Final work: Concept Statement
For my final work I explored the collaboration question in the form of a documentary and three group-made collages. My ideas progressed from the work I did with the poster, becoming based more on collaborative art than collective art. Once I’d explored the basic foundations of group works and personal contexts that go with it, I decided to look more into how people interact with one another when placed in a collaborative situation. My aim was to investigate power in group dynamics, challenges faced and their solutions, as well as unique contributions of the individuals.
Three people were interviewed individually, assigned a group brief to work together on three collages and then finally re-interviewed.
The work looks more at the collaborative journey than the final collages produced. I was interested in how group processes are often driven or hindered by roles people adopt. Inspired by Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment*, the work queries whether the dichotomous roles of ‘leaders' and ‘followers' are dispositional or situational. When asked who he thought led the group, one of the collaborators clearly state, “Definitely not me because I’m not a leader”, reflecting Zimbardo’s dispositional theory. This suggests that these roles we assume are predisposed, based on our identity and not just the situation we are placed in.
The way the group interacted also relied on their pre-existing relationships as they had known each other for 30+ years. These types of connections allow a high degree of honesty and understanding between the members resulting in both smooth co-operation and also some very raw clashes.
Despite these longstanding relationships, working in a group does not always run smoothly. Often clashes are inevitable due to the bombardment of ideas when given a simple and broad brief. What could be seen as sisterly bickering on the surface was actually the incompatibility of two very headstrong creatives. Their ideas were all good but also very different, and their natural bias was to lean towards their own. This ultimately led to the divergence of workers for the second and third collages, with minimal advice (and occasional cattiness) becoming their only exchange. This could be put down to the loss of one team member and subsequent inability to follow ‘majority rules’. However, prior to the split, the group did attempt to solve their differences with red wine, compromise, cheese and biscuits and bartering but no solution suited them quite well as working independently. As a group member pointed out, it takes passion to lock horns, but it is this passion that also enhances the artistic outcomes.
Another element that can really enhance the groups productivity and creativity is the personal context each person brings to the project. Each individual has their own world- history, interests and influences- that can enrich the worlds of others when shared. What I found most interesting in this experience was the responses from the preliminary interviews. When asked to pick three images each and give reasoning for their choice, each person shared nostalgic memories or cultural insights that the photos had inspired. Even the act of looking through magazines triggered interesting discussions about history and culture that would have gone unshared had these been a solo works. Conversation topics spanned from remembering Tiananmen Square to raku firings to Pathenons built for ants. I think it is important to note that without the communal goal of creating these works together, these ideas would not have been shared and the members would not have learnt these specific details about one another. This supports the idea that collaboration is often equally or even less about the work produced than the experiences during production. However it is also important to note that the art of collage is a collaboration of materials and embodies the idea that group work brings together components from all different worlds to enhance each other and form one.
In conclusion, this work essentially explores the intricacies of collaborative art and what makes it succeed or fail. It looks at the process of art-making in a group as an artwork in itself and a form of personal enlightenment. It shows that the individual can add value to works by letting their own world collide with others. I’ll finish with a quote from one of the collaborators in reference to the inevitability of conflict within groups:
“…of course [there are clashes] because there has to be in any sort of collaborative thing, otherwise if you don’t have passion then you don’t clash.”
* McLeod, S. A. (2008). Zimbardo - Stanford Prison Experiment. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.html
gummygunk
titsay
izzy806
stormborns
gracieabrams
snowghoul
vaporwave
pixelskylines