Artists Statement

zuhause im Keller (2015) – ‘home in the basement’ – is an ‘entered’, sculptural environment (a sound-based installation) designed to fabricate the form of a ‘particular [uncomfortable] activity’ (Hanks, McLeod & Makins 1986): victim imprisonment (kidnap). Taking inspiration from the ‘Fritzl case’ (2008) – the Austrian citizen who imprisoned his daughter and fathered seven children with her – zuhause im Keller explores the genesis of two theoretical concerns: the construct and impact of sound-scape, sound-based environments – erected within the confines of the gallery space – posited on the gallery-goer and the artist as intermediary (agitator and or instigator).

This environment to be ‘physically entered’ (Kaprow 1966) manifests as an ostensible truth and or a partial actuality of an “everyday” scene: a cramped, man-made corridor and secure cubbyhole (a small enclosed compartment) a generic, impartial paradigm of the “priest-hole” – a secret hiding place – in reverse. Suffused with a blend of 40s French Chansons (a lyrically-driven song) a prop employed as a forewarning suggesting human activity “upstairs”: a sense of ‘lingering unease’ (Garfield 2015).

As a nominal form of Allan Kaprow’s ‘Environments’ (c. 1958) – the focus being on ‘active spectator participation’ (Reiss 2001) – this artwork takes into account a broad sensory experience, rather than framed points of focus on a “neutral” wall or the exposition of isolated objects. In recasting spectators as participants, this retrospective is located in the words of Jeff Kelley, ‘art, [is] not separate from experience’ (Kelley 1993). Including the most recent, zuhause im Keller together with attic: fun times (2015) and bottom’s up! (2014) this body of work evidences a relationship between the artist as intermediary (playing devil’s advocate) and the unnerving sound-based environment experienced. An environment boldly irritating and or displeasing – take b. b. q: fire? (2014) – its purpose twofold; to inflict intended discomfort – as provocateur – and yet to examine the construct of a tiresome, routine sound – a fire-alarm turned off and on – and the impact and amendment; reconditioning public consciousness and domain by its recurrence.

The creation of this apolitical oeuvre – in regard to ‘active spectator participation’ (Reiss 2001) – pushes the borderline between ‘OK’ and ‘too far’: the antithesis of tact and discretion. Its relevance, an appraisal of the current ‘human condition’ – the self-aware and reflective nature of human beings – or lack thereof. Generating a sense of public awareness of life beyond the proverbial “pale” of conventional, standardised and “accepted normality” and the security of the current setting and sensory experience. Paying testament to what Brecht submitted as ‘self-reflection’ – a critical self-awareness as to the import of ‘self’ and surroundings – zuhause im Keller appraises the relevance and public perception of sound in our society, questioning the genuinely “odd” in the most ordinary of settings.