As we move through the physical world we are in an unremitting state of receiving observable facts via the five senses. Yet do these objective facts, recorded by the brain, lead directly to knowledge of our surroundings? Or is knowledge of the physical world a construction of human experience and perception. If all facts are physiologically recorded but much of what we ‘see’ goes unnoticed, does this mean we are extremely efficient editing machines? My work asks the question, is what we ‘see’ more a result of how we have edited reality? And if so, how does the introduction of additional or alternative information begin to disassemble the gestalt and alter our perception or knowledge of the world?

I am fascinated by the extraordinary world that exists within the smallest detail of the ordinary. In ­The Poetics of Space Gaston Bachelard submits, “The man with the magnifying glass-quite simply- bars the everyday world.  He is a fresh eye before a new object”. Using contextually dependent installation I question where the liminal state exists between what is noticed and what is overlooked.

I employ drawing as a strategy to investigate the influence of visual information on a viewer’s subjective perception of object and place. I work outside the traditional notion of drawing, nominating rather than rendering a variable framework of information. Traditionally drawing is considered to be a two-dimensional representation of the three-dimensional. Most often it is a depiction that is once removed from the experience of the object or place it describes. What if drawing was liberated from its conventional role of descriptor and instead was employed as a strategy whose tactics might include, nomination, illustration, and notation and a strategy where materials could move beyond the standard mark makers and paper. Within this context, two dimensions would no longer be the boundary that defines drawing.

The resulting installations are contextually dependent and ask the viewer to engage as participant rather than observer. My interest in audience as contributor leads me to question the hierarchy of the art object.  Is it possible to create work where meaning is not contained within the object, but rather the object aims to create a heuristic state of affairs; asking the viewer to complete the piece.