paper, hot glue
When someone says something’s gone awry, we assume that it’s a result of unfortunate events, a mistake, an accident…
Also, there is a consistent practice of presenting an exhibit in a bigger city first and moving onto smaller cities later on.
Curators’ texts, consistently, have been describing and giving support to the exhibited works.
With Awry, I’ve turned all standards upside down:
I’ve asked the curator to write a foreword about a work that didn’t exist at that time; better yet, I've told her that her text would become the work itself. Simply, I told her what I wanted to do with her text.
Once it was written, the text was printed out and cut out from sheets of paper.
Then, I glued the letters onto the gallery walls, but upside down.
The carrier of the message – paper – became the message itself. It also lost its two-dimensionality and became a three-dimensional object.
The text was describing the situation in which it had been conceived and, although it was visible and clear, it demanded a certain effort to be read and understood.
The exhibit's title might lead you to think that it's completely awry, yet, that would be the wrong conclusion. The amount of effort, dedication, and precision put into the creation of this work denies this conclusion. From the first moment of creating the concept of this work, I had a clear idea of what I wanted to show in this exhibit, and how. I offered a picture and a thought about awryness, even though all that was a product of the intention to mislead people.
Is awryness always a product of an accident, or the result of a well-constructed intention?