Space

I am confronting some issues related to exhibiting these dolls, and I thought I would "talk out loud" about what I could do. I am pretty positive that I like how the dolls are working on the floor. It's important to the work that the dolls exist on the same plane as the audience, to create a physical connection. I happened to talk to one of the other GSIs one day and he asked me how I would integrate the doll and the floor, or at least utilize the floor's potential for what it could contribute to the artwork. This is a topic I've talked about before with Danielle and Michael, and I didn't really have any good ideas. This was earlier, back when I was thinking about creating more of a "scene" in which to stage the dolls. I currently want to avoid using props, like backdrops I think. The piece is more about the human connection and less about...rooms? I don't know. I suppose I will still think about this. Isolation of these characters seem important right now.

I'll be experimenting with what I can do with the floor to make the dolls seem like they belong there. An idea posed to me was using a sand base, as the GSI said he had seen other installations that used sand, but as he noted, that will change how the piece is seen. What I got from that idea however, is a platform on which to place these dolls. I thought about maybe painting the floor underneath the dolls, with the shape following the outline of where the doll rests. I could either paint an outline or a filled shape. Anyway, that is just an idea. Since I submitted my grandpa piece to the show, I don't have that to experiment with as far as this goes, but I can do a mock up perhaps with the dolls I have already. I need to fix those up and finish them. They are kind of rough around the edges, and I need to change some pieces and repaint/make clothes to get them up to snuff. I'll also be starting a new doll--introducing Grandma this time, probably. Okay. I need caffeine.

ASE

An update: My submission for the 8th annual All-Student Exhibition is complete.

Pardon the mess

And also the poor photo quality. I'll be taking high-class photos soon. In the meantime, my laptop must do. I hope all the paint can dry within the next few days, so I can finish construction and submit for the All-Student Exhibition. May I introduce to you, my grandpa:

I've been painting the hands today mostly and I'm extremely pleased with how they're turning out. They look pretty real, which is creepy but cool.

Yidle-diddle-didle-didle man

I'm not really liking the format I have with doing my posts weekly to log my studio time, so I think I will have more in quantity and just do them as I go along or think of new things/have more pictures to show, etc.

So! What has been going on in my world? Bodies have been happening. I've been working on a new doll, code name "If I were a rich man". The doll is my grandpa, who pretty much embodies Tevye to a tee, minus being Jewish. He did some theater when he was younger and played Tevye, and my family grew up on this movie. He is a character, that's for sure. I'm hoping to get this done in time to submit to the all-student show. I will...cross my fingers. I've got until the sixteenth, right? Right. Five days, let's do this.

Paper I wrote for class that applies

Reactive Attachment Disorder

Reactive attachment disorder (RAD) is a developmental disorder listed in the DSM-IV-TR with other disorders found in infancy, childhood, and adolescence. It is usually found in children before age five, the hallmark of the disorder being significantly inappropriate social reaction between the primary caregiver and child and ultimately between the child and others (Hornor, 2008). RAD is a disorder that resides within the wider scope of attachment theory, and this theory must be understood to define, classify, explain, and treat reactive attachment disorder.

Attachment theory is a concept first explored by psychoanalyst John Bowlby that states that the relationship formed between caregiver and child is crucial to the development of awareness of self and others. This establishment of identity influences intrapersonal relations throughout a lifetime (as cited in Fairchild, 2009). Since attachment is formed in early childhood and affects future success in connecting with others, this suggests that a disruption in attachment formation results in negative consequences regarding that success. Reactive attachment disorder is one such disruption.

In the DSM-IV-TR, the American Psychological Association lists RAD as “very uncommon” (as cited in Corbin, 2007). Symptoms of RAD fall under two categories: the inhibited type and the disinhibited type. Both types require the presence of pathogenic care provided by the primary caregivers in order to be classified as reactive attachment disorder. The inhibited type characteristically includes an inability to bond with the caregiver, resulting in both resistance to comfort and the lack of seeking comfort. Children with the inhibited type may appear emotively frozen and uninterested in socializing. Alternatively, the disinhibited type exhibits a readiness to socialize with just about anyone, without special preference for the caregiver (as cited in Hornor, 2009). Like inhibited RAD children, disinhibited children do not rely on the caregiver either. Recent studies show that while inhibited and disinhibited types are listed as mutually exclusive, comorbidity of the types is possible, with one study by Zeanah and Emde (1994) showing that seventeen percent of the sample group showed behavior associated with both types (as cited in Hornor, 2009).

All of these symptoms are abnormal in a caregiver-child relationship. It is typical for young children to form a strong bond to their caregivers in normal family dynamics. A caregiver provides a loving, supportive and predictable environment and the child learns to depend on this. Attachment forms. However, when a caregiver fails to provide such an environment, attachment is less likely to form. This is considered pathogenic care, which increases the risk of RAD. Hallmarks of pathogenic care may include physical abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect; parental alcoholism, drug use, and/or mental illness; or the absence of a stable caregiver, such as in orphanages or when a child passes through a series of foster care facilities (Hornor, 2008). The abnormal behavior of a child with RAD is understood through this lens. While pathogenic care does not necessarily always lead to reactive attachment disorder, all cases by definition require pathogenic care to be considered RAD. Other disorders that may present themselves similarly to reactive attachment disorder are mental retardation and the pervasive developmental disorders (PDD). However, according to the DSM-IV, children with mental retardation are able to form parent-child attachments, and children with a pervasive developmental disorder show “other associated impairments in communication and restricted, repeated, and/or stereotyped patterns of behavior“ according to which disorder the child presents (as cited by Corbin, 2007). Most importantly, children with PDD may have abnormal parent-child attachments even without the presence of pathogenic care giving, which is a necessary facet of RAD diagnosis. Understanding the often harsh, pathogenic backgrounds from which RAD children develop not only helps psychologists distinguish this disorder from others, but it also helps explain the disturbed behaviors they exhibit.

Aside from the vast psychological impact that pathogenic care exerts upon a child, it also has physiological manifestations that are largely irreversible. The DSM-IV states that RAD has affects on physical development that are similar to cases of malnutrition, such as stunted growth (as cited by Corbin, 2007). This connection between the psychological and physiological affects of RAD illustrates the mind and body concept of abnormal psychology. The mind is not inseparable from the body and what affects the mind also affects the body and vice versa. In this case RAD children’s minds are affected by the pathogenic care provided by their caregivers, and their bodies in turn may be stunted from the psychological damage of never having a parental bond with anyone.

Studies on the effects of pathogenic care on the brain show that adults with such a history have a smaller hippocampus and amygdala, with evidence showing a decrease in GABA receptors in the amygdala. This in turn “essentially affects the ability of the amygdala to receive messages to calm itself” (Amini et al. as cited by Corbin, 2007). The affected hippocampus, which influences long-term memory storage, is imprinted with early memories from that pathogenic care model and solidifies a social basis that affects how the RAD child interprets the world from then on (Liggan and Kay as cited by Corbin, 2007). These psychological and physiological changes suggest that if not observed early while the child is still developing, children with RAD will grow up to be adults with RAD, who will suffer from the same symptom of crippled intrapersonal relationships. This mind-body connection helps explain the causes of reactive attachment disorder and allows for a multiple avenues of treatment.

In keeping with the idea of attachment theory, if a child with reactive attachment disorder comes from an environment of pathogenic care, treatment should involve the removal of such care and the supplementation of an environment that coincides with the humanistic mantra of unconditional positive regard. The environment should be reliable, nurturing, and loving, so that attachment is able to form. By offering a counterpart to the developing child’s memory of pathogenic care, it is hoped that new models of social interaction and attachment will form cognitively in the brain, allowing for a more developed sense of self and other.

According to the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, there are three ways to approach this attachment therapy: by working with the caregiver alone, with the caregiver and the child together, or with the child alone (as cited by Fairchild 2009). While all methods rely on changing the pathogenic background, the first two involve attempting to improve the existing parenting techniques to create a healthier caregiver-child dynamic. These methods uphold the family systems perspective of abnormal psychology, which recognizes that the whole family is the patient (Hansell & Damour, 2008). However, maintaining the same caregiver-child pairing can be dangerous for the child and in these cases, removal from that environment is necessary for treatment. From that point, the therapist can utilize the third method of treatment and work with the child alone.

Reactive attachment disorder, a disorder stemming from a disturbed connection between caregiver and child, is best understood within the context of attachment therapy. From understanding and defining the problems of the disorder, psychologists can classify its symptoms and begin to explain the causes behind the disorder. With these explanations, treatment can commence in order to help restore normal attachment patterns in these affected children.

References

Corbin, J. (2007). Reactive attachment disorder: A biopsychosocial disturbance of attachment. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 24(6), 539-552. doi:10.1007/s10560-007-0105-x.

Fairchild, S. (2009). Introduction to a special edition: Attachment theory and its application to practice. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 26(4), 287-289. doi:10.1007/s10560-009-0178-9.

Hansell, J., Damour, L. (2008). Abnormal psychology. Array Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Hornor, G. (2008). Reactive attachment disorder. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 22(4), 234-239. doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2007.07.003.

Among Other Things I've Taken Up Smoking

I've been reading this book entitled Among Other Things I've Taken Up Smoking by Aoibheann Sweeney. It started out as pleasure reading...I love getting lost in fiction, and I feel more inspired by stories about families and relationships than I do about facts I guess. Anyway, the story is about a young woman who grows up on an island off the coast of Maine with her father. Her mother died when she was young, and her relationship with her dad was often strange and quiet. She went through high school and didn't really like it...and didn't go to college, so her dad got her a position at a classical literature institute in New York. The story is about her coming of age in the city, and her being confused by life, love and finding happiness.

I thought the novel spoke a lot about attachment...how her relationship with her father affected how she interacted with New York City. She could never step outside herself...outside of that Maine mindset and fitting in with other people who were vastly different from her was difficult. Not in any bad way per se...like she accepted those around her and everything, but she interacted with others based on how she learned how to interact back in Maine. It was very interesting, and I could relate to it a lot.

A lot to think about.

10/19-10/26

This was a week of finding out things for me. I was working on the bodies of the dolls of my mom and dad and putting them together/experimenting with the visual form they would take. Tapered legs? I like the look of them, and it adds that quirkiness or different quality that separates my drawings from my actual sculptures. With the bodies on the dolls, I can see how they fit in space and interact with each other, but I feel that I need to push it more. These are my first dolls, and I have to figure out how attachment is going to be articulated through them. Exciting times.

I also found out, on a more personal note that some important people to me are having health problems--namely my grandparents that I've lived with for the past two summers while I worked my summer job. My grandpa is having lung and heart issues, and he's on oxygen 24/7 now. My grandma went to the doctor and found a lump in her breast, and from the tests they did, they couldn't tell if the abnormal cells were benign or not....so they are going to do a biopsy. So that has been on my mind and will be on my mind until we find out. That with the stress of school has me pretty on edge.

10/12-10/18

This week I've been reflecting about everyone's presentations and I am really itching to get some more work done. Looking back on the very first puppet I made this year, I really see a progression that makes sense to me and that narrows in on my ideas both conceptually and visually.

With the weekend being fall break, I had some obligations out of town as well as really intense studying, so I did not get as much done as I would've liked. What I want to focus on for the next week is producing, especially some of the designs I drew up last week. It's hard for me to work small in painting with oils, because most of my brushes are too big to paint a face the size of a postage stamp, but maybe I will at least try it to see these mock-ups come alive so I'm not bogged down in making real-size end-products. This is the time to see what will work and what won't, and so once I get the bodies all set for the two larger dolls that I have in production, I'll get on that. I will also make some more drawings illustrating attachment and how that could enhance my dolls.

So...big plans, and a need for some production. Time to get working. (Arms and legs have appeared for one doll and in the works for the other. Woo!)

Studio Log 10/5-10/11

So this was the week before the presentations in class, and I've been really thinking about what aspects of memory I want to deal with in my project. By chance I happened upon a book in Borders called A General Theory of Love, and I've started reading it. This made me recall the theory of attachment from psychology, which says that childhood bonding with their parents and other loved ones influences how these children interact with others in adulthood.

Wikipedia article on attachment theory

This was extremely interesting to me, because most of my work in the past relates to familial connection, home, and loss. The word "attachment" also has visual aspect that could really enhance the relationships between the dolls I am creating.

Springing from this, I started sketching small drawings of possibilities for doll interaction. What I am most concerned about is the overall set-up for these dolls...how will attachment be expressed and how should I design the dolls to function?

During this time I also started making a body for one of my dolls, which proved slow-going because it was all handsewn. Primarily I just wanted to get a 3d body out there because it felt like I have been thinking through my concepts and working on the heads I showed last week.

So...things I've been thinking about...Tony Oursler's work, attachment theory, my past work, where I want to be, art therapy, possible doll designs. More next week!

Studio Log 9/28-10/4

This week I focused on making. The physical objects...something visually and technically intriguing to me and hopefully others. Making work as my alter-ego Christine, who does anything she wants, when she pleases, let me step outside my grand plans and look at what I really love to do--painting. I had a bit of an identity crisis related to painting because while I wanted to explore and try new ways of approaching painting and my painting process, I sort of turned my back on how and what I like to paint. This was for a specific class and with specific assignments and with what I felt was a specific "ideal" of what painting meant and what we, as students should strive for. I was feeling a lot of pressure to make paintings in this way, and I tried. Oh how I tried. And however much I tried to change my painting, it wasn't received well. But I felt if I did what I love to do--portraits, it wouldn't have been well-received either. I think that was just a perceived limitation I put on myself because I was questioning the validity of portrait-making and what it all meant on a grander scale. In some aspects, they become rote, dry, or boring. I didn't want to create something purely technical that may mean a lot to me, but not mean anything to other people.

While this history may seem somewhat unrelated to my Integrative Project and how I went about formulating my idea, it is very much the essence of how I approached the whole thing. I was afraid to paint again. I know I can paint, and I know I can paint well, but instead of me worrying about other people finding meaning in it, I was really worried about whether I could find true meaning in my own work. I wanted there to be something more to the painting, so I decided to just skip the subject altogether.

Enter the marionette/doll idea I've been working on. I knew I wanted to work with memory and I had worked with marionette making before and really liked it, so an idea was born. I'll post my first and second iterations of my idea in the next post, so you all can read what it is about. The point is, I was all geared up and excited about this new idea that I didn't really remember my old passion, painting. I am not me without it.

Being Christine, the type-A personality, fur-wearing, unapologetic narcissist who has little regard for the feelings of others, allowed me to do "whatever the hell I felt like doing", which was painting small gouache portraits of people I liked. Ahh, painting. My old friend, you're back! Painting those portraits reignited the fire of my love for technical rendering of faces. I looked at the puppets I had made, and something was missing. Real, human features. Things caricature-esque sculpture of a face can't really express. It's like the difference between having eye contact and not having eye contact with a person. Even walking down the street and looking a stranger in the eye ignites something very human within each person, as if asking "Do I recognize you? Are you a part of me? Should you be?" The puppets I made did not feel like they were breathing, did not have that spark. So I got the idea to utilize my painting skills (and love for painting people) and combine oil portraiture on the actual sculptured puppets/dolls. From the experimenting I've done, I really like the results. I'm excited and I just want to make. Make make make.

Next week's log will include the refinements I've been thinking about and making to my idea: honing in on what aspects of memory I want to convey. Here are some photos:

Sourcing Inspiration Through Linda Weintraub

I was given the following questionnaire in class regarding how I make art. The prompt was "Are you more likely to be inspired by:", and my answers are highlighted below.

• The presence or absence of contentment?
• Personal situations or social conditions?
• Interactions with humans or non-humans?
• Rest or fatigue?
• Sobriety or being high?
• Joy or sorrow?
• Culture or nature?
• Familiarity or mystery?
• Production or consumption?
• The past or the present?
• Facts or feelings?
• Anger or pity?
• Yourself or others?

The presence of contentment, personal situations, humans, rest, sobriety, sorrow, culture, familiarity, consumption, past, feelings, pity, others. Five of these I'll discuss a little more in-depth.

Personal situations:

I'm much more inspired by personal situations due to the fact that I'm much more emotionally impacted by intimate details about another person or people. On that level, I can work by myself, observe and relate to these details and use similarities within myself to react/respond. I connect to people directly and deliberately, even if it is a fragile connection. I deal much better with subtleties than I do with overt or generalized conditions of society as a whole. This may be influenced by the way I handle myself in social spaces. I am reserved and attach myself to one or two people I'm with and don't seek out the opportunity to "work the room". It may seem a stretch to connect how I interact socially with my artistic inspiration, but I think my temperament when approaching both issues is similar. I've often secretly thought of my artwork--or at least the artwork that really comes from me--as being quiet. I prefer it that way, and I don't really feel comfortable with it any other way.

Humans:

I am inspired primarily by humans vs nonhumans. The way the question is worded, it seems like either option is at least a sentient being, but I'll take it as humans vs the rest of the world, including inanimate objects like a chair or something. I'm inspired by other people, probably again because of my personality. I'll forever be an observer--one who will try to understand and empathize with others. Humans are so full of wonderful and tragic stories that I can't resist putting myself in their places. For example, right now I'm in a cafe and from my table I saw a man I thought looked exactly like an acquaintance from high school. Almost uncanny. I played all the memories of Ryan I had in my head, but then the man turned. In profile he was Ryan, a connection, but when confronted with the straight view of his face, the spell was broken. This stranger had intruded in my memories and made me connect my personal stories with him. I hadn't run into him at the airport and ended up on the same connector flight to Chicago. He wasn't a friendly face in an unfriendly world. But even so, we looked at each other longer than even I expected, so maybe I was a potential friend too. Maybe I could've been his airplane acquaintance long ago. I think it is this potential that interests me most of all--the potential in humans to connect to each other, sometimes in unexpected ways.

Sorrow:

I prefer experiencing joy, but sorrow is what inspires me more out of the two. I can't explain it without sounding morose, but I think sorrow has an apparent depth in how it affects people. For example, I have had a lot of joy throughout my life, and that certainly adds up, but it also becomes more normalized than periods of sorrow, at least for the most part in my case. I'm lucky. Because these joy events become normalized and are seen as a part of my modern American life, the sorrow events stand out much more than joy, except for maybe in extreme cases. My mom always asks me why I don't recall all the happy or fun things she did for my sister and I as kids. I remember some of course, but I don't remember her taking us out of school early to head to the lake on some days. It's not that I didn't experience joy when going to the lake, but I just don't remember it. I do remember my mom one day goading me to play on a piece of playground equipment, off of which I promptly fell into a mud puddle. To a self-conscious seven-year-old, that was pretty traumatic. I also remember much later, lying on my parents' couch in the fetal position after my first heartbreak, feeling too numb to move. When I see sorrow in the world, I feel an empathy toward whoever is ailing. I don't pretend to have a sorrowful life, or a life that is harder than others, but I feel an empathy. I connect and interpret the world better in this way, and like I said before, I prefer to turn the scope down to the personal level and operate this way.

Familiarity:

Along this vein, I am inspired by familiarity, because it is the facilitating force in how I interact with the world. I use what I know--my memories and thought patterns--to figure out the world. I'm very interested in how these connections are formed between my interior world and the exterior world around me. I also want to be familiar to others, to connect. It's not that easy to do, at least for me, despite my efforts. Mystery is interesting too, but there aren't a whole lot of things that I can't familiarize in my mind, at least on a partial level.

Others:

Finally, I chose others vs myself. I am perpetually uninteresting to myself, except for the ways I connect to others. I am a die-hard introvert, but I am contemplating how others relate and how we relate together rather than just drawing inspiration purely from myself. That's really the only way I can find words to explain it.