1

The Search for Identity in Self-Portraiture

MA Drawing Angela Ho

Introduction

Self-portraiture has been a popular and enduring tradition in the history of western art. It could be a portrait of the artist, or a piece of art involving him/her in a larger work, e.g. a group portrait. According to Wikipedia, many historian painters are said to have included depictions of specific individuals, including themselves, in painting figures in religious or other types of composition. Such paintings were not intended publicly to depict the actual persons as themselves, but the facts would have been known at the time to artist and patron, creating a talking point as well as a public test of the artist's skill1. This would suggest that self-portraiture is perhaps one of the most difficult tasks to carry out in art, at least in former times. Thanks to the invention of photography, artists nowadays have an alternative way of looking at themselves, and although it seems to deprive painting of some of its importance, it can be used as a source to study a specific vision and many contemporary painters are still keen to do self-portraits. Photography can make self-portrait easier to achieve, because we can now look at a still image of ourselves as a reference to draw, we can measure the proportion of silhouette much more precisely and objectively, and unlike a mirror, it captures your reflection in movement and not in a concrete way. But why are artists interested in painting themselves? The reasons can be varied and depends on the type of self-portrait he/she wants to achieve, but all self-portraits have things in common: it is a conscious act, our mood and self-awareness indicate the projection of our features, shadow, direction and other possible subjects in particular order, while the authorship shows uniqueness and it will potentially deepen selfknowledge through expressing or exploring psychological truth2. Self-portraits are not always open to the public; in fact many people (not only artist) like to do self-portrait

Wikipedia contributors, 'Self-portrait', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 31 July 2012, 17:21 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selfportrait&oldid=505127377> [accessed 4 August 2012]. W.Ray Crozier and Paul Greenhalgh, Self-Portraits As Presentations of Self, (Leonardo, Vol.21 No, 1, 1988) pp. 30.
2

3 for personal reasons, e.g. erotic or narcissistic pictures. It can be used as a vehicle to make you feel good or explore the unusual side of you, but most of us are too embarrassed to reveal this privacy to the public we want to keep this secret, but consciously enjoy the vision. Frida Kahlo is one of the legendary self-portrait artists in the art world; she painted herself in many of her narrative paintings with subconscious memories and encounters. They are expressive paintings of life experience, although many of her work involved her face, very few of them focused on her appearance, even the close up self-portraits. She always narrated herself with selective subject matters, and used her distinctive appearance as a source to deliver her own unique story. Another example could be Rembrandt, who used selfportraiture to question his persona, role and position in society, it was an expressive and liberating influence on him, and contributed to an understanding of selfportraiture as a fundamental means of self-scrutiny3. There is one type of self-portrait that is very popular in the history of art; artists painted themselves painting in action. Sofonisba Anguissola, Marie-Denise Villers, Ren Magritte, David Hockney and many others have tried to paint this scene. This particular scene of painting in action has additional strengths: it offers viewers an interesting sight of a visual studio visit, to reveal a scene of work in process painting in a painting. At the same time the image confirms the artist as a professional, because it gives him/her identity. The two former artists I mentioned are less famous than the latter two, and their particular self-portraits in the act of painting are both shown as profile pictures in Wikipedia 4 . It indicates that this type of self-portrait is representational and open to the public, because it is inviting viewers to look at the artist painting. It also has the symbolic meaning of craftsmanship. The painting does not concern the appearance of the portrait, but the juxtaposition of the objects. At the same time, the genuine artist who painted the painting has therefore stood out of the whole scene and viewed himself from an anonymous viewers viewpoint, or painted the reflection from a very large mirror. This method to paint the scene echoes the
3 4

Patrick Procktor, Self-Portrait, (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1991) pp. 48.

Wikipedia contributors, 'Sofonisba Anguissola', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 13 May 2012, 05:58 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofonisba_Anguissola&oldid=492318326 > [accessed 5 August 2012].

4 classical self-portrait; close up head shot self-portrait in an empty background. Countless artists have done this type of self-portrait. It has taken root in most peoples mind of what a standard portrait is supposed to be, and probably because it is so popular and we always see portrait artists drawing this type of work in tourist areas in many countries, it becomes some sort of craftsmanship or tradition to record oneself. It is representational, and in fact there is not much difference from a standard passport self-portrait. Obviously you could argue that the nature of photography and drawing is very different, but I am writing about the function of this self-portrait as a representation of identity. This type of self-portrait is easy and convenient to achieve, there is no creativity required, and obviously the artist will need a certain degree of painting skills to demonstrate his / her competence at obtaining likenesses 5. For many non art-educated, the importance of technique is the first thing to be admired, and therefore, I have handily gained approval from the public because my drawing has always been semi-photographical. Viewers are prone to be drawn to the detail and photographical quality of the drawing skills 6 . However, there is a paradox hiding somewhere in my drawing: the head shot self-portrait is supposed to demonstrate my strength of confidence, given that I have high competence in technique but I secretly feel the exact opposite.

W.Ray Crozier and Paul Greenhalgh, Self-Portraits As Presentations of Self, (Leonardo, Vol.21 No, 1, 1988) pp. 30.
5

Mick Maslen and Jack Southern, Drawing Projects, an Exploration of the Language of Drawing, (London, Black Dog Publishing, 2011) pp. 12.
6

Confusion in Self-Portrait

fig. 1 Us, 2011, Courtesy the artist Fig.1 is my recent self-portrait; although it is not exactly the kind of portraiture I wrote about earlier, it shows my face as one of the main focuses in the drawing. I have a very odd feeling towards it and am somehow disappointed, it is nowhere near a powerful representation of who I am and it also took me quite a while to recognize it as a self-portrait. People say this portrait is not of me; I am neither that ugly nor odd, and maybe they are right. I am in doubt about this drawing. The feeling is almost as if my soul has jumped out from my body into another persons and I am looking at the drawing through that persons eyes. This experience is not enjoyable nor do I like the drawing. I became very critical towards it as I am able to identify the discrepancies or slightly unintentional distorted facial features from the real me. What makes it even worse is I feel like I have been cloned, and that it might be a copied version of me is haunting and disturbing. How could I possibly not have been aware this feeling when I was drawing it? Is it because I had somehow transformed into another person while I drew? Was I looking at myself like any other objects? The portrait in this drawing is looking away from viewers, and it is narrative based and therefore it is less threatening, but I could imagine if the me in the drawing were staring at me (viewer) I would feel incredibly uncomfortable. This is not the same as viewing your reflection in the mirror: firstly the reflection is the usual face that you recognize yourself as, and secondly, doing a self-portrait is visualizing the face you believe you have, and therefore the mirror acts as what your eyes see and you hand acts as what

6 your heart thinks. When they converge they do not seem to get along at all but the reason is unknown. However there was a tiny amusement after all: because someone took the effort to depict me in a drawing, I feel flattered and important. I believe this feeling is natural, when you are being drawn by someone, no matter whether it looks like you or not, you will always feel happy and excited (unless the intention of the drawer is to insult you) because it is the face others think you have. It evokes the feeling of seeing yourself on television or somehow unusual, and feels so bizarre yet happy. In fact, this is not the first self-portrait that evokes this intimidating feeling; it has existed for a very long time, but in the past I decided to avoid self-portrait, and now I feel like I am ready the confront this problem. The eye I mentioned earlier is almost like an outsider of the drawing activity, in other words a viewer, that makes me feel more disorientated and lost; is it possible that I have detached myself as an artist and changed into a viewers position once I have finished a drawing? And if it were true then what is my true identity and how should I position myself in art practice? Where does the haunting feeling come from, or is it merely because of the inability to depict myself accurately? I am aiming to

create a series of drawings to answer or investigate this confusion and find out where all these feelings are coming from.

Investigation of Self-Identity
The idea of positioning me as a viewer is interesting; it is like taking a step back to view the whole activity and it is truly inspiring. This experience seems to echo the artist Diane Borsatos statement, accompanied with the image:

fig.2 Diane Borsato, 1999, Rolling on the Lawn at the Canadian Centre for Architecture I was living near the Canadian Centre of Architecture and walked by it everyday. I was trying to think of new ways to engage myself with the city, and coming home from work one fall afternoon I decided to roll across the entire length of the famous green lawn- instead of just walking by. The lawn seemed to me to be a provocative space- between the museum and the sidewall. Rolling on the lawn shocked my bones and made me dizzy, with the ground and the sky spiraling around me like a tornado. I repeated the action in every season for the following year.

Although this method does not sound reliable, it reveals the process of how Borsato encountered a problem or ways of experiencing. She chose contact with the lawn instead of walking alongside it. Clearly distinguishable from conventional ways of resolving problems, by orientating myself into a different position and perhaps gaining a similar effect, although I am not physically changing the way to encounter problems, I have changed the way of looking and experiencing, she continues: []the physical experience that is foreign, new, unprecedented, the awakening that pure sensation provokes should thus be understood as the site of true learning,

8 which goes far beyond a knowledge of the body; it aims towards a penetrating comprehension of all aspects of life7.

Hence, I decided to carry on with this assumption of identity to look at Angela Ho, her drawings, exhibition and even viewers, to be an invisible observer and draw from an unusual perspective to investigate the confusion. This self-portrait would be interesting to viewers for quite a few reasons. When a viewer is viewing a piece of art, this activity between the viewer and the art is intimate and inseparable; although it might just last a very short few seconds, the viewer is unable to see his/her own expression directly and in fact, nobody can because the distance between you and the artwork would be so close to each other, the only one who is able to see the viewers response would be the artwork. I intended to draw from this perspective, because I want to portray the response of the viewers. This act is like drawing another selfportrait in an indirect way, because I am one of the many random viewers. At the same time I can feel the guilt and joy of spying on viewers privacy, Jose DrouinBrisebois, a curator at the National Gallery of Canada stated in The Viewer as Performer: [.] caught in the act, like an interruption, arrest or suspension of an activity in progress, and ambiguously suggests private activity suddenly becoming public. It emphasizes on living action, an on the other, an objectification that is said to occur where observation is concerned: a Sartrean reversal in which the observer or the voyeur suddenly becomes the object of anothers gaze, a disruption. Echoes this view and proposes some interesting variations on the theme of action and observation, as well as on the relationship of a viewer to a scene viewed. With its overtones of an illicit or private activity, and the guilt attached to the voyeurism inherent in the role of observer, the terms for a psychological unfolding are initiated with this phrase.8 Being an invisible observer is a pleasant experience; I am free from being seen or disturbed, like a ghost who is able to penetrate and move around and see from any perspective. The joy of drawing from this perspective is like paparazzo who has taken

Diane Borsato, Artist Statement, Rolling on the Lawn at the Canadian Centre for Architecture,1999, < http://dianeborsato.net/projects/rolling-on-the-lawn-atthe-canadian-centre-for-architecture-cca/> [accessed 3 August 2012].
7

Jose Drouin-Brisebois, Caught in the Act: The Viewer as Performer, 2008, P.183 All further references will be to this edition.
8

9 a picture and cannot wait to share the photos, because they are rare and the effort of taking those particular pictures would be so much harder than any other scenes. Publicizing this private activity does not frustrate viewers; instead, it creates an interesting sight because it is an indirect portrait of them, which offers an unusual way to look at themselves, as if the drawing is talking to them. This compounded my feeling towards my self-portrait, because the artist is expending efforts to include them in the drawing; it is flattering and amusing but bizarre. I want to share the awkwardness from my self-portrait and consciously transport it to viewers by drawing their response (such as taking photographs, scrutinizing the drawing in detail or simply not paying attention at all.) and make them feel the way I do, as I assume me and other viewers are equal; therefore it is not a personal self-portrait but an invitation to participate in the drawing. My drawing is doing two things; firstly it beings out the concrete existence of the viewers and asks them to question their own visuality and identity, how they look, see and are unaware what is around them are reflected consciously by the artist, secondly, it is a self discovery of my personal feeling, which the viewer may empathize. This two functions echo Louise Bourgeoiss Maman, she claims: Space does not exist in itself; it is just a metaphor for the structure of our existence 9 . These two things are incompatible upon the first thought, but I have consciously empathized myself into the position of viewers, this act connects the viewers intellectual thinking of exploration of the artist. I am aiming to bring out the surreal existence of the artist in my drawing. Hence, the eye level, size and scale of all the subject matter in the drawing appear to match the genuine scene at the exhibition space, which explains the reason I worked on an enormous scale. This idea echoes Diego Velzquezs Las Meninas, which I will discuss in greater detail below. Svetlana Alpers in The Viewing of Las Meninas stated The frame appears to intersect a room whose ceiling floor, and window bay extend, so it is suggested, to include the viewer[.] The size of the figures is a match for our own. This appeal at once to eye and to body is a remarkable pictorial performance

Trisha McCrae, Louise Bourgeois. Maman: From the Outside In, 1999 < http://www.artandeducation.net/paper/louise-bourgeois-maman-from-theoutside-in/> [accessed 8 July 2012].
9

10 which contradictorily presents powerful human figures by means of illusionary surfaces10. One of the main differences between Las Meninas and my drawing is the presentation at the exhibition. Fig 3 shows the picture of Las Meninas at Museo del Prado:

fig.3 Meninas at Museo del Prado, 200211

Las

It is hung in the middle of the wall, probably two feet away from the floor. Because this painting is a historical painting on canvas and it is framed, there could be no other way of hanging it. The painting includes the floor as almost one-third of the background, but the edge line between the wall space and floor cannot be the same as

10

Svetlana Alpers, Interpretation without Representation, or, The Viewing of Las Meninas, (The Regents of the Unversity of California,1983), pp.31. Rocio Gutierrez (photographer), Las Meninas at Museo del Prado, 2002 <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rooo/123259549/> [accessed 2 August 2012].
11

11 the space outside the frame. For that reason viewers are less likely to interpret the artists intention that easily and the gaze between the figures and viewers will not be horizontal. I suppose Velzquez has not actually considered the point of representation at an exhibition, or perhaps there was no such thing in the sixteen century. Five hundreds year later, I am working on a drawing supported by Las Meninas. Paper is thin and has the flexibility to fold or crease; therefore it can settle almost anywhere without being noticeable. You can place it on the floor or glue it in the angle between the ceiling and the wall.

fig.4 Diagram of the folded paper at the exhibition It is only a piece of paper, but it provides a versatile surface for the artist to draw and potentially transform the exhibition space. The boundary of my drawing is infinite, because it extends outside the scene. I intend to leave it unframed to violate the conventional impression of drawing. In order to match the eye level from reality, the height of the paper has to be relatively low. The bottom part of the drawing will fold by ninety degree and placed on floor in order to match the edge between the wall and floor from the real space. This presentation enhances the illusory effect and changes the way we look at the drawing. If I placed the drawing at normal height like Las Meninas then I would not be able to connect the drawing to the real space and viewers will not be able to reflect themselves in the genuine scene. This interaction is conceptual; viewers are more or less controlled by the presentation and the drawing. You might argue that I could draw directly on the walls and the effect or impact of the

12 illusion might even be more impressive. The problem with that is that I do not intend to create this illusion only for the given space at the exhibition. I wanted this scene to connect with any sort of space with any viewers. The figure (fig.5) below is the plan of my drawing. The reason I am presenting this draft is that I am going to draw two different perspectives but portray them in one drawing.

fig. 5 Plan of the drawing, 2012, Courtesy the artist

I, as an invisible observer am drawing Angela Ho and her poser in her studio space. When the drawing is finished it is going to be shown in an exhibition and so the scenario happens to be an illusion of the artist genuinely drawing at the space, which appears to be a live performance and open studio visit for viewers to participate in. The reason I captured the artist drawing the poser instead of drawing a self-portrait is because I could not bear the discomfort of the gaze from the portrait. This type of self-portrait was mentioned earlier. The artist can use a mirror to reflect him/herself while painting so the nature of the way to proceed is very much the same as the standard close up self-portrait. I used the camera to assist me rather than a mirror, but the theory behind remains the same. The other side of the drawing is the background of the drawing. Traditionally, the foreground appears to be what is at the front, and

13 the background provides support or coherence behind the foreground in order to complete the painting. This order or position of subject matter is perceived from reality: foreground is usually the main focus of the vision or at least it is the focus people tend to notice in the first place. My drawing does not work this way. The background of the drawing is going to be a mirror reflection and therefore it will be showing the scene in front of the foreground. The mutual point of the foreground and background of the drawing is that they are both publicizing the private and intimate moment but from a different situation. The foreground is sharing or unlocking the secret of how the artist processes a drawing. It is interesting to viewers because it is like visiting a museum that displays how certain things are made, whereas the background is showing the personal moment of viewers and artwork. These two scenes reconstitute the relationship between artist, artwork and viewers in a new format. This joining of the past (artist captured in the act of drawing) and future (future viewers captured from imagination) does not clash but creates the present. This scene is not imaginary fantasy, but a concrete scenario of what is/will be happening at the exhibition, because I am drawing the viewers response in the reflection. And the perspective or vanishing point is behind the mirror reflection. (see fig 6)

fig. 6 Side view of the plan for the drawing, 2012, Courtesy the artist

14

Pictorial Representation and Studies on Las Meninas

Mirror does not only reflect vertically, it reflects the spread of the objects like light in front of it. And therefore if I were drawing from the viewpoint of the artwork the dimension would be much broader. My drawing is three-dimensional with two-sided viewpoint located outside the drawing, but exactly opposite to each other (fig. 6) both of them are in the center of the drawing, but only one of them is shown in the reflection. The other one is hidden behind the mirror, which is one of the functions of the mirror. It is also a vehicle to deliver the scene in front of the foreground. Obviously the viewpoint comes from the invisible observer, at the foreground of the drawing. The invisible observer stands by the side view of the artist and poser. This perspective of looking is a classic reading of representation, John Searle, an American Philosopher proposed an axiom of representation which corresponds to this viewpoint.

Fig. 7 John R. Searle, 1980, Las Meninas and Representation, pp.481

The way that classical pictorial representation combines resemblance, aspect, and point of view is as follow: the artist (or camera) sees on object or a scene from a point of view, and that point of view must lie outside what is seen, since we cannot see the eye with which we are seeing, the artist then produces on a flat surface an object such that if the observer has the appropriate point of view in front of the flat surface he will have an experience like the visual experience that artist had.

15 Searle claimed, traditionally, the perspective the artist sees and the vision he paints should be identical and this perspective is under visual aspects. And therefore when a viewer looks at the painting, that viewpoint is the viewpoint of the artist. This is known as illusionist reading. Most of us believe as if we were seeing the scene from the point of view of the artist, but the distance of looking is different. For viewers we look at the picture from much closer than the artist looked at the original scene. But this is not always true; some artwork (e.g. Anamorphosis) requires viewers to look from an unusual angle in order to recognize the object in the picture. [.]this in turn underlies our ability to see P as a pictorial representation of O under F. in the case of fictional and fictionalized pictures the artist need not have actually seen the objects he is painting. Indeed the object mat not exist12

This statement supported the idea for the background of my drawing. The viewpoint is located at the back of the mirror reflection (in other words, behind the drawing), this perspective is logically impossible, because it has been blocked by the mirror, but that does not mean it does not exist. Imagine if I were drawing on tracing paper and the drawing is hung in the middle of space. I would be able to view this background scene from the back of the drawing. Although the situation now does not allow me to view this particular perspective, I could still imagine it and it is not contradictory nor does it violate the real scene. Unlike Las Meninas, John Searle claimed the painting is paradoxical.

12

Critical Inquiry, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Spring, 1980), pp. 481 <http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1343104?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid= 21100962753883> [accessed 31 July 2012] All further references will be in this edition.

John R. Searle, Las Meninas and the Paradoxes of Pictorial Representation,

16

fig.8 Diego Velzquez, Las Meninas, 1656. Museo del Prado, Madrid

The mirror reflection is one of the prominent subject matters that enhance the curiosity of Las Meninas. Upon the first glance, we would be aware that almost all the figures in the painting are staring at us. The painter on the left is painting and his position and gaze suggests he is probably painting us. This confuses our identity are we seeing or being seen? My drawing has the same doubt or confusion, but this is done in a different way. I am clearly drawing the viewers and the scenario happening in reality. Therefore it makes perfect sense that I have included my viewers as one of the subject matters in the drawing. This act suggests viewers are not only people

17 visiting the exhibition, but members involved in the whole activity, which confirms their importance, but at the same time, this reassurance makes people wonder about their identity, whether they are viewers or the spectacle? Las Meninas, on the other hand, is a mystery. Michael Foucault states in The Order of Things that: We are observing ourselves being observed by the painter, and made visible to his eyes by the same light that enables us to see him. And just as we are about to apprehend ourselves, transcribed by his hand as though in a mirror, we find that we can in fact apprehend nothing of that mirror but its lusterless back.13

However, the mirror reflection at the back seems to unlock the confusion. Foucault and Searle were convinced that it is a reflection of the King Philip IV and his second wife standing in front of the painting, which makes them the spectacle of the painting on the canvas. In other words Las Meninas is a painting from the perspective of the Royal couple, which makes it a paradox because how was Velzquez able to paint Las Meninas when his point of view is taken by someone? Does he also consider himself as an outsider of the painting and did he paint Las Meninas from imagination? My drawing, on the other hand, is much more straightforward as I am viewing from an outsiders point of view, and that view is not taken by anyone. Apart from the perspective of looking, Las Meninas and my drawing have quite a few similarities. The figures in the painting narrate some ambiguous activities: they might be in the middle of something or about to do something else. Many art historians have tried to interpret the scene or any deeper meaning based on their knowledge of Velzquez or the history of the period of time. My intention is not to study the meaning of it. Whatever they are trying to do in the painting, they are caught in the act. This includes the painter who is caught in the act of painting on the left; the only part of the painting that is clearly stated without ambiguity this connects to my drawing. Caught in the act is a capture in motion, we are aware that the scene would only hold for a few seconds and therefore Las Meninas and my drawing both indicates movement in the act; they are lively and vivid.

Michael Foucault, In English, The Order of Things, (Pantheon Books, 1970)< http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/theory/FoucaultOrder_of_things-text.html> [accessed 19 June 2012]
13

18 The function of the mirror in Las Meninas and my drawing is the same; it is revealing the subject in front of the artwork, which enhances the oddity or interest of the dimension. Although the mirror in Las Meninas is far subtler, it is intentional. It is implying the existence of the Royal Couple and the figures in the painting are more or less looking at them. We, the viewers are sharing the same perspective as the Royal Couple. This affects us in a way different from my drawing. The only figure that is not paying attention to any of the surroundings is the dog. It is again the total opposite to my drawing. The figures in my drawing have no exchangeable gaze to viewers. The only figure who is looking towards the viewers is the cat, but viewers are not able to exchange gazes at all, because it is located at the ankle level to the viewers, but it presents the same function as the dog in Las Meninas. As Peter Levine, an American Research Director of Tufts University stated Pets are domesticated nature, and nothing could be more domesticated than a large hunting dog that allows a dwarf to step on its back without moving [] Painting, too, is domesticated nature: it is infinite, shifting space reduced through magical artifice to a flat, motionless surface [.]We look at nature; nature doesn't look at us. We look at paintings, and usually paintings don't look at us. But Las Meninas is an unusual painting, one in which the artist has to peer around a large canvass to look in our direction. []All this is enough to make you wonder how natural the painting really is.14 The main connection between Las Meninas and my drawing is that we both look at viewers, which offer them an invite or place them a position. This makes the art unusual and so it seems to violate the naturalism of painting or I would prefer to see it as breaking the boundary of presentation in painting and drawing. Las Meninas is an intellectual painting indeed, it requires patience and curiosity from viewers to explore. Because of its complexity, it also requires viewers to study the foreground and background in relation in each other. Many art historians have studied Las Meninas through different approaches. Their findings are contradictory and cancel out one another. I am not particularly convinced by any single historian nor do I argue for the truthful interpretation of Las Meninas. My own realisation is that we will not be able to identify the genuine meaning of Las Meninas. In fact it is not necessary. Philosopher Umberto Eco suggests that arts, including music, literature, and visual Peter Levine, Trying to Look at Las Meninas, Journal, 2005 <http://www.peterlevine.ws/mt/archives/2005/11/trying-to-look1.html>[accessed 1 August 2012]
14

19 art, have effectively shifted from the production site of meaning from the author to the recipient: In fact, the form of the work of art gains its aesthetic validity precisely in proportion to the number of different perspectives from which it can be viewed and understood. A work of art, therefore, is a complete and closed form in its uniqueness as a balance organic whole, while at the same time constituting an open product on account of its susceptibility to countless different interpretations which do not impinge on its unadulterable specificity. Hence, every reception of a work of art is both an interpretation and a performance of it, because in every reception the work takes on a fresh perspective for itself.15 Our perceptual systems can only translate information through what we already know. We know what orange looks, smells and tastes like so we all recognize it. But we are not able to recognize anything new though, that might require further use of imagination but because we have neither the experience nor knowledge of it and cannot imagine it either. That is why art historians and viewers can never understand the same way as the artist does when they look at art. What they could see is the painted picture and try to interpret it through the knowledge available.16

15 16

Josee Drouin-Brisebois, Caught in the Act: The Viewer as Performer, 2008, P.29

Simon Abrahams, Why Painters Painted Themselves, Blog (2011) < http://www.everypainterpaintshimself.com/blog/why_painters_paint_themselv es/> [accessed 2 August 2012]

20

Conclusion

My interpretation of my drawing comes from the artists first-hand experience; therefore it is the most convincing statement, as I am the only person who has fully experienced this perception of the genuine scene. This interpretation also unlocks my confusion of identity, I could not and I have not been a viewer of my artwork because I knew everything about the drawing. This experience only belongs to me. When I said I felt haunted about my own self-portrait, this feeling also belongs to me only because to any genuine viewers that drawing would only be a portrait of someone. The reason I felt uncomfortable is due to my personal character, to create a close up self-portrait requires narcissism and perhaps I am not naturally that vain or selfobsessive. Therefore, the uncomfortable feeling about headed self-portrait would never change, but it does not mean it is an unsolved problem, because there is no reason why I must draw myself. At the same time I believe if a portrait only depicts the appearance of oneself then it cannot be considered a particularly interesting drawing. Nevertheless, imagining me as an invisible observer was a fun experience. I explored new ways of looking and realised how little I would able to see if I were only looking from a fixed viewpoint from certain eye level. I am awed by the nature of surrounding. It seems to suggest that every drawing I did has been drawn by nature, and my job is to capture them on paper. This drawing experience brought me to revisit the scene of drawing in action, as well as predicting the future as I drew the viewers responding to my drawing before it opens to the public. This anticipation is based on the response from previous exhibitions. It is a time traveling journey more than observation of the artists life, because I have always been the same person no matter how I tried to detach my original identity; I am aware that the person I am observing is me and realized how different I felt and looked when I revisited the old me. Hence, the assumption at the beginning was actually problematic, because I am not able to transform myself into someone completely random; the realization comes from the blocked view. One of the hardest parts of doing a self-portrait is that you have to be honest, not only honest to your genuine appearance, but the mood at the time you drew. When everyone says the self-portrait (fig.1) is not of me, I am not that

21 ugly or unpleasant, that is because they are referring to the physical appearance of me, but at the time when I drew that self-portrait, I was feeling annoyed and perhaps it explains where the ugliness is coming from. Viewers are not able to imagine or realize this feeling because this is something foreign to their perceptual systems. This honesty seems to resonate in every bit of my drawing, including the subject matter and the use of medium. Pencil is a direct, simple, honest and modest tool, but its versatility is incredible. After all, my drawing is a very sincere and genuine selfdiscovery and I have leant to share my honesty through the experience of drawing and looking from a new perspective. Now, the last thing that is missing from the whole research paper is the object in front of the drawing. Apart from the viewers, there are three optical devices called Zoetrope, they appear on the background of the drawing. In reality, I have concretely made them and placed them in the position you see in the drawing, which is part of the project and idea that initiated the drawing. The content of the drawing inside the Zoetrope clearly echoes the big drawing, although I could have just drawn some other small drawings on pieces of paper and the idea would still work, the result would be much less interesting. Viewers are able to view the moving images like animation; it breaks the boundary of drawing as a still image and therefore enhances the experience of viewing. It is like viewing a fast forward version of the big drawing in detail, which allows viewers to time travel like the artist. At the same time, it invites participation from viewers, not quite the same way as the big drawing because viewers would need to physically engage with the Zoetrope. It suggests the piece of work is not complete without viewers and therefore it doubly highlights the importance of viewers. Traditionally, self-portrait is autobiographical and selfexploratory. It is hard to attract viewers attention. Why do we bother to study someones autobiography, especially someone ordinary? My self-portrait is an unusual one, because I am using the eye of viewers to experience and project the artist as a subject for us to visit. It is a drawing dedicated to us. The whole experience is like participating in a game. A game without winning or losing, just a realization or recalculation of the relationship between artist, artwork and viewers.

22

Bibliography

Alpers, Svetlana, Interpretation without Representation, or The Viewing of Las Meninas, Representation I:1 (The Regents of the University of California, 1983) Crozier, W. Ray and Greenhalgh, Paul, Self-Portrait As Presentations of Self, Pergamon Journals Ltd (Great Britain, Leonardo, 1988) Cohen, Ted and Snyder, Joel, Reflexions on Las Meninas: Paradox Lost, (The University of Chicago, 1980) Drouin-Brisebois, Josee, Caught in the Act: The Viewer as Performer, (Ottawa, National Gallery of Canada, 2008) Maslen, Mick and Southern, Jack, Drawing Projects, an Exploration of the Language of Drawing, (London, Black God Publishing Ltd, 2011) Procktor, Patrick, Self-Portrait, (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1991)

Online Resources

Abrahams, Simon, Why Painters Painted Themselves, Blog (2011) < http://www.everypainterpaintshimself.com/blog/why_painters_paint_themselves/> Borsato, Diane, Artist Statement, Rolling on the Lawn at the Canadian Centre for Architecture,1999, < http://dianeborsato.net/projects/rolling-on-the-lawn-at-thecanadian-centre-for-architecture-cca/> Foucault, Michael, The Order of Things, Pantheon Books, (1970)< http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/theory/Foucault-Order_of_thingstext.html> Levine,Peter, Trying to Look at Las Meninas, Journal, 2005 <http://www.peterlevine.ws/mt/archives/2005/11/trying-to-look-1.html> McCrae, Trisha, Louise Bourgeois. Maman: From the Outside In, Blog, 1999 < http://www.artandeducation.net/paper/louise-bourgeois-maman-from-the-outside-in/> Searle, R John, Las Meninas and the Paradoxes of Pictorial Representation, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 6, No. 3 Spring, (1980) <http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1343104?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid= 21100962753883> Wikipedia contributors, 'Sofonisba Anguissola', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 13 May 2012, 05:58 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofonisba_Anguissola&oldid=492318326 >

23 Wikipedia contributors, 'Self-portrait', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 31 July 2012, 17:21 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selfportrait&oldid=505127377> Wikipedia contributors, 'Las Meninas', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 24 July 2012, 05:44 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Las_Meninas&oldid=503898124>

Further Reading

Barthes, Roland, The Death of the Author, American Journal (1967) Berger, John, Berger on Drawing, (Occasional Press, 2007) Benton, Michael, Studies in the Spectator Role, (London, RoutledgeFalmer, 2000) Merleau-Ponty, Maurice The Phenomenology of Perception (London: Routledge, 1962) Duve, Thierry de, How Manets A Bar at the Folies Bergre Is Constructed, (The University of Chicago, 1998) Kahneman, Daniel, Thinking, Fast and Slow, (Penguin, 2011) Kennedy, Dennis, The Spectator and the Spectacle, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009) Schmitter, Amy.M, Picturing Power: Representation and Las Meninas, (Blackwell Publishing, 1996) Stamelman, Richard, Critical Reflections: Poetry and Art Criticism in Ashberys Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror, (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984) Stein, Roger B, Thomas Smiths Self-Portrait: Image/Text as Artifact, Art Journal (1984)

Online Resources Ivy, Jeanne, The Exploration of Self, http://userpages.umbc.edu/~ivy/selfportrait/intro.html [accessed 30 July 2012] Rivera, Natialia, Las Meninas, http://evergreen.loyola.edu/brnygren/www/Honors/velazquez.htm [accessed 7 July 2012] Culture Now: Tracey Emin, Institute of Contemporary Arts, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wouyb5KQM9k [accessed 4 June 2012]