I don’t deny it and, in fact, I am quite proud and excited especially since it probably is one of the best pieces I have done in this project. Now you might say if it’s one of the best then it’s because it was someone else’s good idea that makes it good! To which I would ask which of the many versions by various artists did I copy? Or is it an amalgam (an interesting word to pop out considering the context of this piece!)? Is it a cop-out or is it very clever? It references 400 years of the history of art, plus the history of physics and of chemistry; touches into the realms of philosophy and religion; demonstrates my understanding of the traditional technologies of communication and my knowledge of art techniques. Could it be said that the earliest two versions I know of were in themselves a cop-out – one that I recognise myself liable to? Then, taking all of that into account, I delivered a finished piece that is technically pretty good and almost perfect against the needs of the idea – especially in the choice of materials – as well as being pretty good to look at!
All that is pretty good when you consider that when I returned to the studio this evening I was vacant of ideas and got pretty despondent that my first fiddlings about were leading nowhere. There is a whole magnificent history of stealing other people’s ideas throughout the history of all the arts to be discussed. I have made this piece my own partly because of the intellectual content behind why I did it, which opens up another discussion about what art really is. Sadly I have neither the time nor energy to think about it right now, let alone construct an argument about it. Another day maybe.