Was out at a function and got socialising. It is interesting talking to people just to hear their ideas. Ideas can run so deep. It actually helped me define my own work and where it fits without even talking about it at all. The guy had built a water feature that snaked through his garden. He has an eye for detail. He likes certain rocks and how the water catches the light as it moves over them. We all can have an eye for aesthetics. Maybe the neighbour doesn’t and that says a lot about them. Maybe they start building a water feature and don’t really finish it leaving a kind of green sedimentary pond.
The story itself leads to the description ‘abortion’ to describe the failed aesthetics, the aesthetics of giving up. The primacy of clean lines and light that glistens off rocks in an Arcadia is the ideal. The primacy of organisation and thinking. The primacy of planning and executing to a fine detail.
Of course this is the primary problem of some art and aesthetics today. The over planned heavily orchestrated micro managers heaven. When I look at old graffiti photos the element of spontaneity is high. It seems refreshing when I see these works. Personally I feel something that balances both extremes is quite interesting. Although I would er toward spontaneity.
The idea of failed aesthetics or of ugliness and say an over grown garden full of weeds brings me back to my first video work at university which was the piece, “Weeds do not exist”. The words just sitting on a screen declaring this statement. Maybe weeds are simply the mismanagement of human society where only weeds can exist when society stops thinking. Nature on the other hand is always thinking. It is destruction and chaos, life and death and all in between. We have to outsmart nature but always revere it. What we can learn from nature is it isn’t biased. It lets anything exist, even what we describe as weeds.