Friday, September 5, 2008

Beauty and wonder in the ritual of making


What drives us as artists and makers to do what we do? The repetitive actions and technical processes that I as a weaver understand as necessary to my creation of art may seem to some as mind-numbing, tedious, and even unnecessary. After a particularly labor-intensive day, I sometimes question my methods: why do I spend hours guiding hundreds of threads individually through my loom when I could just buy a piece of cloth? This care, this attention to the single units that are eventually swallowed into the entirety of the work, what purpose does it serve? Like many artists, part of it is related to compulsion: the performance and ritual of making a sculptural raw material like cloth feels as natural and necessary as breathing, it's something I must do to feel like myself. After reading Weschler's Mr. Wilson's Cabinet of Wonder, I found that there was one particular story that I kept returning to, and I realized that it spoke to me on this very level of artistic obsession. It's about a man named Hagop Sandaldijan, a sculptor who carved his work not out of blocks of marble but individual strands of human hair. In the book, Sandaldijan's son describes his process:
'He would wait until late at night,' Levon said, 'when we kids were in bed and the rumble from the nearby highways had subsided. Then he would hunch over his microscope and time his applications between heartbeats-- he was working at such an infinitesimal scale that he could recognize the stirings of his own pulse in the shudder of the instruments he was using.'
The act itself is a work of art, a ritualistic performance only for the maker: but what does it satisfy? I imagine this sculptor hunched intensely at his microscope, barely breathing, knowing the only evidence of his toil will be tiny marks in a strand of hair. Underlying this process is the search for an innermost essence or truth: that which might be seen through a microscope, between the pulse of one's own heart. In the irrationality of his work we catch a glimpse of living poetry, a testiment to purity and the human capacity for goodness, beauty beyond what words can articulate. This is the gift we are given as artists, makers, human beings. As I sit at my loom and pass lines of thread back and forth, trapping the evidence of my labor one strand at a time, I understand why Sandaldijan must perform his quiet ritual. In the rythm of my own hands, my breathing, and the soft rising and falling in this machine I conduct: I realize that I too am aware of my heartbeat.




1 comment:

Aaron McIntosh said...

Eloquently put thoughts into words, Andrea! I was also particulary drawn to the "hair sculptor" artist in Weschler's book. Talk about dedication to one's craft. This guy takes that cake!

I do want to point out though, that you make a moral judgement here:

"In the irrationality of his work we catch a glimpse of living poetry, a testiment to purity and the human capacity for goodness, beauty beyond what words can articulate."

Certainly, we can admire the skilled artist's hands as creating beautiful objects/ideas, and that there is a beauty in the actual use of the hands. But to assume that the maker, their hands and their objects are "pure" and indicative of "human goodness" are your personal constructions of humanity. In this sense, Sandaldijan's craft is more romanticized and "folk-ified" than given equity as fine art practice, which is a modernist notion, and a way in which folk artists were ghettoized and made separate from the art world.

Do all the trappings of our art education and refinement as critical thinkers make us any less "pure" as artists? If art could be "pure" what would it look like and who would make it?...Something to ponder.