Holga, Kodak Portra 400
prompts for musical performance on 8/6/17
Ben Lamar Gay, Katie Young, and Ryan Packard were given the following prompts for their improvised performance within my "Stay out come in stay in come out" installation on 8/6/17.
sound collage
Something surprising and kind of magical happened this past Sunday during a musical performance in conjunction with my installation on the lawn of Comfort Station. I had invited Katherine Young, Ryan Packard and Ben LaMar to improvise with the surrounding sounds based on some loose prompts provided by myself. When we set up the surrounding sounds included a large event across the street featuring rap battles, break-dancing competitions, and much more (for Chicagoans not familiar with the annual #writersbench event put on by Barry Allen and others... it's pretty incredible). The volume of the event seemed at first to be too loud for us to carry out this performance of discrete sounds, but the musicians graciously decided to give it a shot.
It was truly a unique sonic experience hearing the ambient bed of sound they created wrap around the beats and voices bleeding over from across the street. Part of my intention for this performance was to explore a notion of live sound collage, and the Writer's Bench event provided a whole lot of fodder for the musicians to juxtapose and play with. At times the two sonic zones operated separately, at other times they melded into one large, strange audio-organism that provided a very surreal soundtrack to everything happening--cars and people zipping by, wind blowing in the cicada-filled trees, the sun setting, dogs pooping...
Thank you to all who made it out for this event, and special thanks to Ben, Katie, and Ryan for their skills at sonic transmutation!
Differences in Permeability
Thanks to everyone who made it out to "Differences in Permeability" on Friday night, and extra special thanks to Allen Moore, Tracy Montes, and Rebecca Himelstein for reading these texts so thoughtfully!
Text Divination #3: Differences in Permeability
July 28th (Friday), 8pm, Comfort Station Lawn
"Differences in Permeability (Text Divination #3)" is a reading-performance, in conjunction with Jordan Martins' site specific installation "Stay out come in stay in come out" on the lawn of Comfort Station. Three readers situated within the installation will simultaneously read a set of related scripts, each of which scrambles various appropriated textual sources: technical descriptions of biochemical processes, first hand accounts of border crossing, observations about bird mating rituals, instructions for crowd control tactics, and dubious advice about flirtation from askmen.com.
Text composition and reading staging by Jordan Martins
Readers:
Allen Moore
Tracy Montes
Rebecca Himelstein
---------------------------------------------------
More about the Text Divinations series:
http://www.jordanmartins.com/text-divinations/
More about "Stay out come in stay in come out"...
http://www.jordanmartins.com/stay-out-come-in-stay-in-come-out/
"stay out come in stay in come out"(cloaking device #2) is a site specific, participatory installation. Installed on the lawn of Comfort Station in Logan Square for two months, the project consists of 6 barricade structures with a striped “dazzle” camouflage pattern based on the colors of the immediate surroundings of the Logan Square traffic circle. The patterns are designed to both attract attention and at the same time visually obfuscate the form of whatever or whomever is behind them. The barricades are constructed in a modular fashion to allow different configurations--a wall, a shelter, a fortress, a scattered cluster--with a bench built into the anterior side of each.
The barricade structure was chosen for its function as a barrier that is both firm but permeable: it marks a line between inside/outside, allowed/not-allowed, and public/private, but it functions differently according to who is implicitly or explicitly granted access to one side or the other. By making this installation re-configurable, various publics are encouraged to create their own spaces with it, or imagine how a structure that limits movement could be a space that is protective, inviting, or empowering."
0 Likes
Share
Stay out come in stay in come out: sound performance with Katherine Young, Ben Lamar Gay and Ryan Packard
August 6th (Sunday), 6:30pm
In conjunction with Jordan Martins' site specific installation "Stay out come in stay in come out" on the lawn of Comfort Station, Chicago improvisers Ryan Packard, Katherine Young and Ben Lamar Gay will perform a sonic response to the installation. Based on loose cues and guides provided by the artist, Young, Packard and Lamar Gay will improvise sounds reacting both to one another and surrounding ambient noise.
---------------------------------------------------
About "Stay out come in stay in come out"...
http://www.jordanmartins.com/stay-out-come-in-stay-in-come-out/
"stay out come in stay in come out"(cloaking device #2) is a site specific, participatory installation. Installed on the lawn of Comfort Station in Logan Square for two months, the project consists of 6 barricade structures with a striped “dazzle” camouflage pattern based on the colors of the immediate surroundings of the Logan Square traffic circle. The patterns are designed to both attract attention and at the same time visually obfuscate the form of whatever or whomever is behind them. The barricades are constructed in a modular fashion to allow different configurations--a wall, a shelter, a fortress, a scattered cluster--with a bench built into the anterior side of each.
The barricade structure was chosen for its function as a barrier that is both firm but permeable: it marks a line between inside/outside, allowed/not-allowed, and public/private, but it functions differently according to who is implicitly or explicitly granted access to one side or the other. By making this installation re-configurable, various publics are encouraged to create their own spaces with it, or imagine how a structure that limits movement could be a space that is protective, inviting, or empowering."
Bad at Sports interview
Thanks to Bad at Sports for interviewing Nina Yeboah, Felicia Holman and myself about the POWER Project at Comfort Station!
The POWER Project
I'm extremely proud of the programming coming together for The POWER Project this June at Comfort Station. We're partnering with the Art Leaders of Color Network (ALCN)--led by Felicia Holman and Brett Swinney--to produce daily events for the entirety of June. Brett and Felicia selected four members of the ALCN to take one week of the programming each, with the goal of having a variety of events that in some way provide Preparation, Organization, Wonderment, Empowerment, and Resistance.
This project is also emblematic of the kind of collaborative programming that I'm trying to establish at Comfort Station, where an outside organization or group is given full ownership and vision for the space and the Comfort Station team acts as facilitators to connect all the dots of the production.
Loudon Still Life (after Willem Van Aelst)
How easy is a bush a bear? Interview with Makenzi Fricker
In advance of my video exhibition at The Mission’s “SUB-MISSION” project space, Makenzi Fricker interviewed me about the work in the show…
Interview with Jordan Martins
How Easy is a Bush a Bear
March 11 – April 23, 2016
By Makenzi Fricker
MF: Although your work isn’t process-oriented, the creation of your videos is nonetheless very involved. Can you describe that process?
JM: My work with video the past few years has mostly been experimental, in the sense that I’ve been trying out different ideas without necessarily having a particular final piece in mind. This project at THE SUB-MISSION is one of my first attempts at sifting through all the various experiments to channel them into a specific experience. The clips that comprise this video installation are all dealing with principles identified by gestalt psychologists, camoufleurs, and other visual researchers that hone in on the peculiar ways in which the human brain is wired to process visual information. Techniques of unit-forming, unit-breaking, disruptive coloration, figure/ground blending, coincident disruption and others, are used in both a controlled studio environment and site-specific installations in natural settings. While these videos are not specifically demonstrative of any single principle, each combines various techniques that engage vision in a different way. I staged these videos both in studio and “in nature”.
Most of the studio based footage is essentially an installation of planes of fabric suspended a few inches apart, cut into in various ways and lit evenly to minimize the depth. I used mostly “loud” fabric patterns that contradict one another or otherwise create a kind of visual collapse. But I also tried to make these read as landscapes in some way. I carried out a similar process with printouts of scanner based collages I made, again cutting into them and moving them around to imply different kinds of depths and figure/ground relationships. I also shot footage in the woods in Wisconsin (summer) and Tennessee (winter), creating installations of bright colored flagging tape. These were more about overlaying a bold, geometric abstraction onto a natural landscape that was still integrated into it, as it both disrupts the landscape and completes it. I’m still figuring out why I’m doing these, but I’m partly curious about how the bright lines might erase the depth of the landscape, or perhaps how they impose a different visual framework onto it?
MF: In what contexts do the objects that comprise your collages usually appear?
JM: I often use source material whose everyday function is visually bold and conspicuous in a certain way, either in its color or pattern. I’ve been playing with neon flagging tape, the kind used to mark off areas for construction, surveying, or to highlight a point in an otherwise undifferentiated landscape. Its function is extremely condensed down to simply “standing out” visually. Moreover, it seems to occupy an intersection of the optical dimensions of color and a particular cultural semiotic coding: hue and saturation are chosen for their efficient means of being visibly distinct, but their use evokes a kind of official activity (surveying, construction, civic projects). Flagging tape hues aren’t assigned particular meanings the way red and green traffic lights are, for instance, yet they still assert themselves onto a context as a wholly “other” element, a colorful punctuation that resists integrating. The chromatic “otherness” of flagging tape can be so intense that it appears almost as a virtual set of lines superimposed over a visual field, rather than existing within space. The fabric patterns I use tend to be bold, but they include more “traditional” ones as well as pretty kitschy ones. I try to be fairly democratic in how I choose them, focusing more on their possible visual effects than their particular aesthetics. In the scanner collages I’ve been making recently (which mostly becomes source material for other collages and videos) I’m pulling from a lot of different sources, but I’m been particularly interested in football uniforms, tradition dress from Papua New Guinea, and nature photography.
MF: How do you decide how to compile objects? Is it meticulously planned or do you rely on subconscious, surrealist automatic methods?
JM: It’s basically an ongoing improvisation. There’s an overarching methodology to it for sure one that feeds insight from one experiment into the next but in each moment I’m just trying to be sensitive to the materials and conditions in a way that can tease out some new possibilities.
MF: For you, what is the relationship between collage and film?
JM: I’m not a film expert by any means, but from what I understand one of the biggest breakthroughs in the medium was Eisenstein’s radical use of montage: cutting and juxtaposing between disparate elements. That’s essentially an act of collage, cutting something to bring it closer to something else. This is a basic tool of even the most banal film now, so it’s fair to draw a direct connection between these two media. And I think it’s not accident that a lot of breakthroughs like this were happening in around the same time period the development of camouflage, modern film techniques, collage…
MF: Do you think that the act of filming neuters the materiality of your collaged objects?
JM: I might not use the word “neuter”, but I think it visually flattens and re-contextualizes the physical space of the objects. That’s an important effect for me, because it means that a viewer is less able to orient themselves in terms of scale, distance, figure/ground relationships, etc. But the goal is that this leads to some kind of reconstituted physicality or spatiality in the viewing.
MF: Gestalt theory, a subject concerned with psychology and visual perception, posits that the mind is predisposed to create order out of chaos. How do you apply this theory to your work?
JM: In many ways I’m trying to create visual fields that straddle that line between order and chaos. In both my 2D collages and my video pieces I’m trying to provide enough visual structure to “hook” a viewer while also leaving the composition unresolved or undifferentiated basically leaving enough space for their own perceptual instincts to give form to it. I’m also interested in the difference between passive and active perception for example, walking through the woods with no goal versus walking through the woods looking for something (foraging for mushrooms, for instance). When you’re looking for something discreet within a complicated visual field it’s not so much a matter of scanning every square inch of the landscape as it is relaxing your vision to sense small aberrations. Early Gestalt psychologists like Kurt Gottschaldt created visual puzzles with “embedded figures”, essentially camouflaging a simple abstract form within a more complex one, that require the viewer to shift their vision in order “solve” the puzzle. My video installation aims at a similar effect without having a specific solution to the puzzle.
MF: Are you, as in gestalt theory, more concerned with the sum of your videos/collages than the individual elements?
JM: That’s an interesting connection, and actually pretty accurate. I do think that all of my individual projects are pointing at something in common that isn’t completely intelligible in any one of them. And I tend to let things spill into one another: most of the work I make has elements that get folded into one another in different ways. So if you look at a set of recent collage works you’ll see specific forms repeated because I’ve generated a certain image and then sampled it across several individual pieces. I like the idea that someone could notice the pattern of that specific motif popping up in different contexts. Similarly, when I make videos it’s hard for me to create a hard endpoint it’s highly likely that the footage used in this particular installation will get reworked into other ones.
MF: How do you think earning your MFA in Brazil distinguishes your practice from those of artists trained in the United States?
JM: Good question! Working on an MFA in Brazil probably influenced my practice in innumerable ways that I’m not fully conscious of, but at the time a big part of the impetus to do it was immersing myself in a different language and artistic community. For one, having to learn a new language loosens certain connections in your brain and forms new ones, and I just felt that it would be an inherently fruitful context to try to make work in, purposefully disorienting myself in order to dislodge other pathways my practice could take. Much of my work there also revolved around just the experience of navigating a foreign city and culture literally the experience of figuring out the logic of the urban space or where to buy certain materials. Things operate differently and that challenged me to find new ways of making work. And, as much there is more and more a certain global “contemporary art” world, there really are discrete pockets of artistic communities out there that don’t reflect the same trends, aesthetics and presuppositions that one would find in programs in the US, so immersing myself in a different creative landscape helped me scrutinize my a work in a particular way.
MF: Is there a specific reference in the title, “How Easy is a Bush a Bear”?
JM: I lifted the title from a chapter of Roy R. Behren’s book “False Colors: Art, Design and Modern Camouflage”. Behren, in turn, was riffing on a passage from “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” where a character is referencing the paranoid imagination that takes over when you see something in the dark. It’s about the mutability of vision, how our own perception can trick us into seeing something that is not there, essentially a hallucination.
MF: How do you plan to transform THE SUB-MISSION space, and how do you see this project fitting into the narrative of your work as a whole?
JM: How Easy is a Bush a Bear is a two channel video installation dealing with conditions of visual perception. I want to create a space where a viewer can in fact question and recalibrate their perceptual faculties to a certain extent not only recognizing patterns and visual tensions, but also noticing how and when these patterns and tensions emerge. I’m loosely inspired by two precedents that treated vision didactically: Abbott Thayer’s early 20th century research into animal coloration which pretty much invented modern camouflage and early Soviet era “psychotechnics” labs that trained citizens to free themselves from “automatic perception” by demonstrating illusions of space, angles, and volume. Thayer used a simple stencil structure to show how patterns of animals corresponded to their natural environments, and psychotechnics labs were essentially rigorously constructed visual playgrounds that highlighted specific distortions. So, part of my idea for this installation is to take on that hypothetical model where vision is a trainable activity, and the exhibition space becomes the site for that.
My work in general has shifted more and more toward this interest in the dynamics of vision. I’ve worked with various collage methods for years, and I think there’s a natural link there. The act of collage not only creates a certain effect in the final piece, but it also cultivates a certain way of seeing, noticing the ruptures that occur when something is removed from its context; the reactions that arise when it is grafted onto another system; how the “edges” of these interactions engender different results if they are smoothly cut or jaggedly torn, seamlessly integrated or bluntly repelling each other.
Interview with Inside/Within
As a big fan of this site and the artists that it has profiled in the past few years, I was flattered to be included in this round! See the full interview (with their beautiful pictures) here.
Jordan Martin’s Mutating Phenotypes
Layers permeate each aspect of Jordan’s practice, collages produced in resin, flatbed scans, and on video. Currently producing work created on flatbed scanners, Jordan prints, cuts, and layers back in elements that include photographs, paint, and imagery from books. Moving these pieces around on the scanner, he attempts to finds the perfect composition, often reworking original source material until the audience is unable to tell which elements are scanned, photographed or painted.
Published February, 2016
I\W: How has your practice evolved from collage-based works in resin to distorted flatbed scans?
JM: Part of it is just the expedient factor of being able to generate my own collage content. For a long time I really liked the mining of books and other texts. I enjoyed having to hunt for each specific piece, but that allure kind of wore off and left me with the problem that once you spend that piece, you will never get it back. It can be cumbersome to always get new material. The texts that I could previously manipulate were all old, and for a while I really liked that. There is just a certain point with any collage work where you have to decide if the pastness of the source material is something you want to own, or is something that is just automatic. With the flatbed scanner I can take several images and experiment with arrangements and then make as many copies of it as I want. I can go to the library at North Park where I teach and get new books that I couldn’t normally alter and scan them into collages. I think working with the flatbed scanner began in a very practical manner, and it evolved into a different way of working that has now allowed an infinite reproducibility.
Why do you refer to these works as phenotypes?
A phenotype is a genetic form that has certain types of properties that have infinite variations. Digital media is a phenotype in that sense. I was thinking about how these same pieces of collage that are just moved differently are part of the same phenotype that I could theoretically makes hundreds of expressions from. So unlike previous bodies of work, these scanner-based pieces took on different implications because I could take one set of visual fragments and show them mutating slightly with each scan. Each one is related to the other, while being completely unique at the same time.
What source material besides books are you using to layer within your scans?
There are new books and then also older printouts. I will take past printouts I’ve made of other scanned collages and I will paint on them, cut them out, and put them back on the scanner with new material. Certain works have third or fourth generation pieces in them. There are also printouts I’ve made of photographs. I really like that sometimes you can’t tell the difference between what is collage and what is a photograph of a collage. I also integrate photographs of my computer monitor. At one point I wanted more imagery of football uniforms and realized I could just Google search images of them. I will Google a specific topic, expand the screen, then photograph them. The images have a grain which I can drag and distort on the scanner and add new textures.
It seems like you are then contrasting the digital from the physical, placing fabricated paint strokes alongside actual paint.
Exactly. I like the idea that something completely virtual can look really physical, and vice versa. Sometimes some of the physical qualities of the collage start to have a similar effect. I am using the same techniques of collaging in both ways of my working, where the physical collages are suspended in resin instead of being put on a scanner. I am trying to leverage similar visual effects by completely different techniques.
Does the physical layering of your collages relate to free improv music?
There is a certain thing in free improv music that I like which is this immediate success or failure. When there is a free improvising ensemble it is essentially a collaborative collage of sound. When I make collage I get to make my own decisions with what looks good where and what works well. With a group, when you make a choice, someone might read that differently and respond to it in a way that can lead to interesting results or complete meltdowns. I definitely have the later in my personal work. Most of my work goes through that stage. I try to treat them like ecosystems that develop and reach some sort of threshold where they will either get channeled into some final form that works, or I will push it too far and it will have a meltdown like Chernobyl.
How do your collage and resin coated pieces serve different pleasure points in your practice from the digitally composed works?
That’s getting right to the point with my resin pieces. When I first started making the scanner collages, I was really excited and really depressed at the same time. I very quickly had some effects that I was really into, and then I realized it was accomplishing what the work I was doing before had achieved but with 5 percent of the effort and investment. It makes these works seem almost futile. I am a little more at peace with it now because I think the physical works are now doing something the others can’t, and I am also realizing that they are more of a visual training ground. I don’t want to say that these are practice, but a way to cultivate ways of seeing. Part of the reason that I feel the scanner pieces have been so easy and quick is because I had spent hours, days, months, years on these. I don’t want to relegate these to drafts, but I did realize the importance of these for me is about a place to develop strategies that get deployed in videos or other works.
How do you incorporate video into your practice?
I dabble in music videos, but then I also have an upcoming exhibition at the SUB-MISSION that will be a video. In the piece I will be creating a 3D collage stencil out of videos. I am going to build a false wall in front of the back wall of the gallery which I will cut a hole in. I am going to have a projection inside the piece as well. It is going to be a trippy piece that is again made from layers. Part of the idea is the exploration of the physical distance. Will it be perceptible when you walk in? Will it collapse? Or will the back projection come forward in space? It will definitely get psychedelic. Part of the reference point is of a certain history of visual didactics. Abbott Thayer was this late 19th century painter who basically invented camouflage and he made these stencil demonstration kits where he would cut out the shape of a duck and put it in front of a field to show how the field’s natural pattern immediately looked like a duck’s coloring once the outline was imposed on it. To a certain extent there was this act of collage already at the beginning of the invention of camouflage. The other reference point I am thinking about is this moment right after the Bolshevik Revolution there were these avant garde artists doing this thing called psychotechnics. The premise was that the proletariat needed to be liberated from their automatic vision, so they made these laboratories for citizens to come in view these visual didactic space installations and come out cured of bourgeois vision. I am very lightly suggesting that this space is going to be similar, but with no goal. It’s more based around if a can viewer recalibrate their own senses to the video installation.
I love your reference with your work title Ghost Nets. Can you explain your thought process for relating this idea to your works?
I think it is a really interesting metaphor for collage because you have this assemblage of lost or obsolete nets, which are these capturing devices that have something textual about them too. The idea that they have a life after their function is extraordinary. They can form these complex ecosystems that allow for marine life to grow on them and fish to eat out of them. I feel like images are texts that we eliminate a lingering sense of a narrative or ideology from. The idea that they can still nurture you or insnare you is interesting. I was applying the title based on that. The function of certain elements can flip—a net or piece of garbage that is in the ghost net had one function when it was being used, and then when it got sucked into this weird assemblage in the ocean it got repurposed. That is what language does, and that is what collage is about for me often times. Recently I’ve become more concerned with the visual effects of what I’m collaging, but the visual anthropology of the pieces has always been important to me as well.
Angela James: In Between
This is my first foray into making a music video! I collaborate with my wife Angela on her music project--co-writing songs, playing in her band, playing and production on her records--so it was fitting to make this video for her first single from her new record.
We shot everything in one afternoon with our twin nieces while we were visiting my in-laws in eastern Tennessee, the summer of 2015.