath), and a hot water bottle (Torso) in the exhibition. To cast these objects, Whiteread needed to sacrifice their original form. She tore it apart in order to obtain casts of the hollow spaces within them, which aided her in the understanding of her own memories. The transformation of the Shallow Breath, plaster object into its surrounding negative space (Whiteread, 1988) solidifies its past, letting Whiteread study its remains more closely. This is similar to how Zompetti replaces old spaces with the photos. As Whiteread dismembered the furniture, she allowed it to transform physically. Its old characteristics are forgotten and the used domesticated objects, with their wear and tear, now stand alone with a renewed purpose.

Torso, plaster (Whiteread, 1988)

9

One famous work by Whiteread is House (1993), due to controversies surrounding its existence (Wroe, 2013). Many deemed it to be an “eye sore”, and yet it was also called an “exceptional piece of art” (Mullins, pg. 56). Zompetti commented that House was “particularly moving”, and that it was “easy to imagine…what kinds of memories or feelings lived within” (Zompetti, 2013) the Victorian house. In House, the original structure was essential in the creation of the new piece. She used concrete to create a new “skin” (Mullins, pg. 50) of the inside of the house, filling in spaces that usually go unnoticed. Whiteread and her team had to strip away the original pieces of the Victorian building, to reveal House. This is the same method she used in the casts of furniture. The concrete cast solidified more than a century’s worth of memories and traces of life, from the inverted windows to the pieces of wall paint stuck to the cast. The negative space that exists within the original house is now solid, making the old physical structure that stood on Grove Road non-existent. House serves as a memorial to Grove Road, as perhaps a tombstone for the old Victorian house that previously stood in its place. However, House was demolished in early 1994, after protests from the public in Britain. Whiteread’s intended temporary structure fell down, but it can be said that its demise is appropriate, as it now only exists in the memories of those who have seen and read about it. (Mullins, 2004)

House, concrete (Whiteread, 1993)

10

Peter Doig

Peter Doig is an artist who greatly uses paint as a medium, allowing him to approach memory in a way different to Whiteread. The Scottish painter intends to freeze a moment in time and invites the audience to experience it in his depicted landscape.

Growing up, Doig constantly travelled with his family due to his father’s line of work. As a result, his paintings illustrate sceneries and landscapes from different countries. He spent most of his childhood in , which led to the prominence of snowy scenes in his work. Doig uses heightened colours in most of his pieces, to evoke memories in the readers that will lead them to a certain time. He selects scenes that reflect a certain tinge of light, and he amplifies the effect through painting. His starting point is usually an image from a third-party source, which transports him to “memories or particular experiences” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 132). However, he approaches the subject of his own memories from a broad perspective and aims to make it relatable to the audience. Real events and individuals are referenced in his work, but Doig tends to distance himself from making his subjects specific. He sets out to use memory without making it overtly autobiographical, and for this reason, he remains ambiguous in his paintings.

Doig’s works are influenced by Canadian artists Paterson Ewen and Tom Thomson, who both create layers on the surface of a painting in order to Blotter, oil on canvas (Doig, 1993) mimic weather conditions. Doig’s Blotter (1993) embodies this influence, evident through the multiple layers used to create the reflecting ripples on the ice. Films like Tokyo Story (1953), by Yasujiro Ozu, made an impression on Doig, through its “measured stillness” (Searle, Scott and

11

Grenier, pg. 134). He applied this to his own work, Lapeyrouse Wall (2004), by creating an unsettling immobility seen in the man’s posture and the smoke wafting from the chimneys. Both are frozen, and we are left anticipating when the man’s foot will fall on the ground and the smoke will dissipate into the air. An eerie atmosphere is produced as the audience waits for the next moment with bated breath. David Milne also affected Doig’s approach towards landscapes. Milne distances himself from the landscape, but also is “quite specific at the same time” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 131), which Doig does in most of his works (Searle, et al., 2012)

Lapeyrouse Wall, oil on canvas (Doig, 2004)

Doig’s method of “painting…by proxy” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 30) seems to have started when he painted Friday 13th (1987). The movie Friday the 13th (1980) by Sean Cunningham is directly referenced in Doig’s painting. As Doig’s only work in this nature, it is the root of his eventual works, leading him to change the course of his work into that of substituting images for memories. Friday 13th (1987),

12

painted from a still, separated from the original movie scene, now shows a young girl gazing at her reflection on the surface of the water. The situation is now somewhat romanticised, as the new depiction overtakes the old. (Jeffries, 2012)

Most of Doig’s paintings in the 1990s show landscapes covered in snow, like White Creep (1995-1996). Despite being located in at the time, he was drawn towards his childhood in Canada, as he “can’t get away from it” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 131). Whiteness overtakes the canvas, but it is not blinding. (Schirn Kunsthalle , 2009) There is, however, an eerie stillness and sentimental fragility that suggest bareness and uncertainty. Perhaps, this stems from the constant uprooting he experienced as a child. He defends that these are “invented scenes, and elisions of fact and fiction” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 60), which begins once imagination takes over as he paints. Doig stumbles upon images that trigger a memory within him, and consequently, he creates a piece which infuses his reality with his romanticism.

White Creep, oil on canvas (Doig, 1995-1996)

13

Doig keeps his distance from his subjects, as can be seen in Hitchhiker (1989-1990). Doig painted it right upon his return to England, after two years in Montreal. The eye-catching red truck provides the only splash of bright colour on the canvas. It is on a journey with an unknown destination, which is how Doig felt towards his livelihood at the time. He undertakes the concept of continuously falling out of place while his memories are pushed to the back of his mind. To achieve this, he uses multiple layers. This isn’t confined to the story or scene, but also reflected in his use of oil paints. In this particular piece, Doig uses postal bags stretched across a frame, instead of his usual canvas cloth. Postal bags may hint upon the continuous journey that Doig found himself on, after he became unsure of the way his career as a painter was going. It may also mean that there is a road that continues beyond the canvas, and our minds are not confined to what Doig has presented to us. (Searle, et al., 2012)

The painting that popularised Peter Doig was White Canoe (1990-1991), due to the attention it received for setting the record as the highest-priced painting auctioned by a living European artist. There is human presence seen in his painting, as evidence of “habitation” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 16), showing the relationship between the landscape and humans. The tranquillity in the scene is disconcerting, as the feeling of “ripe decay” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 73) shrouds the viewers. Confusion is also evident in the layers of paint that Doig uses, as he varies the thickness of the paint and the amount of lines throughout the painting. His uncertainty and ambiguity is seen by viewers in his layers and details, as the lake relentlessly shifts and moves. We see the painting in a surreal state, overwhelmed with the details and their indefiniteness. There is an innovative obscurity in how Doig practically fills the canvas with half-hidden decomposed tree stumps, and diverts the viewer’s attention away from the slumped body in the canoe. Through White Canoe, he has examined his previous work, Friday 13th, in a different light. He revises its form and adds more memory-inducing details in the piece, by the “proliferation of matter on the surface of the canvas” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 135). In this way, his own personal thoughts from when he painted Friday 13th are now incorporated in his revisiting of White Canoe. (, 2005)

14

Hitchhiker, oil on postal bags (Doig, 1989-1990)

White Canoe, oil on canvas (Doig, 1990-1991)

15

Similarities and Differences

Whiteread and Doig evoke a feeling of discomfort in viewers through their works. Their interpretations and presentations allow the audience to experience this in different ways. Whiteread’s plaster casts are inverted forms of domesticated objects. For viewers, this makes the pieces almost indecipherable, as we see the negative space solidified (Jones, 2012). The sculpture is familiar, but the viewer is prompted to sift through their personal memories in order to recognise the object. Meanwhile, Doig’s paintings are disconcerting due to their stillness. Viewers cannot escape the “sense of awkwardness” (Searle, Scott and Grenier, pg. 140) in his work, practically suffocating in it. This uneasiness is also found in some of Whiteread’s work, such as Ghost (1990). She “mummified the air in the room” (Mullins, pg. 23) by casting a house and filling in negative spaces. The viewer is disoriented, as the room is seen inversely. (Mullins, 2004)

Ghost, concrete panels (Whiteread, 1990)

For both artists, architectural considerations are taken in order to create their works, as they are reconstituting something previously built. Whiteread researched into building a new foundation within the structure intended to be casted for House.

16

As she had done with the pieces of furniture, she used the same process which left the house as a carcass (Mullins, 2004). Similarly, since Doig painted actual buildings in some of his work, he must also take into account the architectural form. He is constructing the landscape through his own perspective, but continues to let the viewers interpret the scene through their own eyes. The central groundwork of the house in The Architect’s Home in the Ravine (1991) is evident, despite the fact that it is covered by branches. The house’s structure is still decipherable behind the melee of trees, showing how Doig carefully studied the original home. (Searle, et al., 2012).

The Architect’s Home in the Ravine, oil on canvas (Doig, 1991)

The obvious difference between the two artists is the media they utilise in their work. Peter Doig mainly uses oil paints for his pieces. It allows him to use the layering technique, and scrub surfaces to make them thinner. This method mimics the weather conditions that Doig wants to reflect on his canvas for the sceneries (Searle, et al., 2012). Rachel Whiteread, on the other hand, solely uses three- dimensional media for her sculptures, such as concrete and plaster, which can capture the smallest cracks in a structure. She uses a more varied choice of media

17

than Doig, in order to mimic the physical properties of the object she casts. (Mullins, 2004)

Their sources of objects also differ, despite both artists’ repurposing. Whiteread scours for items that have specifically been worn through use over the years, and she purposefully finds objects which contain memories in their negative space, like Eva Hesse and Alison Wilding. This means that she aims to show the “visual reminders” (Mullins, pg. 23) of life, even if it did not co-exist with the objects anymore. In doing so, she successfully manages to make the pieces impersonal as she has no direct use of the object.

Doig’s prompt for the creation of his work is quite unsystematic. He sometimes comes across postcards while on holiday which evoke memories of his childhood in one way or another, and uses them for his paintings. He has a more spontaneous reaction to certain objects, stumbling upon them. It serves as a map for his work, rather than a foundation, like Whiteread’s. He is guided by the images he decides to use in his work, using them as a surrogate for his own memories. This is unlike Whiteread, who has to physically use the objects before producing her pieces. (Searle, et al., 2012)

Another contrast between the two artists is the way they present memories in their work. Doig wants to shift the place of origin and instil it with his personally- created thoughts. However, he retains deliberate references to the source, as can be seen in Friday 13th. This is unlike Whiteread, who deliberately sacrifices the original object to make way for the new piece. With the dissection of the original object, only clues of its prior existence are left behind. Even if this is so, Whiteread’s aim is to capture the traces of life left in an object, while Doig’s is to revisit memories and infuse it with his imagined scenes.

18

Conclusion

In conclusion, Doig and Whiteread both acknowledge the fact that memories exist in our surroundings, and are not confined to only human minds. They notice how everyday objects contain memories, and they transform these into artwork that reflects the audience’s memories. They use different techniques, and media, in order to elicit a reaction from viewers. Doig paints in order to portray scenes inspired by generic images, while Whiteread forms sculptures which capture the negative spaces of an object. Both artists present their remembrance in different ways, by utilising impersonal objects as sources of inspiration. This allowed them to depict a universal construct of memory, which affected the audience in a subjective way, as their own memories are brought to mind.

Rachel Whiteread’s manipulation of pieces discarded through time permitted her audience to see inverted versions of familiar objects. Her controversial large- scale piece resulted in nationwide attention, which made her a household name in the UK. Peter Doig, however, layers paint on a surface to depict scenes in his work, which transports the audience back to when they saw places similar to his paintings. His work’s unsettling, surreal atmosphere holds the audience’s interest, and it is this peculiarity that sold White Canoe at such a high price. (Mendelsohn, 2009)

In my research of the two artists, and interview with Mary Zompetti, I saw how memories, an abstract and personal concept, can be physically touched and relatable to all individuals. Even if memories are personal, through Whiteread and Doig’s utilitarianism approach, they have given a successful portrayal of memories accessible to their audience. This has made them into prolific artists to this day, as they continue to create pieces which epitomises memories.

19

Appendix A

1) Please comment on how Rachel Whiteread and Peter Doig incorporate memories in their works. In your opinion, is one of them more successful? If so why?

2) In your House/Home project, you mentioned that you considered the ‘psychological imprints of memory within’. How does an artist decide which memories deserve to be archived, and how do you think Whiteread and Doig do this with regards to their own work? What strategies did you find effective for addressing the topic of memory in your own work?

When I began photographing my home, before I had conceived of the House/Home Project, I was interested seeing how the energy of the space, or the emotions experienced in the space, could be captured by the camera. I strove to utilize light and shadow to communicate the mood of the moment. When I look back at those photographs, I remember how I felt, and how the house felt, when I took them. That said, it wasn't a decision to archive certain memories but not others but rather an ongoing attempt to understand the space - both physical and psychological - with my camera. When I decided to do the House/Home Project as an installation, I chose photographs that could be re-inserted back into the house in places that could attempt to communicate a variety of emotional experiences had within the same space. The movement of light through the house, and how it changed continuously, served as a metaphor for that changing psychological experience. The idea of "house" referred to the physical space, and "home" referred to the psychological space or idea. During this time, I was reading Gaston Bachelard's book, The Poetics of Space. You might find it interesting.

As far as the idea of memory is concerned outside of the concept of the installation, I found the camera as an optical tool to be an interesting analogy for the concept of memory. When we reevaluate photographs over time, our experience or reliving of those memories is mutable - it constantly changes and the idea truth can become slippery as information is re-contextualized. There is an idea that the photograph is "evidence" or something concrete - but really, i would suggest that it is merely a fractional moment taken from the flow of time. Every viewer can bring their own

20

interpretation to it. I saw an artist talk by artist Liz Deschenes - in that talk, she suggested that all photographs are abstract - this idea stayed with me as my work evolved, and I began to consider the idea that perhaps memory is an abstraction as well.

In the vein of this comparison between memory and the photograph, I have enjoyed the words of Susan Sontag from "On Photography" - "The ultimate wisdom of the photographic image is to say: ‘There is the surface. Now think – or rather feel, intuit – what is beyond it, what reality must be like if it looks this way.’ Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation and fantasy."

I became interested in Rachel Whiteread's work because I found it fascinating how she captured the non-visible - the internal space of the house - in a tangible way, with concrete. I found her installation "House" in London to be particularly moving. The physical space we can't ordinarily see became solid, and it was easy to imagine from there what kinds of memories or feelings lived within that once non-tangible space that became solid. Was that energy captured in the concrete? I would ask also - do you believe that Whiteread's work is about memory?

I am not overly familiar with the work of Peter Doig, so I don't feel informed enough to comment.

21

Appendix B

1) Once you re-insert the photographs back into the house, does it help you in understanding the space-- emotionally, physically, and psychologically? Does this method sort of give these spaces in the house a new purpose?

2) In contrast to how photographs are abstract, do you think that Whiteread solidifying a physical space limits a viewer's interpretation of her work?

Yes - reinserting the photographs definitely helped me to understand the space differently in several ways. Whenever I looked back at a photograph I took in the house, I could remember the emotional experience I was having at the time of exposure. Placing those photos back into the physical space was almost like projecting those memories or experiences back into the house in a physical way. It also helped me to understand the house's architectural structure differently - I think because I was paying attention to the details by observing the space more carefully. When I started photographing the light's movement, it helped me understand how the light interacted with the house in really specific ways. It was interesting for me to place those photographs of light's movement back into spaces where the light had interacted in the past and to see how the perception of color is affected by light. I believe that it gave the house a new purpose as the physical space shifted from being my home (with all of the emotional implications of the concept) to an installation space within a house (a physical structure).

I did an interview and a review was written just after the installation was created (when it was fresher in my mind) - here's a link to it if that's helpful: http://www.7dvt.com/2012home-where-art

As for Whiteread and your question - I don't see the interpretation as limited because it's solid - I would imagine that the experience of seeing something so large and solid is rather moving - and ambiguous at first interaction.

22

Bibliography

Danto, Arthur. "All About Eva." The Nation. The Nation, 28 June 2006. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. .

Gagosian Gallery. "Rachel Whiteread - Gagosian Gallery." Gagosian. Gagosian Gallery, n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2013. .

"Interview with Mary Zompetti on Rachel Whiteread." E-mail interview. 10 Sept. 2013.

Jones, Jonathan. "Rachel Whiteread Is Britain's Greatest Living Artist." Theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 14 Dec. 2012. Web. 18 May 2013. .

Jeffries, Stuart. "Peter Doig: The Outsider Comes Home." . Guardian News and Media, 06 Sept. 2012. Web. 18 May 2013. .

Luhring Augustine. "Rachel Whiteread - Luhring Augustine." Luhring Augustine. Luhring Augustine, n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2013. .

Mendelsohn, Meredith. "Artist Dossier: Peter Doig." Blouin Art Info. Blouin Art Info, 26 Jan. 2009. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. .

Mullins, Charlotte. Rachel Whiteread. London: Publishing, 2004. Print.

Nicholson, Octavia. "THE COLLECTION." MoMA.org. Oxford University Press, 2009. Web. 08 Dec. 2013. .

23

O'Hagan, Sean. "Peter Doig: The Art of the Foreign." The Observer. Guardian News and Media, 28 July 2013. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. .

Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt. "PETER DOIG." YouTube. YouTube, 18 Feb. 2009. Web. 27 Apr. 2013. .

Searle, Adrian, Kitty Scott, and Catherine Grenier. Peter Doig. London: Ltd., 2012. Print.

Saatchi Gallery. "Peter Doig." Saatchi Gallery. Saatchi Gallery, n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. .

Wroe, Nicholas. "Rachel Whiteread: A Life in Art." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 06 Apr. 2013. Web. 18 May 2013. .

24