DRAWING, WRITING, ETC.:
–New Miscellany (2016-Present)
–Drawing Group (2015-Present)
–A slight so egregious it lingers beyond the dream (2015)
–The House without Orifices
–Oversized Beneath the Percolator
–Bonfire Night (2012)
–Whispers Project (2011-2012)
–Paolo vs. “The Man” (2011-2012)
–Dicework II (2008-2009)
–The Dead (2008)
–Dicework I (2008)
–The Messier Catalogue (2007)
–Brushstroke Diagrams (2006-2007)
–Tell Me What to Paint (2006)
Lives and works in Vancouver, Canada. Primarily interested in the following: a) Visual and textual lines; b) the antiseptic tempered by a quiver of the handmade; and c) the diagrammatic and/or explanatory, especially when cloaked in ostensible self-importance without necessarily being true, serious business. Adherence to stringent procedural methods allows for an iterative exploration of the above concepts ad infinitum [read more].
–Art for Life
–The Dead 2
–Hollingworth & Davie
–MAKE // BREAK // FIX
–The Pleasant Matthews
Site powered by WordPress.
The following is reproduced from a project on VerySmallKitchen:
I am very much interested in certain relationships between image and text. This interest is not only concerned with final forms, or products, but also with the processes “drawing” and “writing” through which the results are arrived at. I see parallels between grammatical structure and delineated form, especially within the sort of mental and physical groping exercised when working toward their refinement. The pictorial and verbal connections I attempt to handle in my practice are often nebulous at best, yet apparent enough for me to negotiate conceptually. However, once momentum has died down and all that remains is the final draft – the residue of process – it is the specifics of fiction, with its requisite plot and character(s), which tie together disparate visual and textual elements. Formally disconnected images band into a unified series through a titling system which reads like excerpts from an overarching narrative. At the same time, uncertain illustrational relationships between text and a visually cohesive set of images can be reinforced through the repetitive application of narrative continuity.
Tadeusz & Gregory are most certainly fictional, and possess potential for fluid identity. The idea of Tadeusz & Gregory is an intentionally vague set of relationships which can be played with in a variety of ways. Regardless of what is written about them, Tadeusz & Gregory may or may not be alike Mason and Dixon, Mason & Dixon, Harrison and Wood (but neither Harrison nor Wood), Reeves & Mortimer, Mark and Jeremy, or any of countless other (and not necessarily British) duos. However, Tadeusz & Gregory are definitely self-serious intellectuals whose research, of no fixed academic discipline, is likely insignificant to both their peers and the population at large. Yet the pair carry on while maintaining an impeccable work ethic. In turn, they celebrate their achievements and bemoan their failures.
Tadeusz & Gregory’s pairing as a duo carries with it the expectation of an act or routine. The nature of this enacted relationship is informed by what is committed in writing about the two colleagues, but is also influenced by expectations carried over from popular culture. The implied missing, or extra, identifying narrative information that is inherently present in excerption as a format lends itself to the malleability of the two characters’ association. This facilitates the conceit of the Excerpts series: that the titles are written as though excerpted from a greater completed story. However, there is largely no premeditated continuity in Excerpts. Thus flexibility in both the identity and interactive tendencies of the characters is useful for allowing the introduction or de-emphasis of landmarks and trajectories within the expanding fiction. And because the drawing and writing are so structurally and procedurally interwoven, enabling verbal improvisation encourages similar leeway in the realm of the pictorial.
Excerpts is an ongoing series of mostly drawings that are presented alongside titles, but these titles are in fact little bits of larger narratives. Some of the titles are not little, and instead span a paragraph or two. The words do not directly describe the pictures, nor do the pictures strictly illustrate the words; what instead occurs is a comparative examination of the often implicit ways in which a set of ideas can be conveyed simultaneously through fictive constructions and diagrammatic processes. Writing and drawing are here considered analogous operations, both actively groping towards formulation and definition through iterative reworking and refinement.
There are currently two types of rulesets: primary rulesets and meta-rulesets. Primary rulesets list instructions for the creation of a dicework. Normally only one ruleset will contribute to a specific dicework. Meta-rulesets introduce additional rules that adjust, modify, and/or negate one or more of the dictates present within a primary ruleset. Meta-rulesets undermine the authority of the dice in that the numerical result of a roll might demand a certain command listed in a primary ruleset to be carried out; however, a decree from a meta-ruleset will alter or nullify that command so that it cannot be executed. Certain exceptions appear in meta-rulesets that defer the meta-ruleset to various clauses present in primary rulesets. Occasionally primary rulesets may be written in such a way as to exert influence upon meta-rulesets. But if meta-rulesets are an attempt to sabotage the accidental will of the dice, they remain nothing more than a list of potential options. Ultimately the dice decide how the meta-rulesets will exert their influence. A balance of power is maintained between the deliberate and the accident. I am unable to act without the say-so of the dice, while the dice are unable to enforce without my contribution of actionable options.
Dicework II was in development between late 2008 and early 2009, but was never completed. None of the rulesets were ever used to produce any work.
Excerpts is an ongoing series of mostly drawings that are presented alongside titles, but these titles are in fact little bits of larger narratives. Some of the titles are not little, and instead span a paragraph or two. The words do not directly describe the pictures, nor do the pictures strictly illustrate the words; however, this is not to say that the visual and textual elements are wholly divorced from one another. Excerpts considers the processes of drawing (or painting) and writing to be absolutely analogous. Both possess the same active struggle from conception towards definition, as well as feature the same types of editing and restructuring utilised in the effort to achieve a condition of finish. At its most obvious, the narrative could sometimes be interpreted as explicating the procedure by which an image came to be. In other pairings, the endeavour by which a prose passage was composed is defined by the image. But more significantly, there is an overarching redefinition of how these two formally and conceptually disparate components relate to each other. Image is accompanied by – and synonymous to – text, and therefore text is always accompanied by – and synonymous to – image. It is logical then that text is always accompanied by text and image is always accompanied by image, despite appearances (at times text is literally accompanied by text, but might as well be image accompanied by image). The aim is to continue to work through this relationship between congruent and laborious pictorial and literary processes, as it offers the potential for a viably prolonged and dynamic practice within its simple framework.
2010. Ink on paper. 5 x 10 in.