The theme of identity is one I find to be extremely personal and is something that has had significant influence over my life during the past five years. Art making is an outlet and way of expressing one’s inner self and ideas and it is because of this that identity has been the main drive behind the development of my photographic practice throughout my years of study. Specifically throughout this year, my practice has revolved around this broad theme of identity, focusing particularly on the idea of stereotyping and the psychological concept of schema, a concept that deals with the mind and the limited amount of information processed when making an identification of an individual (Bartlett, 1932, p. 208). The work has more recently evolved, resulting in an exploration into the idea of the human self being an extremely fragile thing that is somehow stronger due to this fragility and the ability it has to mend itself (Baggini, 2011, p. 39). My photographs tend to focus specifically on the physical identity of an individual; their clothing style, accessories they wear and body shape, and critique the way in which we as human beings perceive and categorize individuals within society based purely on such limited information. With primary reference to the concept of schema, my practice has largely consisted of photographic portraits of others. This has naturally evolved, leading to an experimentation with digital manipulation as well as manual collage, and has recently explored the art of still life photography. Throughout this extended artist statement I will provide detailed insight into three of my works’ that I believe can be seen as the most influential in terms of moving forward with my practice throughout this year. Untitled silhouette #5 (2011) is one of a series of a photographs that directly references the concept of schema and issue of stereotyping via the use of digital manipulation, while Triangle and dots (2011) comes from a series of photographic collage which references that same idea and Fragile robustness (2011) is just one photograph from a large series which conveys the idea of the fragile, yet strong nature of the human self through the use of still life photography.
Personal identity is something that everyone in society is consistently confronted with whether it is through the gaze of others including peers, strangers or the media, or if it is through an internal battle between the individual and what it is that they feel defines their own identity. Since an individual is highly likely to have a differing opinion on what it is that defines them physically, in comparison to the opinion of another individual, the definition of an individual’s personal identity can vastly differ depending on who is doing the observing. This act of observing and forming opinions of individual’s identity is something that every one of us does on a daily basis. We look, critique, form opinions of, and categorize every individual we come into contact with and we seem to do this so regularly that it is almost like it has become a part of human nature to do so. It is this act of categorization that is commonly known as stereotyping and refers to the concept called ‘schema’. In brief, schemas are organized collections of social information that the mind has gathered through past experience and stored away in the memory banks for recall at a later date (Pennington, 2000, p. 87). They allow the processing of information to occur quickly and easily, as the mind is able to reference information that is already present, rather than having to go back to a blank slate every time a new social situation or individual is encountered (2000, p. 69). In terms of making an identification of an individual, the mind pulls qualities from that person’s physical appearance such as their body shape or how they dress, and tries to match them with qualities of a person from a previous encounter. If the qualities pertaining to both individuals seem to match up, the mind informs us that this new person is the same as the previous person, however this is often incorrect and leads to false first impressions or stereotyping.
My first series of works this year, which is called Untitled silhouettes (2011) directly references these ideas of schema and stereotyping by addressing what small amount of information about an individual is needed in order for the mind to form an opinion of that individual. The series consists of a number of portrait photographs of individual and the faces, including the subjects’ hair and neck, have then been blacked out by way of digital manipulation via Photoshop, only leaving visible the individual’s clothing and accessories they were wearing at the time of photographing. Through blacking out the faces, the facial features being the most unique aspects of a person, have been erased from the subject’s immediate physical identity and the viewer is left with minimal information in which to form an opinion of, and also categorize that individual. This effectively creates a situation between the viewer and photograph that is much the same as a first encounter with a new person, one that consists of a single glance or limited conversation. The fact that in this instance the encounter between the two individuals, viewer and subject, is created by way of photography, enables the viewer the chance to look deeper into the subjects’ physical appearance and apply more of their time when piecing together the information that is set in front of them. However, this also allows the viewer the opportunity to use his or her imagination when forming an identity of the subject, and it is due to this use of limited facts and / or imagination, therefore false information, being applied to an individual’s identity through false pretence, that the act of stereotyping arises.
Abbey Proctor, 2011, Untitled silhouette #5 [digital photograph, dimensions variable].
The use of the photographic medium to explore the ideas of observation and categorization has resulted in the capture of a single moment of the subject’s life, freezing their identity and displaying them as they appeared in that one moment. By capturing this on camera I have in a way emulated the process of stereotyping an individual; one encounter or one single glance is generally all it takes for someone to form an opinion of another individual and place them into a category that is not necessarily correct. By emulating this situation, I have brought to light the issue of stereotyping and made the viewer aware of how it is they see others within society.
In much the same way as the images featured in the Untitled silhouettes series, my series of collages, including Triangle and dots (2011) enable the viewer to use his or her imagination in aid of achieving an understanding of the identities within the image. Due to an absence of information pertaining to each specific subject, the viewer is able to fill in the gaps of each identity by applying their own opinion and imagery to the already present information in the photograph. It is my belief that the act of identifying an individual is similar to the act of completing a jigsaw puzzle in the way that different aspects and details are brought together to form one ordered entity that is able to be seen and understood as a whole.
Abbey Proctor, 2011, Triangle and dots [digital photograph of scanned photographic collage, 20.3 cm x 30.5 cm].
With this idea in mind I constructed the collages through the use of manual acts such as cutting, layering and pasting, applying these processes to two images and overlaying them in such a way that often resulted in a slightly eerie, mismatched final product, somewhat resembling a completed jigsaw puzzle. Within the image Triangle and dots, the two separate portraits have been overlayed in such a specific and thought about way, with the intention of the final image being to contradict that belief of an ordered and understood entity, and to create confusion about the physical identity of each of the subjects. The way in which the portraits have been placed together has resulted in an apparent fusing together of the two identities, which seems to form one entity but at the same time each individual photograph still has the ability to be seen as separate from one another. This fusion is a result of the subtle matching up of specific facial features within the image as a whole; the nose in each of the portraits is perfectly in line with the other, and the jaw line and outline of the women’s faces appear at a glance to also line up perfectly, appearing to be a part of one person. Adding emphasis to the merging of the two portraits is also the absence of information within each individual image. The overlaying image has been cut in such a way that removes the upper half of the women’s face, therefore removing the lower half of the bottom image which results in neither face being able to be seen in it’s entirety.
As important facial features have been removed from each portrait, the natural solution for the viewer when trying to piece together a complete image would be to substitute the missing aspects of each face with the features that are already present within the image, even though it is obvious that they do not belong as one. It is through this substitution or application of foreign information onto the other subject’s appearance and the fact that each woman’s face is only available through partial view, that my collages and this image in particular, address the concept of schema. The fractured information of each individual that is present within the final image emulates the limited amount of information that is gathered through a brief glance at a stranger or passerby and as a whole, the image can be seen as an accurate visual representation of the schema concept; the viewer is able to see and understand only glimpses of each individual and as this is the only information available, the viewer has no option but to apply that information to the other image, creating a totally new and inaccurate identity.
Although my practice this year has primarily revolved around the concept of schema and the photographic portrait, my work has recently evolved into something quite different as I have been drawn towards still life imagery and the idea of the core self; more specifically the fragile nature of that self. It is my belief that the self is not defined by any physical aspect but is a product of the mind, defined by the morals, ideals, core beliefs and personality traits that are able to be identified as unique to a specific individual. Although these ideals etc. are highly likely to be the same as another individual’s, I believe it is the combination and strength of these different traits and beliefs that come together to define an individual in a unique way; a person may be a genuinely, incredibly kind and gentle individual, who likes heavy metal music, however the kindness and gentle nature will be what defines them and will always be present within their core self; interests, likes and dislikes can change but they are not defining enough to dramatically change the self of an individual. It is possible for an individual to change however. We are able to be broken, damaged and grow as individuals due to challenging or rewarding personal experience, however we do not change into a completely new person (Baggini, 2011, p. 21), we are still able to fully function as a whole. It has been said that the self can be compared to a composite or amalgam, a collection of things where “items can come and go, or be damaged, without necessarily terminally destroying the character of the whole” (2011, p. 39). Whereas if the self was a singular entity, physical or not, such damage would not allow us to continue to function whilst mending ourselves. It is this fragility and the seemingly robustness of the core self that has lead me to produce the final series of works’ I discuss.
Fragile robustness (2011) consists of still life images, each comprising of a single, ceramic object that could be classed as ‘everyday’: plates, mugs, an urn and a vase. These objects have been chosen for their breakable qualities, because although they are strong and able to withstand everyday use, they are also incredibly vulnerable as they have the ability to be easily broken. Within the series, the vulnerability of each object has been played upon, each being purposefully shattered but with the intention of being pieced back together. By breaking these objects, there is a loss of control as to how it is that they will be damaged, whether they will break perfectly in half, or if they will shatter into numerous tiny pieces, which in turn gives me no control over how they will be pieced together in the end. The final product of each object is one of slightly damaged, individual pieces glued back together in the best way possible, some have been totally removed as they do not fit or function well within the entity anymore, but the pieces that have been reassembled are still not perfect.
Abbey Proctor, 2011, Fragile robustness I [digital photograph, dimensions variable].
It is through this mismatched and somewhat messy piecing together that I have addressed the idea of the core self. The ceramic objects have been broken in such spontaneous and harsh ways, yet they have still managed to be mended no matter how many missing pieces there may be and, to an extent are able to fully function as their original form, much the same as humans when our core selves have been broken or hurt.
In conclusion the extremely broad theme of identity that has been the basis throughout my body of work this year, has been addressed through aid of varying photographic techniques and styles, mirroring the broadness of the issues and ideas placed within this theme. The work has primarily addressed the social issue of stereotyping with specific reference to the psychological theory of schema, as per Bartlett (1932). Through use of the manipulated photographic portrait and removal of telltale facial features, these works have focused on the limited amount of information that is needed for the mind to form an opinion of and categorize an individual, bringing to light the ease of which stereotyping takes place. The natural evolution of the work throughout the year has resulted in the exploration of the idea of the human self, more specifically with reference to Baggini (2011) and the theory of a fragile yet strong inner self. Through the use of crisp, structured still life photographs portraying broken, yet mended and therefore strong objects, the images have put on display a metaphorical inner self, addressing the fragile nature of that self, while also emphasizing the force of it’s strength. My work as a whole seeks to address the personal and broad idea of identity, giving insight into the core self while bringing to light the issue of stereotyping.
References
Baggini, J. (2011). The ego trick: what does it mean to be you? London, England: Granta Books.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: a study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Coetzee, M. (2007). John Stezaker: Rubell family collection. Quito, Ecuador: Imprenta Mariscal.
Giolla Leith, C. M. (2007). Marriage. London, England: Ridinghouse.
Giolla Leith, C. M. (2008). Masks. London, England: Ridinghouse.
Jenkins, R. (2004). Social identity. London, England: Routledge.
Pennington, D. C. (2000). Social cognition. London, England: Routledge.
Wilson, M. (2009). John Stezaker: Friedrich Petzel Gallery. Art Forum International, 47, 9.
