An unappealing thing

 *

 

An unappealing thing, blu-tac, match

 

 

There is much that is beautiful in the world and my objective here was to create something which  people will find unappealing, without resorting to obviously repellent mimetics (representations of unappetising phenomena) or recourse to unpleasant symbolism (symbols associated  morally dubious groups or individuals, such as the Nazi party).

I started with an unattractive material, blue tac, which has a grey colour. It has a slightly grainy texture. It also has an odd property which is that it can be stretched if warmed and pulled very slowly, and can also snap.

 Thinking about it now though, the grey is actually quite nice, its a soft, grey leaning towards yellow. It would never be my favourite colour (which for the record is a marron red, or jade green or golden yellow depending on my mood) Maybe here a dirty pink would be better?

However, I would say that the texture of blu-tack here is not very pleasant, at least to me. I don`t know about you, but I`m really a smooth surfaces person. I  always say no to rustic.

My blue tac has been formed into a sphere- or rather, an almost sphere. Such an almost form is, I think basically unsatisfying. I believe incompletion and irregularity are essentially unpleasing, unless they are given a specific context - i.e. a rough path surface which serves to provide a better grip, or the dissonance used in certain pieces of music by, say Mahler.

 I added a blotch of blue tac to give an additional unpleasantness. Do you see how it looks a bit like a scab? I hope so. I`m breaking my rule of avoiding obviously unpleasant mimetics- here I admit it.

I also drove several (four) small holes in the surface with the matchstick before inserting it into a fifth.  Arbitrariness has, I feel, a disturbing quality, the sense that there`s no rhyme or reason for something is   annoying, pointlessly provocative. It is argued that one of the definitions of the classical in art is in  completion, harmoniousness- so that no element can be added or removed without destroying this balance. I hope I have, in contrast, succeeded in  creating a piece in which  elements can be added, moved  or removed without disturbing its essential quality, leaving its meaning- its ugliness - intact.

 In addition, the act of puncturing the surface of the piece conveys an aggression towards the piece (perhaps a metaphor for self harm?) which I trust views will recoil from. Of course, there is an established tradition of the fragment in art, one of the many strange borrowings from the re-discovery of Greek art by Northern Europe in the 18th century, and which resulted in the deliberate production of fragmented pieces by forgers, and ultimately detached hands, heads faces- by Rodin and Brancusi among others. 

But, in contrast to the considered fractioning of these masters, my action here is merely violent, conveying nothing more than the idle idiocy of the casual vandal, and I trust viewers will recoil from the sight of these four puncture holes.

I hope also that viewers will find the matchstick sticking up like that- basically stupid and pointless. 

*