Honing in

I found Rhi's post makes some quite useful points, and in putting together a response realised this might make more sense as a spin-off post than a comment.

I'm definitely finding 'too many ideas' more of an issue than too few. I guess that's a luxury that beats the alternative! I have a fairly strong impression of Bundanon in my mind, based on previous visits, so find a lot of my ideas are slotting into place in regards to specific things that may or may not work in different areas there.

When considering photographic/film opportunities, my thinking is more along spatial and reflective/responsive lines than historical, yet when I think of text it's the converse - it's more about exploring the time layer and being drawn to a 'yet-known' past, yet very much set in a particular space.

I've been reading a bit about Arthur and the Boyds, but not yet much about their time at Bundanon. I've been doing some 'practice' writing I suppose you might call it, but it's based more on Arthur's paintings than his life or Bundanon and surrounds.

'Based on' isn't very accurate mind you - it's more of a 'response' that touches on some of the themes and images (Greek mythology etc), but then takes on a life of its own. So while I could trace it back to what might have prompted a certain part or idea, it's probably not very obvious that they have any necessary co-relation. Some are closer than others, and some or so tangental as to bear little resemblance whatsoever - even to me by the time they're done.

I know we talked about a preference for a collaborative piece rather than a bundle, but the more I think about how it will work (the project, and the two weeks), the more I imagine it will be a mix. I've been spending the last few weeks and weekends devoting more time to creative work, and realising that creative fatigue can set in pretty quickly if I don't move from one form to another (eg after writing for a while, going and taking some photos to rest the writing mind).

I suspect similar things will happen over the two weeks, and that we will move between a central project and some parallel pieces to break things up. These pieces would still, potentially, fit into the 'umbrella' but also take some of the pressure off the joint work. Is this sort of approach what people are seeing working?

Rhi's concept of 'Distortion' is perfect. It fits really well with a lot of what we have talked about, and ties together that crucial third category of 'perspectives' in a way 'interventions' and 'fabrications' didn't quite.

Perspectives are very important to what we're all interested in, but until now seemed to have stood a little to one side. Distortion brings it in beautifully, and opens up a few more doors for my thinking about certain potential inclusions in the project - especially the visual aspects, but also in terms of writing.

The point about the difficulty of working with histories is definitely worth discussing. We're all under certain constraints (time, work, geographic) that mean a too-thorough understanding of the histories of Bundanon and its surrounds would come at the expense of actually creating any of our own.

What interests me more, anyway, is the imagined histories. Despite being fairly well maintained and set up, and a wealth of primary materials being theoretically available, most visitors to Bundanon only get a gloss of its history. They each carry around their own mix of snippets, the rest they fill in; imagining what life there was like, looking around to see whether they can sense the inspiration in the air.

Personally I think that's what we should also be working with - such snippets and snatches, given we can never hope to get across a 'complete' story anyway. And that's far from our purpose as I understand it. I see Bundanon and her history as a Pulpit Rock style leaping point, not a marsh for getting bogged down in. There is something in the air down there, and I want to spend time with that, not just tracing what somebody else did with it.

In terms of deciding 'which aspects of these ideas we'd most like to explore', I suspect they will all cross over at various points. We're still kind of dancing around our project it seems, rather than getting our teeth truly into it, but I wonder how much of that will chance in the next three weeks? I'm happy to nut down further if people are up for it and this blog is perhaps the best place for that.

Rhi feels we need to decide on what we are aiming to produce with a contingency plan if it doesn't work as planned. She mentioned agreeing on an expected outcome before we go away, else risk disaster. These seem good ideas, though I sense a little trepidation on people's behalf in this approach.

I'd like to hear what everyone thinks, but will go first. I'm still very much interested in exploring the potential for a site-specific work, but also remain aware that's one of the most logistically difficult. I think we could produce quite a strong project based on our two weeks there and subsequent work, but there will always be the matter of the location's remoteness. We've discussed tying it in with another event (eg FlameTree if it returns in 2008) but it does suggest we should consider opportunities beyond the location. I'd also like to talk more about the potential 'bundle' of works we could bring together if the site-specific aspect proves unworkable, so we can go into the fortnight with a pretty strong idea of what we are working on ourselves, but also what everyone else hopes to achieve.


- Benjamin