In response to the Odradek text the group Manual created a public event to illustrate the role of authorship within an interactive space. With reference to Lawrence Weiner’s work that redefines the artist/viewer relationship in the making of an artwork. "People look at the work and say, oh that's a feasible solution, and they use it and add their things to it and take things away - that's the point of design to move things on...." Lawrence Weiner. The logic of the “Join the Dots” piece relies in the instructions set out by the group Manual. The relationship to authorship is questioned when the engaging elements and/or tools for making this piece of work are handed over in the interactive space that allows the viewer to become influential in the production of the potential work. The potential work was giving limitations, these limitations were the three walls within an empty white room, the 3000 plus black dots on the white walls and the 100 coloured markers along with the instructions to “Join the Dots”. The authorship of this piece was placed within these limitations of the instructions. The audience are constructing an outcome for the space, which the group had no preconceived notions of. The idea of the influence by the viewer by the group was that they would create a piece of work that was at that time indeterminate by the group.
The cultural context of this piece of work is the use by general audiences; although this event was in a controlled environment within an art college, the set limitations can be applied to other controlled public spaces. The reaction to the space by the viewer was like a chain reaction that followed on from one spectator’s involvement and the disconnected influence from the group. The group holds no authorship to the finished piece; that belongs to the audience. The audiences participation was diverse and contained extreme understandings of joining the dots. The beginning of the day started with people using basic line drawings to connect the dots; which lead onto more abstract forms of line drawing to connect the dots. There was a leap from basic line to figurative representations within the random dots, an elephant, star constellations and little made-up figures appeared from the dots. The audience started to then give their own instructions for other participants to follow. An example of one was the made-up figures that had the black dots as their facial features that then asked for accessories to be added. “Hello we need hats, hair, glasses and other stuff plz” [sic]. The interaction with the space was limited to the audience; this could be seen as another limitation because the space was only accessible for one week. The group had never intended “Join the Dots” to remain in the space; it was another control element to the piece. It was then painted to its original white cube space.
The video piece that I have submitted as my representation of the groups work shows the progression of the spaces development by the spectator’s involvement. It highlights the diverse approach and the physical happenings during different times throughout the first day of the event and captures the different approaches to the same limitations by the general public.
The cultural context of this piece of work is the use by general audiences; although this event was in a controlled environment within an art college, the set limitations can be applied to other controlled public spaces. The reaction to the space by the viewer was like a chain reaction that followed on from one spectator’s involvement and the disconnected influence from the group. The group holds no authorship to the finished piece; that belongs to the audience. The audiences participation was diverse and contained extreme understandings of joining the dots. The beginning of the day started with people using basic line drawings to connect the dots; which lead onto more abstract forms of line drawing to connect the dots. There was a leap from basic line to figurative representations within the random dots, an elephant, star constellations and little made-up figures appeared from the dots. The audience started to then give their own instructions for other participants to follow. An example of one was the made-up figures that had the black dots as their facial features that then asked for accessories to be added. “Hello we need hats, hair, glasses and other stuff plz” [sic]. The interaction with the space was limited to the audience; this could be seen as another limitation because the space was only accessible for one week. The group had never intended “Join the Dots” to remain in the space; it was another control element to the piece. It was then painted to its original white cube space.
The video piece that I have submitted as my representation of the groups work shows the progression of the spaces development by the spectator’s involvement. It highlights the diverse approach and the physical happenings during different times throughout the first day of the event and captures the different approaches to the same limitations by the general public.
