Fluctuanding

Different geometric shapes can be observed coexisting in the same space. These represent the various genres of art that coexist in a common space. Each form is put together from a different point of view since always seeing or thinking about things from the same place is not usual. The general idea of ​​this work is that depending on the social, personal, political or ideological context of each individual, these forms can be interpreted in different ways. In this case I thought of an analogy in which various geometric primitives subjectively represent different genres of art. If each of us sees from our own judgment, then there is no correct way to see things. It is possible to agree on a large scale, but no one has such superiority that allows us to affirm that things should be seen in a certain way. So let’s allow ourselves to doubt, make mistakes, reason and from there generate new thoughts.

Technical, aesthetic and conceptual development

Starting with the technical part, in this sketch 3D figures are used to project depth and different planes on the canvas. Through simple functions, a sound is loaded that accompanies them and generates an atmosphere. These primitives contrast with the black background and thus take center stage. I chose vibrant colors since it seems like a good way to generate attraction towards them.

One of the ideas that I found interesting in the text “The art of installation and its heritage” by Bishop Claire is that of antagonism as a characteristic of space, that which is unusual and that generates a certain attraction for the viewer. I find it an attractive idea since, if we take the side of the viewer, if we see something that is out of the ordinary then it will generate interest in us. On the other hand, Bishop writes “There is no correct way of viewing the world and no vantage point from which to make such judgments.”

I find it relevant to highlight this quote since “Fluctuanding” tries to represent just that. We judge, observe, deduce or appreciate from a place that only belongs to us and no one else, and from that arise thousands of different interpretations. If we think of figures as different ways of making art, how broad, right? I return. If we thought like this, then for each unit they could mean something in particular. Each primitive is in movement, and this reflects how the same type of art can be in transformation, and if we observe carefully, if two figures cross each other, both manage to coexist and merge, just as happens with different artistic genres.

We can relate this idea to the text “New Media” by Fricke Cristiane in which the term fluxus is named, which is explained as a type of art that deals with trivial topics without mastering any specific technique. In fact, it is proposed as the fusion of some of them, producing a confluence between the genres of art and proposing an act, in this case a sketch, that includes acoustic, visual and simple software functions and whose execution or functionality depends on the presence or absence of the spectators and the material. In this case, if there were no computer or a spectator who pressed play, there would be no such observation of the work.

As for its name, the word fluxus led me to think of the verb, fluctuate, which means to move over the waters following their movement or to experience a certain feeling or state in a variation of intensity. I thought it was an interesting word to name the work but to give it a certain originality, I thought that in the English language there is a verbal tense that is used for things that happen and progress over time and to these verbs the letters -ING- are added at the end. So “Fluctuanding” is an invented word that transmits the feeling of fluctuating, moving, relating, merging in time.

Biography

• FRICKE, Christiane. (1999). New Media
• BISHOP CLAIRE. “The art of installation and its heritage”