2018Leeds Arts University Repository (Leeds Arts University)Requires access

Viva voce exhibition (PhD)

Tom Palin

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

My viva voce examination was held at the Royal College of Art, 11th April 2018, in the Sackler Building, Battersea. The examination panel consisted of Mick Finch (Central St Martins) and Dr Craig Staff (University of Northampton). Professor Graeme Brooker (RCA) chaired proceedings, with my supervisor, John Slyce, also in attendance. My project addressed how a reduction of painting to linguistic schemas serves to render the material object of painting redundant. The conception of painting as image – free of material baggage and operable through language alone – acts to disguise the temporal nature of the manner by which a painting is constructed. A painting’s surface is built incrementally and, in its stillness, offers clues to what it has been—perhaps the only clues to what it, in fact, is. I addressed in two ways. First, through a body of studio practice I sought to demonstrate the indispensability of spatiotemporal concerns in respect of the processes and object of painting. My painting is reliant on responsiveness to methods of making, and I was keen to foreground the image’s construction, staging it as an imbrication of language and material in time. Secondly, through a phenomenological consideration of both the practice and object of painting, I re-examined the notion of medium specificity. The retreat from medium specificity, in the 1970s – a move largely made in opposition to the hegemonic force of Greenbergian formalism and the expanded field ushered in by studio practices, as well as an embrace of the text (promoted through theory) – dislocated image from that from which the image is constituted. The context for this work, then, is the realm in which painting’s ontological status is questioned—targeting the nodal point where there is recourse to consider the extent to which the meaning of a painted object is dependent on the particularity of its material and temporal conditions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

My viva voce examination was held at the Royal College of Art, 11th April 2018, in the Sackler Building, Battersea. The examination panel consisted of Mick Finch (Central St Martins) and Dr Craig Staff (University of Northampton). Professor Graeme Brooker (RCA) chaired proceedings, with my supervisor, John Slyce, also in attendance. My project addressed how a reduction of painting to linguistic schemas serves to render the material object of painting redundant. The conception of painting as image – free of material baggage and operable through language alone – acts to disguise the temporal nature of the manner by which a painting is constructed. A painting’s surface is built incrementally and, in its stillness, offers clues to what it has been—perhaps the only clues to what it, in fact, is. I addressed in two ways. First, through a body of studio practice I sought to demonstrate the indispensability of spatiotemporal concerns in respect of the processes and object of painting. My painting is reliant on responsiveness to methods of making, and I was keen to foreground the image’s construction, staging it as an imbrication of language and material in time. Secondly, through a phenomenological consideration of both the practice and object of painting, I re-examined the notion of medium specificity. The retreat from medium specificity, in the 1970s – a move largely made in opposition to the hegemonic force of Greenbergian formalism and the expanded field ushered in by studio practices, as well as an embrace of the text (promoted through theory) – dislocated image from that from which the image is constituted. The context for this work, then, is the realm in which painting’s ontological status is questioned—targeting the nodal point where there is recourse to consider the extent to which the meaning of a painted object is dependent on the particularity of its material and temporal conditions.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

My viva voce examination was held at the Royal College of Art, 11th April 2018, in the Sackler Building, Battersea. The examination panel consisted of Mick Finch (Central St Martins) and Dr Craig Staff (University of Northampton). Professor Graeme Brooker (RCA) chaired proceedings, with my supervisor, John Slyce, also in attendance. My project addressed how a reduction of painting to linguistic schemas serves to render the material object of painting redundant. The conception of painting as image – free of material baggage and operable through language alone – acts to disguise the temporal nature of the manner by which a painting is constructed. A painting’s surface is built incrementally and, in its stillness, offers clues to what it has been—perhaps the only clues to what it, in fact, is. I addressed in two ways. First, through a body of studio practice I sought to demonstrate the indispensability of spatiotemporal concerns in respect of the processes and object of painting. My painting is reliant on responsiveness to methods of making, and I was keen to foreground the image’s construction, staging it as an imbrication of language and material in time. Secondly, through a phenomenological consideration of both the practice and object of painting, I re-examined the notion of medium specificity. The retreat from medium specificity, in the 1970s – a move largely made in opposition to the hegemonic force of Greenbergian formalism and the expanded field ushered in by studio practices, as well as an embrace of the text (promoted through theory) – dislocated image from that from which the image is constituted. The context for this work, then, is the realm in which painting’s ontological status is questioned—targeting the nodal point where there is recourse to consider the extent to which the meaning of a painted object is dependent on the particularity of its material and temporal conditions.

Key concepts: Painting, Studio, Exhibition, Visual arts, Object (grammar), Art, Aesthetics, Art history

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Viva voce exhibition (PhD) — Research Paper | ScholarLens