Sebastião Castelo Lopes UNIT 1 by Sebastião Castelo Lopes

Sebasti達o Castelo Lopes Unit 1 MA Drawing Wimbledon College of Arts

Contents 4 6 12 32 48

The Work Studio Practice A1 Squares Books

84 88 90 94 96 100

Exhibitions Essay Proposal Essay - Why do artists work? The reason Pecha Kucha - THE QUESTION: WHY? Lectures and Exhibitions Links

behind the making.

The Work Reflecting on the overall work that I produced, the idea that occurs me is that ‘it is what it is’ in all the senses of the expression. When my interest is not on the understanding of why or what is represented, but rather in the representation, mark-making, itself; it is what it is. When I constantly search for the possibility of been able to see the materials and, consequently, the materiality of those materials in the final piece; it is what it is. When I over-layer all the work that has been done to create a representation of a human figure with a solid and opaque layer of white paint, making it , visually, return to the first stage of the work (a white surface); it is what it is. When the idea of what is visible is the main one: the form, the colour, the composition, the contrast, the material; it is what it is. It is what it is. I was really certain of this words until I’ve started to work on the books. It’s interesting that, as in my work, the ideas are always changing but, as is possible to see in my work too, I insist on exposing them and, after that, layering them with the new ideas (not only layering visually but conceptually too). In the books the idea is different, it is more focussed on the experience of the spectator: Trying to create a relation between the viewer, the image and the text. The reason behind the text in the work has to do with the ambition to introduce another layer of complexity to the work (Not complexity in the sense of difficulty, but rather in a sense of more information to be possibly absorbed by the viewer). In this works, my idea was to give to the spectator the possibility to create a deeper relationship with the work, and I thought that the words with the partial abstract images will facilitate that experience. I, until now, continue to agree with this idea but, I don’t think that the final product is really working. If this particular work is, in a sense, much more to the viewer, I don’t think that the size of it is the appropriated neither the repetition and the amount of images and text in them. This characteristics are responsible, in my opinion, for a boring and painful experience while seeing them, which leads to a quick, unthought and unrelated experience between the spectator and the work. That being said, the process and the methods used are, in my opinion, fine but, specifically in the books, the final work is not strong, or is not working. Repetition, layering, erasing, combination of techniques; all of these acts are made with the propose of creating images that work, the main objective is the working factor. After that, they are presented singularly, in pairs, in tryptics or compiled in books and related with words or phrases that, as the visual works, are picked when they work by themselves. All of this steps are part of a process created with the objective of produce works that work.

STUDIO PRACTICE

Elizabeth Barrett Browning in the Perface of ‘Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s works‘ Vol.1, London 1903

1#, Mixed Media on Paper, 59,4 x 81,4 cm, 2015

2#, Mixed Media on Paper, 59,4 x 81,4 cm, 2015

3#, Mixed Media on Paper, 59,4 x 81,4 cm, 2015

4#, Mixed Media on Paper, 59,4 x 81,4 cm, 2015

5#, Mixed Media on Paper, 59,4 x 81,4 cm, 2015

SQUARES

1#, oil paint on wood, 20 x 20cm, 2015

2#, oil paint on wood, 20 x 20cm, 2015

3#, oil paint on wood, 20 x 20cm, 2015

4#, oil paint on wood, 20 x 20cm, 2015

5#, oil paint on wood, 20 x 20cm, 2015

6#, oil paint on wood, 20 x 20cm, 2015

7#,oil paint on wood, 60 x 20cm, 2015

BOOKS

They are books. They have collages but they aren’t collage books, they aren’t sketchbooks, they aren’t artists books because I don’t know what art is, they aren’t made for fun they are made to work, they aren’t a portfolio because they don’t intended to show my work they are the work, they could be seen as a inspirational source books but they aren’t for me, they aren’t instructional books because they don’t intend to teach you anything, I would like if somebody refers to them as poetry books but nobody does. They are books.

Work, mixed media on book, 20 x 16,5 cm, 2015

Full of the Conceptual Bullshit, mixed media on book, 20 x 16,5 cm, 2015

EXHIBITIONS

Proposal Why do we, as artists, work. The reason behind the making. One of the most discussed issues in art and drawing related essays seems to be to define what drawing is and what are his borders and boundaries. This essay is not interested in defining or thinking on what drawing or art are. As Auerbach writes on his interview to the documentary “To the Studio” (2005) ‘Hannah wrote me a letter, many years ago, asking me to appear on a program design to demystify painting, I refused, of course. The thing is, painting is mysterious and I don’t want to demystify it.’. Defining drawing does not seems relevant, in this essay, because I think that we (as artists) do not need to define it to be able to work. Another reason that is possible to present against trying to define this concepts is the fact that defining drawing is mostly a problem, so, I would, probably, end with a question without an answer. Note that not ending with an answer is not a problem, the problem is that I will spend time and fail on something that I think it is irrelevant, while I could spend time and fail on something that could be important and relevant to my work. Based on this, the questions that are intended to work on this essay, are questions about my work and what I find relevant for it. As the answer to what is drawing is not clear, I do not do what I do, to do it, in other words, I do not do the things that I do (my work) because I want to make drawings. My work does not end like it ends because I want it to be a drawing. The questions that will be addressed are why do artists do what they do, why do they mark things, for example, on a sheet of paper, there is something that makes them create pieces the way they create them. This fact must have an explanation, there must be a reason why. In this essay, in my opinion, it will be difficult to end with an exact conclusion. The idea is to create, if it is necessary, a new answer based on other artist’s answers to this question (Frank Auerbach and Francis Bacon). By analysing and comparing this artists answers, I intend to be able to understand more about what moves the artists to work, considering that it does not matter what kind of work they do because, after all, this essay is seeking the reason behind the making.

Bibliography Frank Auerbach – To The Studio – (29 Aug. 2005) * The south Bank Show: Francis Bacon, (1985) * Garner S. – Writing on Drawing, Chapter 2 Nailing the Liminal: The Difficulties of Defining Drawing, Deanna Petherbridge * Frank Auerbach: An interview with one of our greatest living painters http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-features/10336972/Frank-Auerbach-An-interview-with-one-of-our-greatest-living-painters.html *

Essay Why do artists work? The reason behind the making. One of the most discussed issues in art and drawing related essays seems to be to define what drawing is and what are the borders and boundaries. This essay is not interested in defining or thinking about what drawing or art are. As Auerbach (2005, To the Studio) writes on a letter for his interview to the documentary ‘Hannah wrote me a letter, many years ago, asking me to appear on a program design to demystify painting, I refused, of course. The thing is, painting is mysterious and I don’t want to demystify it’. Petherbridge (Writing on Drawing, pag.27) explains the attempt to describe drawing as ‘it invites frustration or obsession in attempting to clarify something which is slippery and irresolute in its fluid status as performative act and idea’. Defining drawing does not seem relevant in this essay, because I think that we, as artists, do not need to define it to be able to work. Another reason that it is possible to present against trying to define this concept is the fact that defining drawing is mostly a problem, so, I would, probably, end with a question without an answer. Note that not ending with an answer is not a problem, the problem is that I will spend time and fail on something that I think it is irrelevant, while I could spend time and fail on something that could be important and relevant to my work. Based on this, the questions that are intend to work on this essay are about my work and what I find relevant for it. As the answer to what is drawing is not clear, I do not do what I do, to do it, in other words, I do not do the things that I do, that is my work, because I want to make drawings. My work does not end like it ends because I want it to be a drawing. The questions that will be addressed are why do artists do what they do, why do they mark things, for example, on a sheet of paper, there is something that makes them create pieces the way they create them. This fact must have an explanation, there must be a reason why. So, why do artists work? Auerbach (2005, To the Studio) presents a response which is simultaneously rational and unthoughtful to a question about what drives him by replying that he does not necessarily question himself giving the reason that he has done this work for such a long time it is now what life is for him. This response is particularly pertinent as it reflects my own personal approach. To the same question in another interview with Rothschild (2013, An interview with one of our greatest living painters) Auerbach claims that ‘I just think I’ve got to get on with it’. He does not mention anything about art, drawing or painting, the reason behind why he is still working, is the fact that he had spent time doing it and, as a result, ‘this seems to me to be what life is for’ (2005, To the Studio). The answer notwithstanding the apparent simplicity, is arduous to give, as it essentially defends the idea that even doing this specific activity every day, the artist does not know why he does it, but he is sure that he will do it tomorrow even not knowing why. Substantially is an answer

that acknowledge the acceptance of our own ignorance (our as artists) about one of the activities that we think and spend more time on: our work. Francis Bacon was asked and had reflected on others work (specifically on Egyptian statues). Thenceforth he suggests a relevant answer, to the same question, that is intimately related to Humans (1985, The south Bank Show: Francis Bacon). I think is the greatest art that ever been done really. I think that the Egyptian thing about 200, 500 BC are the very great things that men as ever made. And you see? They were made by artisans, of course they have a religion reason behind him, and they are an attempt to defeat death, as all Egyptian art was. You may say that we are always trying to defeat death by leaving images, but it won’t make any differences, we where just been death for now. The time theme and, inevitably, the death and the Human afford to stop it, to reverse it or to suspend it in a picture was addressed too by Auerbach in his interview (2005, To The Studio) pointing that ‘somehow felt that, perhaps because for biographical reasons that life stepping by, whoever wonderful and however many glimpses of glory one got in it, in fact the time was devouring it and it was all sleeping away make me terribly sad, and that’s one… I did something to pin it down’. The preceding answer, have more to do with why Auerbach represents what he represents, in other words, I do not think that Auerbach answer has much to do with why do he work, but why he represents what he represents on his work. On the other hand, Bacon’s answer, about time and death, gives him a reason to work, to practice the activity. What pins the time is not what is represented, such as a question about the subject, but rather the act of representing itself. While talking about his own answer to the question ‘why do you work?’, Bacon (1985, The South Bank Show) responds to a series of questions, shaped by Bragg, with the objective of clarify his answer. Bacon open with an answer ‘reality is what exists, are you real?’, in turn Bragg tries to reflects back to Bacon with ‘I…’ although Bacon interrupts him with his own answer stating that ’For me you’re real, there you are Melvyn Bragg you’re absolutely real to me. There you are flesh and blood, before me. How do you gonna re-make that? How do you gonna make that in other art?’ Bragg counters with the first of two questions that are aimed to demystify Bacon’s answer ‘Why do you want to?’ Bacon responds to the first question ‘Because I want to … You may say: Why should you? But I want to remake in another medium the reality of the image that exists’ Bragg retaliate with ‘Why do you want to do that Francis?’ and Bacon, finally returns with the reason behind his making ’Because I like doing it, that’s because I happen to be a painter, that’s all’. When Bacon states ‘that’s because I happen to be a painter’, it is possible to deduce that he was essentially claiming that he does it because he has done it before and had spent years of his life doing it. It is deducible that the same lack of knowledge seems to affect him, so he just know that it is what he do, what he have always done, because of that,

because of all the time spent, he continuo to do it. Continuing the process of study Bacon’s answer is possible to conclude that, one other reason, has to do with the statement (1985, Francis Bacon) ‘I like to do it’ which presupposes some pleasure. This act of ‘remake the flex and blood in an art form’ is what Bacon likes, the act of, for him, painting itself. Thenceforth he defines it, that specific motive that he like to paint, the ‘flesh and blood’. This segment of Francis Bacon answer that has to do with the subject matter, in contrast to Auerbach answer about the same subject, has much more impact on the reason behind the act of work on Francis Bacon case. My reasoning wile thinking on this question was slow and difficult. I had an argument with myself debating the Auerbach and Bacon’s answers and trying to define my opinion on this matter. One of the notions that became clear from this exercise is that I do not work for the pleasure of doing art or a drawing because I do not know what are they, so I do not do my work with that ambition in mind. I do not need to fulfil my need for making art or a drawing, but I need to fulfil my need for making the things that I do. I pondered in a possibility to be for the pleasure that the final work itself gives. Seeing the piece could give pleasure and because of this, and in searching for this, an artist insists in the perpetuation of creating new work. Rapidly concluded that was not the final stage of the work that was the key factor. What is moving me it is the process of working itself, and working do not gives me pleasure. I do not feel the same when I look to the final piece as I feel when I am making it; in fact, wile I am creating it, I do not really know what I am feeling or if I am feeling anything. Francis Bacon, at the south Bank Show with Melvyn Bragg, gave an interesting answer and, somehow, identical to my opinion, when questioned if he feels anything when he paints, he said ‘no, I don’t feel anything when I do paintings at all, I have nothing to feel’ The question addressed on this essay and the possible answer that could come from it, is, more than important, intriguing to me. Is a theme that I frequently meditate on because is a question that have an answer that could affect my work. If it was possible to discover what is that moves artists to continue to work, if I could discover why I work, I could, for example, try to find another activity that moves me in the same way in other area. If it had been discovered that the artists work because they need to fulfil something that is possible to fulfil by other activity, that information could affect artists work to the point that it could take it to an end. Curiously that is not the case, this answer, I think, for now, do not interacts with my work, it just exists, is just another information. At first, when I have thought and tried to answer this question, I thought I was escaping the hard part of the answer when I has confronted with this explanation. After reading and listening to this artist answers I have started to feel much better about it. Being comfortable and accepting this answer is, substantially, being comfortable, accepting and recognising your own ignorance about your work, and in my opinion that way of thinking, in this case, its the most truthfully way to respond to this problem. Working because yesterday I have worked and, based on that, I will prob-

ably do the same tomorrow it is a very simple answer. When I think about it, it is the only thing that I definitely and fully know: that I work, that I do what I do, and that I will probably do it tomorrow based on the fact that I have done it yesterday. So, to this artists, the answer has to do, essentially, with time, time spent. They have done it so far, why will they stop now? The interesting fact behind this answer is the inability to justify this fact. It is possible to conclude that they work without knowing why, that is the answer for this essay question. Thinking on the answer, I noticed that it does not mean anything to them, they continue working: they think their work but they do not need to know the reason behind working, to work. They focus in what they are doing in order to get it done, that is the thing they do. They do not need to have the concept knowledge of what is art or what is drawing, they do not need to know the drawing boundaries, they do not need to know if what they are doing is considered drawing, or painting or art to work, and, I think, neither do I. To work they just need time to spend on it, they just need to continue working.

Bibliography Frank Auerbach – To The Studio – 29 Aug. 2005, DVD, Jake Auerbach Films Garner, S. –2012, Writing on Drawing, Chapter 2 Nailing the Liminal: The Difficulties of Defining Drawing, Deanna Petherbridge, pag.27 Rothschild, H. – 2013, ‘Frank Auerbach: An Interview with one of our Greatest Living Painters’, The Telegraph, 30 Sep. http://www.telegraph. co.uk/culture/art/art-features/10336972/Frank-Auerbach-An-interviewwith-one-of-our-greatest-living-painters.html The south Bank Show: Francis Bacon, 1985, TV Show, Sky Arts

PECHA KUCHA THE QUESTION: WHY? Hi, my name is Sebastião, I’m on MA Drawing and starting from now I’ll present you twenty Works that I like or that I often look at. Works that, visually, have a lot of similarities between themselves and with my own work. Works that I can say that I enjoy seeing and from whitch I pick up ideas. This are the things that I can say. The thing that I find most interesting about this works is not knowing why I like them. It is obvious that part of the reason behind the fact that this works appeal to me is the visual characteristics, the looks, the marks that, somehow, make this works interesting to me. It is this “somehow” that is the second part of the answer. The part that I don’t know neither what or how to respond. So my main question is: What makes me like this works? Why this kind of marks appeal to me and not others? By comparing the works that I’m showing you, it is possible to find the main visual characteristics that seems to interesting me : the lines, the fact that the process is, sometimes, perceptible by looking at the final piece, the lack of human figuration or the non evident human figuration, the minimalistic compositions, the black and white marks predominance, the amount of material that is used to make this works. But still, I can’t say what drag me into them in the first place. It is, for me, un-comprehensible and un-writable. I can’t translate this thing into words, and every time I try to do it or try to talk about it, feels like I’m blurring my own eyes with words that I now are lies, but that I insist to do. I insist on trying to understand and solve this mystery when it is already solved, the answer is: I don’t know. This, brilliant, answer saves me of re-think this question, (for a moment), because it is a rather simple and effective answer. But, as you can imagine, as all the other “rather simple and effective answers” we can always re-think, re-try and re-fail them.

LECTURES AND EXHIBITIONS

AGNES MARTIN TATE MODERN

FRANK AUERBACH TATE BRITAIN

The simplicity of the marks and the variety of the compositions that Agnes has in her work it ‘s extraordinary. The minimalistic, geometrical and straight lines were the beginning marks for her work that, for me, it’s very calm and ordered. The thing that interest me the most, in her work, (particularly in her drawings) was the amount of resources that she uses (very few: straight lines and composition) to achieve this massiveness of “message” or “feeling” to the viewer. It is, for me, extraordinary that a, apparently, simple and accessible grid, had such a profound, (profound not necessarily in a sense of conceptual difficulty, but in a sense of deep, of vast, of having to do with a lot of things) “something” that affects me, as a viewer, a lot. I can suppose that maybe the delicate and simplicity of the work are the things that, visually, I find most interesting on her work. The kick that this visual characteristics (her work) gave me I can’t explain.

This exhibition was extraordinary. The amount of material (paint) that Auerbach uses to create his works reflects, quite evidently, the time he spends on them. There were a lot of hours, days, spent, by Auerbach, on his work. The search, the failure, the analysis, the movement, they are all represented (in a certain way visible) in his work. Visually, his woks affect me in many ways. The fact that, sometimes, the canvas aren’t able to support the paint is, for me, beautiful to be able to observe in the final piece: a physical fact being part of a painting fact.

combined with the materiality of the paint it self, I think. That, for me, doesn’t happens on the landscape figurative images. In Frank Auerbach work, the thing that I find most interesting is that it is a bridge, specially on the portraits, when the accumulation of the oil paint matches with, for example, the anatomy of the face, between the sculpture and the painting as we classically know them.

In my opinion the human figurative works, work better than the landscape figurative ones. I don’t know why but, for me, they work better. I don’t know if this happens because I’m, as an artist, more used to work and to see human figurative images or if it has to do with the distance that the subject is from the painter (Auerbach). In the portraits the movement and the discrimination of the mussels (the lines, the directions) work really well when

Anne Marie Creamer LECTURE

Gregory Williams LECTURE

Ai Weiwei ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS

The idea that most interested me in this lecture was the way that Anne Marie Creamer thought and exhibit the ‘Meeting the Pied Piper in Brasov – A Paper Prologue’. The narrative variation present in it, the idea that the frames are drawings and the influence of the movement when changing the ‘frames’ gave to the work a action feel. It was very interesting to see the way that the artist uses her own movement to give motion to a series of static images.

Even without been able to catch all the information that was given in this lecture, the idea of searching for a process and, consequently, an unconscious drawing was very intriguing to me. Robert Rauschenberg with his two pieces called ‘Factum I’ and ‘Factum II’ intended to explore the idea of the insistence of chance, witch is possible to deduce, inexistence of unconscious in art. Being very familiar with this idea was useful to get in contact with another perspective an been able to access and study the processes to create this drawings. The idea of unconscious drawings still doesn’t fit me but the processes used to create this images will be, for sure, very useful to my practice.

It was my first time seeing Ai Weiwei’s work. The sense of scale, for me, was impressive and overwhelming as where the themes behind the works. It’s interesting for me to see that are something Pop on his attitude but not as much in his work (visually). I like the fact that even doing works that have a strong concept behind them and that intend to work beyond what are their appearance, he can archive, in my opinion in some works, a visual interest as well. The spectator feels engaged with the aesthetics and then proceeds to the reflection on the piece (what is visual works as a trigger).

David Musgrave Greengrassi Gallery

Sarah Woodfine Danielle Arnaud

I realy enjoyed the cleanness where the Musgrave exhibition was taking place. Six pieces in perfect harmony with the room and with themselves. Turning my attention to the pieces, in my opinion, the ones that work better are the drawings, specially the drawing of the card box. It was the only one that was, wile I was observing it, more than a perfect copy of a surface. I think that happens because of the overall grey tone of the drawing. That doesn’t happen in any other piece, when you see them from a distance they are the same as they are when them closer. In the card box one, from my experience, that doesn’t happen, there is some ambiguity when you look at it from a distance that intrigues you and create some curiosity, makes you come closer to the drawing and contemplate the marvellous work that was put in it.

In this exhibition the relation between drawing and sculpture were really well worked. The paper format works along with the drawing in it and visually, the works where beautiful. The format of the drawing creates with the viewer a relation similar to the one that is possible to create with a “classical” sculpture: the spectator has to walk around it to be able to experience fully the work, so the movement it very important and that usually in a drawing is not necessarily needed. Overall, in the exhibition, I really enjoyed the way that the lights were mounted, I thought it worked well with the pieces, that worked well themselves, and with the space.

ALBERTO GIACOMETTI NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY It is, and I don’t know why, difficult for me, to write about this exhibition. Perhaps because it was the first time that I saw his works at a museum, but I’ve study them for a long time, so what I’m going to write, probably, will be a mixture between what I’ve already know and thought about his works and the new experiences created wile seeing the works life for the first time. For me the work is all movement: the lines of the drawings, the finger marks on the sculptures, the quick marks from the brushes, all movement. The interesting thing is that, for me, the best characteristic of Giacometti’s work is the fact that in the final work it is possible to see all the work (time) that the artist put in it. The search for the figure it’s part of the figure it self. In the exhibition I really engaged with the fact that the curator created a room full of photography of Giacometti’s studio and, in the same room, the spectator was able to see a small film of Giacometti working on his studio. The speed, the movement, the indecision, the decision. Everything is present in his work.

Sebasti達o Castelo Lopes Unit 1 MA Drawing Wimbledon College of Arts

site http://sebastiaocl.wix.com/castelolopes facebook page https://www.facebook.com/sebastiaocastelolopes/ issuu page https://issuu.com/sebastiaocl

100