it's an interesting thought to share the creation of a piece of work with another artist.

initially i thought collaborating would be a compromise of ideals and working process, but instead.........

i helped cat sivertsen set up one of her exhibitions and had instant respect for her ideas and work.

after a few fleeting discussions she decided to help a struggling artist (me) and i promised to try and help her from falling into 'post exhibition blues'.

we have begun the process of collaborating on a piece of work.

we started by discussing identity, what art is and what it meant to us, how would it fit together?

fitting our artistic practices together is a question that we didn't manage to resolve, other than finding a few seeds of common ideas.

however that in part is the point of collaborating.

to work through ideas and stretch yourself by responding to another artist.

piece #1

this was the first step.

blue acrylic paint, and chalks.

30 minute time limit.

created by taking it in turns to make a mark, or a series of marks. painting or drawing.

the choice:

• of whether to respond to a mark made by cat
• adapt cat's marks
• make a totally new mark
• destroy a previously made mark
• or make a mark in reference to the picture as a whole
• which medium/colour to use

it becomes artistic mental chess, like a big board game.

the process was influenced by playing music without lyrics, some upbeat some downbeat. (i.e. four tet and g.s.y.b.e!) and by working on the floor.

fun.

it was made generally without talking although this wasn't a 'rule'.

meanwhile the sun streamed in through the windows and the gardener chopped the bushes outside.

piece #2

'anything goes' with multiple materials.

created by again taking it in turns to make a mark, or a series of marks.

except this time we started off with a boundary.

by dividing the paper with a dark blue line into two sections a 1/3rd and 2/3rd's of the paper

it created new choices:

• of how to respond to the boundary
• how to respond to the differing paper size

all with references to the previous choices:

• of whether to respond to a mark made by cat
• adapt cat's marks
• make a totally new mark
• destroy a previously made mark
• or make a mark in reference to the picture as a whole
• which medium/colour to use

the outcome showed more of a working process than the first piece, creating it was more thought provoking and about itself. rather than being a unified outcome like piece #1.

the difference between the marks made in the smaller side of the paper was interesting, due to the restriction in size.

they seemed more focused and fragile.

piece #3

after lunch.

joined by dave.

did the act of seeing someone make marks influence the way you made your mark?

same rules applied as above (no boundary this time though)

but this time you could not watch the process.

we kept our backs turned until it was the next persons turn.

black ink only.

this for me didn't work as well as previous pieces.

part of the process seems to be centered around watching and responding to the mark being made.

it was particularly difficult due to the choice in medium, as working in black and white made the marks difficult to distinguish.

it might be worth trying it with colour?

another factor was the time.

for two thirds of the time we were staring at the wall, it made it the amount of time you spent at the paper 'pressurised', i didn't feel involved as i did previously.

however this exercise could be repeated more easily between two artists and perhaps rather than create one piece the artists could swap over and create two works, so there is no gap between the work.

exercises like this help define what collaboration is and isn't about.

blind collaboration

the outcome: less responsive?

after piece 3# we decided to repeat the process of piece #2 but this time with three collaborators.

we didn't create a boundary in this piece although dave made a strong start which created a boundary in itself.

he wrote a japanese symbol in the middle of the page, which was a challenge to ignore.

as you can see to the right, the work developed around the central black mark 'in all kinds of crazy ways'.

piece #4

the last piece of the day drew in a new element similar to piece #3 'blind collaboration'.

we decided that during the time when we weren't making marks we would decide on what medium the next artist would use.

cat's studio was very well equipped with materials. if you try this at home (make sure you have more than just pens, sticky back plastic and empty washing up bottles)

i unfortunately took a turn after dave who only just stopped short of giving me a knife and insisting that i use my own blood as a medium.

this was fun.

it created new choices:

• of thinking creatively with the medium you gave to someone else
• being creative with a medium you perhaps wouldn't have chosen

as well as the 'normal' choices:

• of whether to respond to a mark made
• adapt marks
• make a totally new mark
• destroy a previously made mark
• or make a mark in reference to the picture as a whole
• which medium/colour to use

'the rock' was a rock tied to a bit of string which was dipped in 'smelly blue' paint.

from the photo's you can see the varying styles of using it.

either the 'little patter of rock feet' or the 'roger daltrey flying microphone technique' seemed to be the most successful.

 piece #5

 piece #5 further on

cat gets ready to use 'the rock'
'little patter of rock feet'

the rock in action #1

the rock in action #2

dave showing how 'the rock' should really be used:
the 'roger daltrey flying microphone technique'

piece #5 finished

the first day of collaboration went really well....where will it lead?

thanks cat.