Thanks for your interest. You are correct, I was thinking about Lacan when I made these pieces. In particular I was thinking about much of his writing about “I-LOVE-YOU” which has been described as a socially irresponsible phrase. I was fascinated by this paradox, one of the symbolically most powerful phrases is empty and without meaning. It’s non specificity leaves it’s interpretation in the realm of the desires of the recipient. The speaker evades the responsibility of the words.

I was also thinking about the David Cronenberg film “Videodrome”, and the place where an external input, for example words or images, are absorbed by your physical being. Their manifestation becomes a part of your physical self. Using a sexual metaphor is one way to demonstrate this.

This body of work is routed in an exploration of desire. I am interested in the limitless of desire. It’s many permutations. It’s contradictions. It’s an uncomfortable part of the human condition – satisfaction does not resolve the need to want.

But I am evading your specific question about subjectification. As a practice I tend to use whatever is preoccupying me as a starting point. From there whatever experience, media or theory that I am conneting to tends to creep in and inform the work.

Blu fits into a discussion Nora Herting and I recently had on this site about language and physicality (see the comments under my recent curatorial statement).

I find Blu a really provocative piece in it’s exploration of language and desire. It reminds me of Lacan’s theorizations of language, desire, and subjectivity, or more appropriately, subjectification. How do you negotiate the specificity of your experiences/interiority with the pre-existing discourses of language that structure subjectivity? It seems you are putting both elements into play in your work.

Thanks for posting,

Jillian