16-18 May 2012
Up(date)
16/04/2012
Applications open for P(AF)5 OCT 2012
Applications open for P(AF)5 OCT 2012
Contexts: Parallax AF
Dr Chris Barlow
Dr Chris Barlow
© Barlow Fine Art 2011
The content and status of knowledge in all its various academic fields has been questioned in recent times. One could poetically describe this as an “earthquake” in human understanding. However, this interrogation, it is argued by some thinkers, gradually became tamed within the academic enclave, which, as a consequence, now maintains a problematic and contradictory existence. According to geological narratives, and cause-effect sequencing, when tectonic plates shift in particular circumstances geological consequences occur. As a metaphor, what succeeds this intense geological activity, in human terms, cannot be contained or halted, and certainly not tamed. The tremors succeeding this interrogation in understanding, this “earthquake” in the state of knowledge, may eventually break over and through attempts to contain them. And the eventual consequences may well seep into, and become a natural part of, the language and concepts of the public sphere in the future. According to some thinkers, therein lurks a dark and grave human tragedy, a terror awaiting, a new “fire and brimstone” for the secular religionists we have apparently become in our quaint narrative. So, one can understand recent emphases on responsibility and ethics in response to this “earthquake” in knowledge. One can excuse the attempts to confine and reconfigure it, however ironically, contradictorily and, in fundamentalist circumstances, disingenuously.
And yet, there are thinkers who consider this “earthquake” in positive terms and as beneficial for knowledge, understanding and creativity. This may well have political undertones for some thinkers, but for those who find that approach ironic and contradictory, it is often for intellectual honesty. Indeed, it may be better to refer to it as a capitulation, however disorienting. It is in this spirit that Parallax AF came into being, and it is this “theoretical capitulation” that makes it different from current open exhibitions and fairs. This element is never seen, nor is its recognition important. If one imagines Parallax AF as a glass structure to view “through”, it is only with a little self-consciousness that one begins to peer “into” the fabric. And then, it is not the material that is important, but the act of looking. In this respect, no particular objects or combinations of objects, temporarily demarcated as “art”, are privileged in Parallax AF. “Figurative”, “abstract” and “conceptual” are considered linguistic markers and arbitrary. This opens up creativity and breaks down barriers amongst artists and movements. But how does one select for an exhibition/fair when, according to some thinkers, the idea of “presence” in (art) objects is now unconvincing? Parallax AF, as a concept, does not attempt to answer this question, as it does not seek to answer any questions. Firstly, it attempts to raise questions indirectly for the public sphere to begin thinking about these issues. And secondly, although in the limited sphere of the visual arts, it takes such questions seriously because of the possible benefits they may have for the future of our culture.
And yet, there are thinkers who consider this “earthquake” in positive terms and as beneficial for knowledge, understanding and creativity. This may well have political undertones for some thinkers, but for those who find that approach ironic and contradictory, it is often for intellectual honesty. Indeed, it may be better to refer to it as a capitulation, however disorienting. It is in this spirit that Parallax AF came into being, and it is this “theoretical capitulation” that makes it different from current open exhibitions and fairs. This element is never seen, nor is its recognition important. If one imagines Parallax AF as a glass structure to view “through”, it is only with a little self-