My practice has become a continuous analysis of personal identity and masculinity. While the works stem from an internal tension, they correspondingly celebrate and encompass a reaction to the various forms of virility that have dominated history and contemporary society.
Explorations of disparate sources observe, relate to and interpret social expectations of masculinity and one’s limitations. Arrays of disciplines are employed to demonstrate and represent a notion that fallacies exist within trivial and exaggerated aspects of our reality.
Much of the process involves exploring and exposing subtle tensions and properties of materials. Mediums are not intentional, instead they are dictated by the contemplative and constantly re-examined sources. My practise willingly accepts naivety, simply because elements of chance and failure are as, if not more, integral to its progression. Unfulfilled elements are as much a part of a work due to the fact that it is these real moments which grant the work its status.
Outcomes do not intend to be perfect or completely realised, instead they are real everyday objects or spaces continually reimagined and reworked. An array of materials are engaged with in literal ways but married in unconventional combinations, with the intention to create an extended authenticity. Works are inherently sociable, fundamentally due to their materiality, however they still require increased levels of engagement to reconcile previous perceptions.
A dichotomy becomes apparent in the making process as the works lose their initial gender association despite their derivative elevated masculinity. Viewers are intentionally left wondering where the work is, whether it lies in the presented object or the complexity of the private thought from which it originated.