Introduction
I think of relief as an odd sibling to sculpture. It seems to exist somewhere in the sidelines of sculptural practices, but also can appear in drawing and painting if the pictorial plane is carried on raised surface. It is often included, and often unremarked, in discussions concerning sculpture, even though it clearly exists as thing of its own. It is this in-betweenness of relief that I am interested in, and it´s possibilities for artistic expression.
In this project I have researched through my artistic practice the relief as a form of expression. Central in my working has been the depth of projection from the wall; to use the negative space as a compositional strategy and the narrative qualities of the pictorial plane.
The main part of this PhD project, the artistic work, comprises of ceramic reliefs I have made between November 2018 – November 2022. I have used different ceramic techniques and materials, like wood firing and Parian clay to experiment with different artistic approaches to relief, and used residencies in combination with studio work to explore my practice and methodology.
BACKGROUND
This project has stemmed from a notion of relief´s unclear position in contemporary art. Relief exists as an implicit category, although it is a form of art and a defined concept in a self-evident, unquestionable manner. Last time relief was widely popular in art was during the late waves of modernism, around 1950´s and 60´s. There are no major contemporary exhibitions, research, or publications dedicated to it, even though internationally renowned artist work with it, like Erika Verzutti and Thomas Houseago. When looking at the writings about their works, reliefs are mentioned, but not discussed.
I tried tracking information from national and international institutions. Going through the online-archives of National Museum of Norway, Documenta, and MoMa, all show similar results. Searching in the National Museum´s collection shows around 600 works with images. These search results include tableware and other utilitarian objects with relief ornamentation, art from the 19th century, supraports, and even one hat. One contemporary ceramic relief by Irene Nordli from 2004 pops up. MoMa´s collection concentrates on art and gives less hits; only 530. Elizabeth Murrays paintings come up, original wood blocks used in printing, etchings and prints, sculptural reliefs from before 1970´s, Frank Stella´s metal reliefs from 1980´s. Random single examples occur when we dig for them, but the majority of the search results suggest an understanding of relief as a decorative and supplementary object rather than an art form in its own right.
The most recent thorough writing about reliefs I have found in connection to modernism, which starts to look at relief as an independent work of art instead of as crafted visual elements in architecture and monumental memorials.
When I started to ask basic questions about the artistic nature of relief, it was then that this research project started to take its shape. The research accompanies the artistic work, which is the project´s most valuable outcome. I have wanted to further understanding by asking questions like: what is at stake working with relief form today? What kind of artistic potential and expressive possibilities does ceramic relief have to offer?
IN BETWEEN PICTORAL AND SCULPTURAL SPACES
Relief is often made with a single material such as clay, wood, or stone, which is to say, from materials which can be modelled or carved. Sometimes reliefs are realized in other materials through the process of casting, taking shape in bronze, plaster and glass. Whereas a sculpture can be walked around and seen from different angles, a relief constrains the spectator´s viewpoint. It therefore can be said to exist between sculptural and pictorial spaces. The concept of relief builds on material economy; a large crowd of people can be portrayed on the picture plane through the contours on the material, pictorial illusion creating the impression that the scene extends beyond the relief´s surface.
What has inspired me to take up this topic is the ambiguous presence that relief has. It has the pictorial space of a picture, and the material expression of sculpture. It has a long history connected with architecture as more of an ornamental feature, and it occurs as art in public space. My initial thinking has been that it is this liminality that has made for its unrecognized presence in contemporary art obscure.
Jay De Feo´s (1929-89) work The Rose1, is a painting project on a monumental scale, and one which took the artist eight years to make. It started as an idea of a painting with a center, but over the years it expanded, and required a wooden support structure to be incorporated into the image so as to support the multiple layers of impasto. De Feo saw it as “a marriage between painting and sculpture”, and the piece ultimately ending up weighing close to 500 kg. It was first exhibited at the San Francisco Art Institute in 1969 where in order to protect it, it was first covered with plaster, and then finally a temporal wall was built in front of it and the space was turned into a conference room. I think this was because an art work by a woman back then was not considered that important. There it hid until 1995, when a curator from the Whitney Museum took the initiative to restore and transport it for permanent display after a special support system was made for it. Since it started as a painting it could barely hold the weight of the sculptural elements De Feo had added to it. At the Whitney Museum, where it is now on permanent display, it is categorized as a painting. Something about its monumentality, its sculptural presence resembles relief to me.
THE PROJECT'S TRAJECTORY
The project proposal I started this PhD with was looking at deskilling and reskilling, and the meaning of skill in contemporary art practice. This stemmed from witnessing ceramics breaking gradually into the field of fine art from the craft and the material-based art field, as well as from frustration with my own ceramic practice. Over time I had grown more resistant towards what I saw as a fetishizing of the making process, which I experienced as focused around traditionally craft-related techniques. I read the publication Sloppy Craft (2015) which describes “craft that is messy or unfinished looking in its execution or appearance, or both“2, and I could not help wondering what is the role of skill and learned models of making in practices and how can I explore these questions in and through my works? After trying to practice deskilling myself, it felt pretentious and as if I were simply illustrating a theory. As such I had to change the topic: my artistic work could not be about trying to hit some predetermined goals. It would not make good art or good artistic research.
The years leading up to the PhD I made mostly pieces which explored the concepts of the vessel and containment, which I see as one the main focuses when working with clay, but also something about which there is very little theoretical discourse. Artists like Andrew Lord, Kristina Riska, Nicole Cherubini and Takuro Kuwata have literally explored the vessel by using its historical references, cultural significance and the form´s space, both negative and positive. Artist Johannes Nagel explores containment through metaphorical vessels.3 Nagel´s pieces draw on an array of influences, and I find his works highly skilled and somehow free in their expression. His objects look sharp and blurry at the same time.
During this whole time my works were playing with two-dimensional and three-dimensional containers, from the negative cavities built in clay to the metaphorical ideas about carriers.
After deciding to look more into the relief as a form and finding out that it has a ghost-like presence in the contemporary art, I understood where my process and research had led me and decided to focus my project on it. Besides, the first thing I made when I started this project were reliefs, and I had carried out making them together with sculptures, so in a way this was a concern that had been present from the very beginning of the project. Because of the way ceramics is connected to the world, I think that the concept of containment is still associated in a way with reliefs.
Because of how the education in ceramics and around the material is structured, because of craft history, and what I would claim as unclear use of terminology, it has taken me some time to identify that clay is a material and ceramics is a process and a field. Both clay and ceramics are entangled in so many other fields from geology to paint industry, from everyday objects to sculpture, that I find it important for the development of this material and art medium to expand its understanding and presence in different fields.
Over the course of these four years it has become absolutely clear to me that artistic research can only happen through one´s practice. The work has to come first. In the beginning of the project I tried performing theory, which meant following some external ideas and this resulted in what was merely illustrative actions. I found the final focus during the last year of this project after I learned to listen to my finished works and ask the right questions.
NOTES ON ARTISTIC RESEARCH
I situate the relief in the field of sculpture, and I review its position in this context. At the same time, I trace my movement from ceramics towards sculptural and pictorial spaces. This research project contributes to the artistic research in the fields of ceramics. Only a handful of artistic research reflections in Norway have been written with ceramics being the main process in the practice. Similarly, there have been few Nordic PhD projects focusing on clay. There is a lot more research to be done, and this project is part of the conversation about what contemporary ceramics can be.
MY RESEARCH METHODS
In this project I have found understanding and developed my methodology through Pauline Olivero´s Deep Listening4, and James Gibson´s concept of affordances.5 Both of these methods have been a way for me to focus on the clay material and the relief form, and neither of these have previously been used as research methods in ceramics. I practice these methods to better understand and outline embodied knowledge related to clay and ceramics. A form of knowledge which can sometimes be hard to articulate. I work intuitively, which is not unusual at all when working with clay, and I have struggled to find satisfactory ways to approach my ways of working. I think I have used these methods mostly to understand the tacit knowledges that are related to my practice, but in doing so I have discovered that they can be used to comprehend almost anything.
Because ceramics is both a process and an artistic medium, these uses of the term make the available literature supply variable. I find the main discussions still centered around studio ceramics and the art-vs-craft discussion. I would like to read about discourses related to clay and ceramics, I am not so interested in the materiality or the craft. Because I have not been able to find the type of art texts about ceramics or relief I would have liked to read, I have looked for texts around painting and sculpture, contemporary and historical, that I have found relevant, because for me the qualities exhibited by these mediums are also those that relief makes use of. This has gradually moved me from ceramics towards picture and sculpture, and a moving away from thinking things in a relationship to ceramics.
The knowledge that arises through this project emerges in close connection to the artistic work. I have developed my practice, themes, and ways of working for years, and these continue in this project, but are contextualized and reflected with a new level of scrutiny. Through the original art works the artistic development unfolds, building consequently on the body of previous works.
RECLAIMING ARTISTIC RESEARCH
An artist, curator and writer Lucy Cotter defines artistic research as ”...not a separable phenomenon from art itself. Rather, it is capable of communicating art as an aspiration, an open-ended process and an open-ended object, which includes, but is in excess of itself as an artwork”.6 Reading Cotter´s book Reclaiming Artistic Research resonated with what are perhaps the core experiences of my own research, how engaging with materiality and dematerialized forms of knowledge unfolded in a way that would not necessarily conform to academic prescription. Cotter has worked in Europe and USA, where I think the artistic research is modelled more along the lines of general academic requirements. This is luckily not the case here in Norway, and where the artist is given much greater freedom to conduct and define their own research, and where the artistic result is the core of the research; the research through the art.
My practice concentrates on the process rather than concepts, and in a field of artistic research that seems better suited for a concept-based approach, this approach meets challenges. Concept-based art seems much more closely tied up to academic research. I see the artist/researcher´s roots as growing out from conceptual art, connected to the question around what was considered artistic work, and the tendency to reject the commodification of the art object. With this development the artist has, since the 60s, increasingly started to occupy new type of roles like those of researcher and more managerial type of positions through deskilling. My background is very different from this since my education and practice has been based around objects. It took me a while to start trusting that I was doing was valid in its own right.
ON WRITING
The artistic research model demands that the researcher moves between inside and outside positions; the artist who makes the works, and the artist researcher who tries to gain some distance to look at them and discuss them. I have found writing a good distancing tool.
Writing has guided my understanding around the topic of my research and made apparent the gaps in my thinking. The most difficult thing has been to write about clay. What are the important things about it? I know a lot about it, its techniques, and I probably say similar things that other people working with clay are saying.
I would particularly like to mention Caroline Slotte´s pioneering artistic research work in Norway, and her project that she finished in 2011. Through her writing in Second Hand Stories7 she, -despite not having any models to work from since she was one of the first artistic researchers in Norway, -lucidly shows what it means to conduct artistic research through one´s own practice.
I have written throughout the research project, but the actual text has only started to take form during the last year of the research. I have written to communicate about the process to a committee and the public, as well as use it as a self-reflective tool that aims to be self-critical as well. I have decided to write in English, as part of my higher education has been in that language and it feels most natural for me to use it when discussing art. As a non-native English speaker this is somewhat challenging. I can speak well enough, but not really express myself with the same freedom and precision as I would in my native language.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Part of the written reflection deploys affordances8 from design theory, a term which was coined by James. J. Gibson (1904-1979), who claimed that world was not only perceived in terms of the shape and spatial relationships but also in terms of object possibilities for (even contradictory) actions. Affordances seek to define qualities or properties in materials or designs, and their opportunity to action, within a context of circumstances. The advantages of this is the way it allows us to fathom both the specificity and generality of things as well as their limitations and their possibilities to contain.
Literary critic Caroline Levine has borrowed the idea of affordances from Gibson, but uses it in a broader sense in her books Forms,9 looking further beyond the affordances in their most immediate sense. For example, a pot as a form affords itself for cooking and serving food, to pour liquids into it, to contain, and all this kind of rather apparent potentials. It also can be turned upside down to cover something, or used as percussion instrument to create sound, i.e. a set of affordances that are not that obvious but within possibilities. This is more broadly connected to Levine´s book Forms, where she seeks to connect art and politics through forms, to explore formalism further in literature studies. Therefore, Levine asks what kind of different affordances does different forms make possible? What do they enclose and what do they leave outside?
By considering the different types of affordances of relief I seek to trace its position and possible ways of being. The various forms of relief suggest liminal positions between sculpture and image, craft and art, object and architecture, two-dimensional and three-dimensional expressions. I am interested in how moving between these different spaces can afford new forms of artistic engagement. I use affordances as a method to unpack the material specificity of clay and the ceramic processes related to them, to map out the potentials and limitations for the project.
ON RELIEF
In this chapter I write about relief´s history and present contemporary artists working with the aspects that are connected to relief. The ideas related to relief as an art form change and develop as the central topics get conceived and processed in new ways. I have contextualized the most important paths of exploration like the narrative and the negative space. I look at relief´s connection to architecture, and how this connection has impacted the history of relief.
ARTISTIC WORK – THE RELIEFS
The artistic work is the most important part of this research project. I attempt to bring you into my process through the works I have made during these last four years and reflect on them and around them, and how they get their titles. It is relief´s distance to the wall that has defined all my experiments. The time-space of the pictorial plane, and negative space have been the two main features that my works have dealt with varying results. I discuss the works I have made during these last four years and reflect on them and around them, and the way in which my works get their titles.
CLAY AND CERAMICS
This chapter looks at the material of clay, and the process of ceramics, and identifies elements of process and ways to work and my relationship with them, expanding on the disciplinary context of ceramics.
The bodily presence of clay embodies weight and brings forth form and scale, whereas coats of glazes melt as surface and minerals materialize as textures and colors. Mapping out of the respective affordances of clay and ceramics helps me to understand how clay materials and ceramic processes suspend the artistic expression in unique way, and are connected to the discussions and artistic research projects connected to the material in contemporary art field. Clay´s relationship to color, glaze and scale also gets addressed, and I reflect on how different approaches contribute to the sculptural expression of the relief in different ways.
I write about my relationship with clay and my approach to various ceramic processes in parallel with other artistic research projects that use clay and ceramics as their central material.
THE EXHIBITION POROUS WORLDS
The exhibition Porous Worlds is an in depth-meditation of the relief form, exploring its presence in the context of art exhibition through specially made architectural exposition devices. These devices make it possible to position the reliefs in these structures in different ways, hence further exploring the different spaces the form can contribute to. The selection of works presents works made from porcelain, stoneware, and Parian clay, in reduction firing with wood and gas, and oxidation from the last four years. I write about the unfolding of the planning process around the exhibition, how it has gone through different stages, and how I have arrived at the final decisions.
OUTCOME
This doctoral work comprises of an artistic work, which is presented to the public through the solo exhibition of Porous Worlds and an artistic reflection component, which consists of written texts and images. The solo show at the Hordaland Kunstsenter in Bergen takes place between 26.11.2022- 22.01.2023. The reflection material is delivered to the committee members in folders with appendix-material and will eventually be published and archived through the Research Catalogue online in 2023.