|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| “Retraction”- Electric Cable 350 x 260 x 320mm 1999 |
|
|
|
|
Part of my investigations into masculinity has lead to the formulation of the theory of the ‘gonadic’ in art. I
was particularly influenced by a magagine article on Melbourne artist, John Meade suggesting that Meade had a ‘de-phallicised’ type of artwork. His work
consisted of an array of forms such as doubble headed sperm, bonded balls, ‘poo’ piles etc. Coupled with the discovery of
artwork by US artists Amy Sillman & Medrie MacPhee
(Contemporary Visual Arts - Issue 21) and Australian artist Fiona Hall (‘Fern Garden’- NGA), I saw that there was expressive potential in
exploring whether the gonadic manifested in a similar was to the phallic, vaginal, mamaric and anal in art imagery. The
gonadic diffuses the polarisation between the phallic and the vaginal because gonads are
feminine (ovaries) or masculine (testicles). The similarities and differences between the ovaries and testicles, and the changes they pass through in a lifetime, offers a field of material for incorporation into relevant visual expression.
“Retraction” splays out the linear, phallic nature of electric cable as the insulation is rolled back. The multiple lines of the
individual wires create oval forms suggesting the form of gonads, but, more specifically, the splayed lines reference the seminiferous tubules within the testicles. |
|
|
