Monthly Archives: July 2015

“Edge and Shore: Acts of Doing (surveying the edges of place and practice)” – notes towards a partial translation.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0004 copy

(Image: Max McClure)


What I’ve written below is a partial, gappy, highly subjective ‘translation/transcription-after-the-event’ of an action into a text. Perhaps ironically, it responds to what I take to be, at least in part, two artists’ calculated move away from the cerebral analytics that make up many reflexive texts. The partiality and gappiness are inevitable. I can’t pay close attention to a complex unfolding sequence of actions involving two people over two hours plus and, simultaneously, write sensible notes. Since the action itself was a lens through which a sense of the everyday is re-visioned, and because its ‘audience’ occupied and moved within the same space, each person there very obviously had her or his unique, moment-to-moment sense of it’s numerous consecutive interactions within a layered physical and (larger, and highly porous), aural space, together with the multitude of metaphorical resonances those interactions activate.

IEdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0127 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

For example, I doubt whether anybody else witnessed one brief, particular and significant conjunction of bodily stances I caught a glimpse of. I just happened to be where I could catch sight of Laila Diallo unfolded from a particular posture at the very moment when a be-suited man, deep in conversation on his mobile, crossed behind her going down the short section of passageway that’s visible from the gallery. A man who was clearly absent from that space in all but the most literal sense, entirely absorbed and so wholly oblivious to Laila out on the edge of his peripheral vision.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0208 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

That momentary juxtaposition, between an attentive and carefully articulated bodily unfolding and a ‘being elsewhere’, an important aspect of Edge and Shore appeared in sharp relief. It illuminated the actants’ inclusiveness, their attention and openness to contingency, happenstance, and the influx of the past – for example to the effects of the previous day’s experiences, which they could not help but bring to the work. It is this apparently artless openness that, I think, helps give their work its particular qualities. Its articulating of a ‘something’ as yet unnamed, a brave opening out beyond the dominant aesthetics of exclusion into another, more generous, sociability. Here the craft and riskiness of attentive improvisation wanders its way along a fine and delicately judged path between two possibilities.

ImageHelenCarnac3 copy

(Image Helen Carnac)

It could very easily have been a working through that, freighted with multiple mundane actions that evoke the muddle, mess and repetition of daily life, would simply leave us psychically swamped, mired in metaphorical overload and the cacophony of our own emotional feedback. Equally, it could easily have gone the other way. It could have been a merely artful formal play with the numerous properties of space, movement, and materials; a seductive but ultimately cerebrally-oriented flirting with the dangers of raw evocation and metaphor that stylishly skirted over all the deeply sedimented layers of unsettling meaning and affect latent below its artful surface. (Artful ‘dry humping’ masquerading as passionate polymorphous entanglement).

 ImageHelenCarnac7 copy

(Image Helen Carnac)

Edge and Shore: Acts of Doing

I was invited by Helen Carnac to take part in an evening conversation with Laila Diallo and herself at the Arnolfini on the evening of July 8th. So I arranged to join them that morning for the first iteration of their Edge and Shore: Acts of Doing. As I understand it, their understand their collaboration as located somewhere off to one side of performance and installation; as setting out to do pretty much what it’s title implies: survey the edges of place and practice through those ‘acts of doing’ familiar to them as an artist/maker and dance artist. (Hence my use of Alastair McLennan and Joseph Beuys’ term ‘action’ and my reference to Helen and Laila as ‘actants’ here).

ImageHelenCarnac6 copy

(Image Helen Carnac)

When I arrived at the Arnolfini I walked through to the ground floor gallery, now set out with various materials, many carried over from Laila and Helen’s previous Edge and Shore residency at the Dovecot Studios, Edinburgh. (These included long lengths of thick, well-used looking and drawn on rolls of paper stood on end or hung, two video projections, boxes of materials of various sorts, and a large cluster of assorted overlapping photographs fixed to one wall). My arrival is noted and Laila appeared almost at once, a thin, animated figure who greets me warmly. Helen soon follows – she has been hunting for a lost box in which they have collected the sheets of A4 paper with the words they’ve used – and we talk about the qualities of the space, the assembled objects, and the floor with its rich staining of traces from previous exhibitions. They both seem to relish the possibilities offered by these traces as another, unfamiliar, set of material memories.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0008 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

As soon as I arrived I was drawn into the intimate tenor of the space by the projected images of hands involved in a game (some cross between Jenga and Paper, Scissors, Stone) My expectations are of play in its widest sense.

Helen and Laila quietly start to prepare the space and I settle myself on one of the low benches provided. As they begin to speak together and then move about the space I catch myself drifting into the particular analytical state of mind of my ‘inner external examiner’. I make a conscious attempt to avoid being caught by this.    

Words start to appear on the blank sheets of paper the actants have distributed around the room.






There is at once a sense that the physical space, its current inhabitants, and its aural permeability, are all being audited, both openly and in more coded terms.





… and so on.

Their interactions during this audit are apparently casual but, at a given point, take on a greater sense of focus as the sheets with their hand-written words are collected up and thoughts quietly exchanged between the actants. The words are then read out loud by the two of them in turn and an editing process takes place, with Laila dropping selected sheets onto the floor.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0040 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

There is a shift – a clear concentration – of the action. The wooden table near the wall is cleared, becomes a theatre for hands, and an assortment of wooden blocks, many of them with blue painted ends, appear (the ‘Jenga blocks’ from the video). Helen and Laila begin a process of exchange based on offering each other vertical and horizontal permutations of clusters of these blocks, with Helen’s tending to emphasise the vertical and Laila’s the horizontal. In this subtle articulation of difference between the two women words have been replaced by permutations that enact a conversational exchange. They are pushed back and forth across the surface of the table, with the proximity of the different groupings to the edge nearest each becoming increasingly resonant. (Questions like ‘whose exchange will be pushed over the edge’ are begged, and I am caught up in every nuance of exchange, bound more intimately into the relationship between these two woman).

This unfolding and sometimes noisy process of exchange crackles with the energy of a real working relationship, its moment-by-moment pulls and pushes, and distinctive characterisations appear, articulated through each gesture, facial expression, and shift of bodily stance. After a while Laila changes the dynamic, using the blocks to map the space in which her hand rests. Helen responds by building her hand space into Laila’s. There is a palpable sense that a dynamically tensioned but empathetic relationship has been established, only to be let go off shortly after.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0064 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

This intense, bodily, wordless dialogue now concluded, Laila moves some of the blocks to the floor. Helen, by contrast, starts another ‘build’ on the table until she, too, transfers her wooden blocks onto the floor. As if now sure of the ground of their interactions, the two actants allow their activities to bifurcate. Helen works with the blocks – as I later discover offcuts from her partner’s work as a cabinet maker- down on the floor. She is enclosing the trace of words that formed part of a previous exhibition, including the word ‘consciousness’, while Laila begins to mark out the larger space of the room itself. Her slightly erratic progress draws attention to its being full of stuff, to her use of her body for a form of ‘mapping’, to a sense of provisionality that is amplified by the fragility of her hold on the cluster of blocks in her hands.

On perhaps the third circuit – it’s easy to loose count when you’re taking notes – a woman watching (who has left Laila little space to pass), is drawn directly into the action. Squeezing past her, and seeing that one of her hands is upraised and open, Laila gives her some blocks to hold. In that instant, the whole tenor of the room changes. Those of us watching can no longer locate ourselves, however tacitly, on the outside, as passive spectators. The assumption of an invisible wall between the ‘performers’ and ourselves has been put in question. Now the entire space is an active palimpsest, is loosened and made more permeable in innumerable new ways.

Like the over-eager child at a party who is not picked to help the conjuror, I find myself unreasonably jealous of my co-spectator turned momentary actant. I want that moment of intimate shock, of immediate physical exchange.

My whole challenge now is to somehow keep in view the double process of mapping/enclosing of space and all this involves. Two counterpointed processes are emerging. Helen’s activity appears primarily oriented by her manipulation of materials, Laila’s by the use of her body as a means of marking out, ‘measuring’, the space – pacing, high-stepping, stretching out, jumping. After a while Laila collects up the blocks that she’s been using as part of her marking out and brings them back to Helen’s space in a moment of convergence.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0096 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

My response to this is best described in an image. A circling child returns to her mother to take assurance from ‘touching base’, soliciting approval by bringing back some small gift. This image is reinforced by the steady practicality of Helen’s sorting of the returned wooden blocks. I am quickly caught up in the mesh of resonances between the two women, now both amplified and confused by my provisional categorising of them as ‘grounded mother’ and ‘restless daughter’. But the feeling attached to this categorisation also lends a tenderness to the unfolding actions.

Emerging from the distance of my own imaginal reverie, I am just in time to catch a pregnant pause while the two actants consult together, the hushed mutter of a large orchestra between symphonic movements. But that thought in turn quickly develops it’s own trajectory. Perhaps the whole work could be read as a musical score, perhaps by John Cage. I am again brought back into the moment by catching sight of Laila starting to move on the spot in such a way as to open up a truncated gestural space through the near-repetition of movements that appear invisibly circumscribed.

Meanwhile Helen has started to methodically straighten out and roll up a long length of bright orange tape. Her preparations complete she uses this to delineate a new space, but in a way that’s quite distinct from the previous foursquare use of wooden blocks as miniature ‘walls’. This new, taped space is somehow flamboyant, almost Baroque, with its ragged, scalloped edges. It now encircles Laila. Helen starts to loop the orange tape up and pin it in short, luxurious swags on the taught surface of the hanging sheet of paper. (This has been serving as a significant edge space for some minutes). Ruched curtains and Mary’s Lorna – both child and sophisticate – comes pirouetting into my thoughts, showing off some party dress for an end-of-term dance). Each of Helen’s pinnings produces a small, densely resonant sound, like a small parchment drumhead being sharply tapped once with a hard stick. And each sounding reverberates powerfully against the background of thick aural soup that, as I now realise, almost continually permeates the space.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0153 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

Laila continues her singular movements, as if trying either to perfect them or else complete them despite what is, invisibly, circumscribing them. I worry that these movements are exhausting her, a concern reinforced by her lying flat and breathing heavily at intervals. It’s impossible to know whether this ‘worry’ on my part is in response to the intensity of my own, possibly inappropriate, emotional involvement – a by-product I suspect of my daughter Anna’s long, debilitating illness – or simply a legitimate response to Laila’s exertions. Perhaps it’s both.

At this point both my notes and my memory entirely fail me.

I find on reading them that I wrote: “she [Laila] inserts her body into the space Helen had enclosed earlier”. Yet according to my own narrative above Laila never left that space. Memory, shaky at the best of times, is no help here. I’m at a loss, simply unable to reconstruct what happened although, thinking back, I’m fairly sure Laila had been moving at some distance from Helen’s ribbon-space.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0106 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

What’s clear from what I can call to mind is that, at some point, the two actants had moved much closer to each other. Helen worked at scrapping and tracing over a section of the floor, much as one might make a brass rubbing from a tomb in an old church. Laila’s actions at this point were gradually encroaching on the particular area of floor space where Helen was working. Again there’s a slight disturbance that I quickly rationalise through an image. A child tries to attract her mothers’ attention in a roundabout way and then feels excluded because her mother misses the cue. There’s both the desire for intimacy, for a transgressing of personal space, and at the same time the fear of doing it. No sooner has this passed through my mind than Laila moves away to occupy a zone Helen had worked in earlier.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0131 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

As if pushed out to the extremities of the space, Laila has now located herself up against a wall near where I sit. Helen, unperturbed, continues to work with and mark the space she has occupied, hunkered down to tap or dot out her traces on paper using a block of wood. (This description is partly conjecture – and certainly inexact – since Helen’s half hidden behind a screen of hanging paper that prevents me from seeing many of her actions, although I hear them very clearly). Laila, now hunkered down by the wall, hesitantly starts to tap her thigh with the fingers of her left hand. She seems about to pick up Helen’s rhythm when it falters and dies away. Laila simply stands up and walks diagonally across the room to write a post-it note that she then sticks to the wall. From my bench I cannot read what she has written.

I am a little envious of how easily each actant seems to move between actions and, I assume, their accompanying mental and emotional states.

Laila has returned to her earlier series of truncated gestural movements but now oriented by a linear movement. Helen stops what she has been doing and moves to a bench by the wall. Again, there’s that sense of an orchestra pausing, of a silence immediately filled by the soupy background hum of noise that once again foregrounds itself.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0140 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

Helen crosses the room and unfolds a cloth, before laying out a variety of materials – photographs, drawings, and short fragments of text – on the floor around it. I have a sudden memory of Gini’s Stony Rises deep map – it’s palimpsest of layers, drawings and transparencies, its votive stones and miniature video screens. Laila continues her movements. Am I projecting onto her a vague sense of being increasingly trapped and uncomfortable in her movements, over there up against the wall again? And if so, why? Suddenly she breaks off, picks up a roll of paper, and joins Helen. Again that easy moving between states, that simply letting go. Helen’s layout becomes more extensive, with various repetitions of small black and white photographic images.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0168 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

At this point my attention got divided without my really noticing that this has occurred. While mentally I continued to observe and write notes, my emotional state (now left to its own devices), started to drop, no longer buoyed up and carried along by the flow of the action. In retrospect I think I simply got more and more bogged down in a muddle of conflicting emotional responses to what was unfolding. But I only became conscious of this when I wrote: “Suddenly Samuel Beckett comes to mind”.

Helen is now tearing words from a long sheet of paper and the two actants reconnect. The rolling out of a long line of paper then gives Laila a new direction for movement, but this somehow seems no less ‘pained’ than before, given its halting slowness. The photographer who unobtrusively stalks her across the floor suddenly conjures up the image of Laila as a wounded animal, one that is trying to drag itself to a place of safety away from the hunter who tracks it.

As if in response to my sinking mood, an angry man suddenly breaks into the space around which we’re gathered and demands in a loud voice to know if we the audience think this is ART? Thrown and irritated in equal measure, I challenge his assumptions and a short but clearly pointless exchange follows. He wants ART that offers us Truth, Beauty, History, (and for reasons that escape me, Archaeology) on a plate, but oddly the image he chooses to support this is the Arnolfini Wedding. I do NOT ask him, for reasons that should be self-evident, how or why an early celebration of a commercially motivated amalgamation of business interests in the form of a bourgeois marriage contract embodies these qualities. He leaves with his wife and child. His anger is, however, in marked contrast to their earlier responses. The mother simply expressed mild puzzlement as to the ‘rules of the game’ being played, while the child just wanted to join in by playing with the wooden blocks.

As my attention returns to the action there is a strong sense of words as stuff, matter to be manipulated, put to work, discarded.

Helen rolls up one of the long scrolls on which the gathered words have been written, while Laila circles one of the large sheets of paper on the floor. On the blackboard on the short wall next to the passage Helen writes:




Increasingly our language seems to me cripplingly inadequate, reductive, off the mark and, it must also be said, crassly abused. Why don’t we have a word for what James Hillman, following several older traditions, calls ‘the thought of the heart’, a word for heartfelt, embodied thinking? That’s the word I want to replace Helen’s THOUGHTS and TO THINK on the board. But surely part of all that I’ve just experienced tells me that we have to work with the potential of what we’ve got, at least as a starting point in the here and now?

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0172 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

Laila has stopped circling and returns to her previous ‘on the spot’ sequence of movements. Later she will follow one of the lines of paper, a slow, hands and knees movement that feels like a winding down. A hill walker working her way up scree, the last effort before home at the end of a long day’s ramble through the high hills.

Helen meanwhile pins torn words and letters to the back of a semi-transparent hanging screen that turns one corner of the room into a darker, store-like space. This action feels like a lining, or insulation of that area, but one that’s highly ambiguous in its relationship to the words that are repositioned, even destroyed, by her actions. There is a real sense of persistence in this action that, despite its sense of inwardness, seems profoundly protective. Is a shelter being prepared, a dwelling-place, but if so for whom and, of course, against what?

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0177 copy

imagehelencarnac copy

(Images: Max McClure)

There is no real sense of a ‘drawing to an end’, more of a ‘circling back’. Laila has started to mark out a new space within the room using the smallest wooden blocks, some no bigger than a postage stamp. Again she is stretching and semi-falling as she does so. She then reverses the process, retracing her movements and gathering up her little wooden markers as she does so. All the time I am very conscious of her bodily exertions, of the fact that she’s been on the move for over two hours, as frenetic as Helen is calm. Laila repeats the action of marking out a space within the room, but in another, slightly more modest configuration, coming and going behind the hanging sheets as she does so.

EdgeShore_MaxMcClure_0307 copy

(Image: Max McClure)

Helen has now moved from pinning to balling up the pieces of paper with their letters and words. These are formed into tight, roughly fist-sized, objects. She lays a good number of them out in careful rows behind her sheltering screen as if preparing snowballs for a fight.

Later we will sit over our food and talk, roughing out what we might say about the work during the scheduled public conversation that evening. We speak together of forms of mapping, about memory, noticing, Tim Ingold on lines, about making, habits, and accumulation. Laila, based in Bristol, must leave soon to attend to her son and our discussion of the work is now casually interleaved with talk of child-care arrangements and his grandmother’s willingness to make cupcakes for a school event.

I am immensely grateful for this seamlessness in our speaking together, this easy camaraderie in the transition from one constellated event to another in our briefly mutual polyverse. And perhaps that is what I will most value in what I take away from my day’s exchange with Helen and Laila.

ImageHelenCarnac4 copy

(Image: Helen Carnac)

At one point, during our post-event discussions, a connection appeared to me between the underlying tenor of the morning’s action and certain old folk songs. Both it seems are in part concerned, beneath any literal ‘narrative’, with the virtues and possibilities of living with the mundane, the repetitious, the overlooked, and with inevitable failure in our lives (‘even unto death’), but also of doing so with canny attention, with a certain lightness of spirit or dark humour (depending on our temperament) and, of the utmost importance, in good company. 

ImageHelenCarnac5 copy

(Image: Helen Carnac)


Helen and I spoke on the phone for just short of an hour prior to the event I’ve tried to evoke here. We were happily teasing out elements of our mutual interests and following up various threads of thought as they appeared. This turned out to be an ideal preparation for what I would experience on July 8th. A good part of that initial exchange circled around issues of attention and, having referred to Kathleen Jamie’s observations, I sent Helen this.

‘Kathleen Jamie refers to attention as follows. When asked if she had prayed for her dangerously sick partner when he was in hospital, her response was that she hadn’t. She adds, however, that she:

“… had noticed, more than noticed, the cobwebs, and the shoaling light, and the way the doctor listened, and the flecked tweed of her skirt, and the speckled bird and the sickle-cell man’s slim feet. Isn’t that a kind of prayer? The care and maintenance of the web of our noticing, the paying heed?”’ (Jamie, 2005: 109)

Without that ‘paying heed’ there can be no empathy, no sense of an aesthetic of the everyday, and without imaginative empathy no politics of nurture worth the name, no concern for the Commons. For those of us who do not want to live under the authoritarian oligarchy that currently passes for democracy in the UK, an oligarchy with its roots in the world-view celebrated by Jan van Eyck’s The Arnolfini Wedding, ‘paying heed’ is now a political obligation. I would have liked the courage and presence of mind to say that to the angry man. To have made clear to him that Art, Truth, Beauty, and History have now all-too-often been co-opted, empty power words. Words that are part of the armoury at the disposal of people whose every action flies in the face of ‘paying heed’, who are fully paid up members of a culture of possessive individualism that is psychically, socially and environmentally toxic.

These are, of course, my own personal preoccupations and interpretations and I have no wish to or intention of fostering them onto Helen and Laila. However, they do reflect something of what I take away from my time spent with them.    

(The images above are used here were taken by and are used here by kind permission of Max McClure and Helen Carnac)





For and against ‘daylighting’ – reflections from a meeting of proto-hydrocitizens


Daylighting – the redirection of a stream into an above-ground channel (e.g. in urban design and urban planning). Typically, the goal is to restore a stream of water to a more natural state. More generally, the ‘making visible’ of what was formally evident but has subsequently been hidden below ground.

Polyverse – a term used by Roger Corless to argue for our existence as a confluence of many selves living simultaneously in and between multiple realities or lifeworlds. This position is taken as other to that of the monolithic ‘life-as’ promoted by rationalist discourse that derives its authority from a secular, scientistic version of the Monotheistic theologies found in the Religions of the Book (Judaism, Christianity, & Islam).


I’ve just come back from three days of meetings, walks, exchange, etc. led by the Cymerau team – Sara Penrhyn Jones, Dr Alexandra Plows, and Dr Tom Payne, along with Shelagh Hourahane, Hywel Griffiths and others – who are part of the larger AHRC-funded Towards Hydrocitizenship  research project. Our meetings took place in various local venues – a sports centre, the youth hostel, the Friendship pub, etc. – in Borth, which is in Ceredigion, mid-Wales. This three-day gathering was one in an ongoing series. On each occasion as many of the large national team as possible try to meet up. This allows us both to support each other by sharing ideas, concerns, and good practice and to do more formal work; to debate and think through issues, strategies, and directions for the project as a whole.

The Towards Hydrocitizenship project a whole is intended to extend “the more established notion of ‘ecological citizenship’ which sees transformations in how society works at individual and collective levels as essential if we are to generate more meaningful, ecologically sustainable forms of society”. The initiators of the project believe this ecological understanding is best put to work in the various contemporary contexts of both individual and community engagements with water, with the arts acting as a key ‘driver’ in social engagement. Unfortunately, and inevitably, the process by which such projects are funded means that the model of ‘combative collaboration’ fundamental to genuinely ‘inter’- , ‘trans’ -, or ‘extra’- disciplinary research activity can really only be considered and enacted post-hoc. This in turn means that fundamental issues of perspective and difference, instead of being on the table during the initial conception of the project, become the subject of attempted ‘daylighting’ during the project. This tends to cause a degree of friction and is rarely successful because of vested institutional and other interests.

As always, my personal experience of this gathering was inflected to some degree by my recent reading. Two books seem particularly relevant. One was George Lakoff’s The Political Mind and the other Barbara Hurd’s Stirring the Mud: On Swamps, Bogs, and Human Imagination. The first book became an (albeit very imperfect and problematic) lens through which many of the intra-personal reverberations bouncing around just below the surface in the meetings could be viewed. The second provided the perfect link between some of the issues raised in those same meetings and the richness of the physical and metaphorical environment of Cors Fochno, the very unusual raised peat bog located just inland from the village of Borth on the south side of the Dyfi estuary.

‘Daylighting’ the hidden – an approach to authority and power? 


The meetings I attended served to both confirm some aspects of Lakoff’s argument and, simultaneously, to highlight the dangerously reductive and misleading nature of the book’s popularist, evangelical orientation. (It seems to be aimed exclusively at middle-brow American readers). It may serve Lakoff’s particular ends to characterise the power dynamic in (American) politics as tensioned between ‘the authoritarian father’ and the ‘nurturant parent’, but as a model for thinking about the lived realities of power that’s simply way too reductive an image.

Ten years ago some of the thinking I developed during my doctoral work was published as a chapter in a book on arts doctoral research – Thinking Through Art: art / philosophy / language – edited by Katy Macleod and Lin Holdridge. This chapter – Hybrid texts and academic authority: the wager in creative practice research – argued for a multi-perspectival psycho-social approach to thinking about the power dynamics of framing academic research. My aim was precisely to avoid the kind of reductive, binary thinking that Lakoff uses. I took as my historical starting-point Alex Seago’s invention to counter the influence of the Archetypal psychologist James Hillman on debates about art as research. (This was made at the behest of the management of the Royal College of Art in the early 1990s). Seago’s task had been very simple: resolve the tension between what he identified as ‘Apollonian’ and ‘Dionysian’ perspectives on art and design research by ‘integrating’ the second into the first. This integration could then support the normative, ‘Apollonian’, perspective being pitched to the Art and Design HE sector by the RCA’s then Director, Christopher (now Sir Christopher) Frayling. The successful ‘resolution’ / ‘integration’ of this tension (at least in Seago’s terms) rested I argued on ‘an intellectual sleight of hand’ (p. 191), at least when seen from the perspective of the positions he seeks to exclude. This slight of hand flows from the fact that the position Seago upholds – and which he presumes to be neutral – is itself archetypally determined and, as such, has its bias. This remains hidden because it is assumed to be the norm. It is, in short, framed by that highly particular balancing of ‘reasonableness’ or ‘common sense’ and insistence on ‘the necessity’ specific to the perspective of the Athene archetype.

My apparently rarefied and esoteric argument continues to be relevant because Lakoff’s ‘authoritarian father’ (archetypally figured as ‘Zeus’ in Greek mythology) is rarely directly evoked in our neo-liberal European context. (The obvious exception being fundamentalists of all persuasions). More usually a variant of this position is represented by the figure of the authoritarian father’s obedient and ‘motherless’ daughter, namely the Athene archetype. Adopting her figural perspective allows powerful institutions and those who identify with them to assume the particular form of repressive ‘care’ that’s neatly captured in the popular saying “mother knows best” . This ‘caring’ position is both instrumental and highly conceptual in its basic assumptions. It assumes the absolute authority of the ‘caring mother’ as validated by the assumption that power is always exercised for ‘the good of the child’. However, it represents an authority that never practically engages in the direct forms of emotional or physical care associated with the lived practices of parenting. (The figure of the cerebral Athene, born directly from her father’s thigh, is that of a true virgin ‘daughter of the father’, one who shuns any experience of the mess, complexity and, above all else, the ambiguities of parenting).

That Athene – rather than the authoritarian Zeus or his son Apollo (with his daylight, high altitude, intellectual brilliance and aesthetic) is the dominant archetypal figure in the imaginary of the academic institution – makes life difficult for those who wish to draw on other, unrelated, archetypal perspectives; those animated by, for example, the figures of Dionysus, Aphrodite and Hermes. (There used to be a powerful but discrete Hestian element within the academic imaginary but, typically given its particular archetypal characteristics, it was largely invisible and rarely acknowledged. It’s attributes of gathering together and hospitality are now largely disparaged). The major problem with the dominance of the Athenian perspective (and one clearly present in our meetings) is that, by tacitly assuming itself to be the authoritative norm, it “conceals a defence against other archetypal enactments which then must perforce be judged abnormal” (James Hillman 1980 On the Necessity of Abnormal Psychology: Ananke and Athene in Hillman (ed) Facing the Gods New York, Spring Publications Inc. p. 32).  So from this Athenean academic perspective much of what is important to many artists is always going to appear, whether tacitly or implicitly, as irrelevant (namely ‘impractical’), abnormal or a deviation. As such it is likely to be reduced to a caricature of the Dionysian in its shadow aspect. (The positive, strongly grounded, non-hierarchical sociability of the Dionysian archetype is profoundly threatening to the whole Zeus / Apollo / Athene configuration of authority, which is predicated on hierarchies of relationship and obedience).

So am I suggesting that the only solution to this situation is a rigorous ‘daylighting’, a constant ‘bringing up to the surface’ of different archetypal positions? For myself the answer has to be comparable with my own creative imperative, which is to keep moving. So the answer has to be: “sometimes yes and sometimes no”.

The term, and more importantly the practice, of ‘daylighting’ is of course itself redolent of the Apollonian archetype. As such it’s largely incompatible with Barbara Hurd’s swamp-derived observations concerning ‘us’ (that is an ‘us’ that acknowledges living in a polyverse). She suggests that we are always to some degree: “things in the margins … on the brink of becoming something else, or someone else ..” (p. 7). Living with swamps and bogs has taught her (she is a poet as well as a prose writer on the natural world) that: “The one essential quality of the imagination is that it moves” – and consequently in my terms here ‘polyversal’ – “in wide sweeps, in pinched steps, out to sea, down into the interior”. That alone should make us careful about any over-emphasis on Apollonian daylighting. Hurd goes on to write: “the imagination is polytheistic and polygamous; its ground spring is multiplicity, not singularity” – and so as such it  invites a loose weaving around differently oriented warps and wefts rather than inter-disciplinary integration. This is because “trying to press a single meaning on its imagery is like asking a river to hold still. It will squirm out of your interpretations, jump its banks, form new rivulets and bayous in its relentless churn toward the open ocean” (p. 36).

So it seems to me that we have to stay with the ebb and flow of different archetypal currents that rise out of the mud of our unconscious and then sink back into it, however uncomfortable that may sometimes be.

Perhaps to be a hydrocitizen is to acquire, among various other qualities, the patience and humility to learn to avoid identifying with any single archetypal position; to learn to be fluid, to be a citizen of a polyverse in flux and in flow that doesn’t mistake itself for a universe in which the production of knowledge is not simply the prerogative of those for whom lifeworld is the Athenean university, monolithically conceived.


Orkney Entanglements

I began writing this text a while back, sitting in the waiting area of the peedie* airport that, if you have to fly, gets you to and from Orkney. This was shortly after the mid-summer solstice this year, although there were still primroses nestling in sheltered areas along the tops of the cliffs. Waiting that morning, and thinking back over the conversations I’d had there, Orkney appeared as a dynamic and increasingly volatile crossroads, one balanced precariously in space and time. A highly charged place where distinctive narrative threads – some that seem as old as the Neolithic complex at the Ness of Brodgar, others that are as new as the cutting-edge wave and tidal technology developed by EMEC – have all become entangled there, ravelling and unravelling on their way into an uncertain future I fear but cannot predict.


Sitting diagonally across from me that morning was a family of five. Proud grandparents, parents and, the focus of all their attention, a stout baby with an unruly tuft of jet-black hair. The child’s father appeared to be an Orcadian, but mother and grandparents were of Far Eastern origin, Japanese or Korean perhaps, or maybe even Chinese. (The parents spoke no English and the mother had to translate for them whenever they spoke to their grandchild’s father). Beyond them, and in stark contrast to the inclusiveness of this family, three men were operating an invisible but highly effective exclusion zone sitting around, and completely dwarfed, a small table. They forming a rugged, rather forbidding mass around which local people and tourists, some of whom I recognised from having visited St Magnus Cathedral and the Ring of Brodgar the previous day, ebbed and flowed at a respectful distance. The men’s physical bulk, their gestures, clothes, even their facial hair, appeared designed to signal that they were persons apart and more at home engaged in their particular specialist activities in the Great Outdoors. While there was a clear nod to American ‘redneck’ culture in their style and demeanour, they were very probably well-paid experts, either working with wave generators in the alternative energy sector or something to do with oil. (Their occasional busts of macho laughter suggested the second because, days before I had arrived, the Government had announced cut backs on support for alternative energy, and workers in that area on Orkney had already been laid off).


Just behind me, and in sharp contrast to this self-consciously macho group, a loose assortment of people of all ages started to assemble for the flight to Papa Westray and North Ronaldsay. At the heart of this gathering was a small, talkative girl of perhaps seven or eight, flying off on her own to visit relatives. Earlier, she had been sitting waiting with her father and another, quieter girl her own age, where she had been the focus of a series of almost continuous if brief exchanges with passers-by (including one of her former teachers) all, it seemed to me, members of her richly inflected, well populated, world.


In these and various other juxtapositions as they occurred in that busy anti-room, I sensed the world of an island-as-extended-village intersecting, on equal terms, with the global ebb and flow of those who, like myself, spend more and more time inhabiting spaces in-between. This was really no surprise. The islands of Orkney, like so many seemingly ‘isolated’ locations, are of course intimately bound into a web of connectivity that links them to innumerable near and distant places. Bound by a wealth of strands – familial bloodlines, a wide range of economic activity, a rich and varied fund of cultural narratives and traditions, and a vast, if often unacknowledged, wealth of material traces mundane and exotic. (One example of the later is a store of exotic stone brought to the island from Canada as ships’ ballast. One stone from this, cut and polished, produced the centrepiece for an unusual and beautiful necklace worn by an elderly lady to whom I had been introduced the night before).


That morning flight, which would eventually return me to County Durham, marked the end of my second, all too brief, visit to Orkney. (The first had been some forty years, when my brother and I spend a couple of days trapped on the island when the boat we were sailing with had to shelter there due to a major storm). This second trip had been initiated by my friend Dr Gina Wall,  an artist and researcher who teaches Fine Art at Moray School of Art, part of the University of the Highlands and islands (UHI). We share an interest in uncanny places, curriculum development in the arts in predominantly rural regions, and the pleasures and challenges of practice-led doctoral supervision. (We are also both members of PLaCE International). My visit made it possible to meet and talk with Gina and two of her colleagues – Anne Bevan – a native Orcadian who for many years taught at Edinburgh School of Art but is now Curriculum Leader for Art & Design at Orkney College, UHI, and Professor Jane Downes – who is the Head of Orkney College Archaeology Department and director of Orkney Research Centre for Archaeology (ORCA).


Jane is centrally involved in various archaeological projects on Orkney: for example at Mine Howe, Knowes of Trotty, and the Ring of Brodgar World Heritage Site. We quickly discovered that the four of us share a common interest in inter- and extra- disciplinary work between and beyond the disciplines of art and science and our discussions included how we might build on productive existing working links between the Archeology Department, the UHI research group Between Places, to which both Gina and Anne belong, and the communities at UHI was set up to serve. Communities that have a rich culture of their own, specific educational needs, and a range of concerns that, in this time of environmental change, deserve to be better represented within wider debates nationally and internationally.


When I walked out to the small plane that would take me back to Edinburgh, the wind smelled of grass newly cut for silage. Normally I’d revel in that scent, a powerful reminder of family summers in the North Pennines. But that morning the smell was freighted with a very real trace of local anxiety. The year on Orkney had been unusually and persistently wet, so that cutting grass for silage had been delayed. This delay had forced farmers to sell off animals they could no longer feed, a situation fraught with serious economic consequences. On Orkney climate change is not an academic topic but one that generates immediate and growing concern.


Anne Bevan had been a thoughtful informant on this and many other issues relating to Orcadian life. Although she had only returned to live on Orkney some two years ago, it was clear that she was now once again very much a part of the community in which she had grown up as a child. When I met her she had just been involved in the music festival, happily undertaken in addition to juggling her various College responsibilities with setting up a croft with her partner. This new enterprise had already resulted in her planting trees with neighbours and, when we meet, she was concerned that the hens she has just been given might not be settling in as well as she would wish. That she was so clearly at ease with living in a polyverse may in part account for the richness and diversity of the exhibition of final year work produced by her students. Work that betrayed no hint of the anxiety to conform to spurious notions of cosmopolitanism that so often haunts undergraduate art students pandering to tutors’ misplaced notions of what constitutes ‘professionalism’.


On the journey north to Orkney I had started to read George Lakoff’s The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide To Your Brain And Its Politics. As a European I find the book’s hectoring tone and somewhat reductive approach – it is exclusively focused on a particular popularist notion of ‘progressive’ American democracy – rather irritating, but it has much to say that is both important and very sobering. The convergence of Gina and Anne’s educational concerns with Lakoff’s insights, when taken against the background of having recently read Geoffrey Parker’s Global Crisis: War, Climate Change & Catastrophe In The Seventeenth Century, are uncomfortably thought-provoking. The overwhelming majority of responses to the problems caused or exacerbated by the Seventeenth Century’s Little Ice Age serve to demonstrate the appalling consequences of the unfettered application of what Lakoff refers to as the narrative of ‘the strict father’ (as authoritarian as it is rigidly hierarchical), as opposed to that he associates with the ‘nurturing parent’.


A paraphrase of one of Lakoff’s observations on authority will serve here to illustrate why. He argues that the conservative notion of authority (modeled on the figure of the strict, authoritarian father beloved of US white Anglo-Saxon Protestant mythology) is such that it is a natural ‘given’ and so must simply be unquestioningly obeyed. (p. 186) It has no truck with the alternative view: that authority and respect need to be earned, requiring an individual or institution to demonstrate real and active empathy and responsibility (‘the ability to respond’) towards others. This clearly requires that both institutions and individuals are open in their dealings and, as such, are able to earn the trust of those with whom they deal. Part of that openness lies in a willingness to give good reasons for decisions and actions that effect others, along with a willingness to debate and modify those decisions when necessary. All this is germane to the various (and I hope ongoing) conversations in which I became entangled on Orkney.

*A lovely Orcadian term meaning small – as in ‘the Peedie Sea’ in Kirkwall or a ‘menu for peedie people’.