Synopsis and personal thoughts of ‘Creative Accounting: Not Knowing In Talking and Making’, from On Not Knowing: How Artists Think, 2013, Fisher, Elizabeth & Fortnum, Rebecca (ed.), Black Dog Publishing, p70-87.

I found Rebecca Fortnum’s research on the creative processes of artists thought provoking and balanced by insight from different artists. I found myself critically questioning logic, making comparison and still left contemplating on how to avoid predictability to achieve an unknown outcome.

Fortnum states that virtually for all artist, the search for the unknown outcome is not only welcome but provides a driving force within the creative process. This is echoed by citing TJ Diffey in which she notes that to create is to engage in undertakings of which the outcome cannot be known, defined or predicted. She goes on to say that “In talking and in making the artist comes to know, but that knowing is never complete. In the same way that an artist’s work is never done.” (Fisher and Fortnum, 2013) Whist I accept that exploration without constraint is essential to an artist’s creativity, I also believe that there is a point in which ideas are formed and shaped that would define and predict the outcome. Furthermore, without this – when does the artist stop without knowing what it is, they want to achieve.

I was intrigued by the Wilding’s drive for a Eureka moment, and equally by the comments of artist Maria Chevska discussing her interests in that ‘epiphany type moment’ and in the sense of failure. This resonated with my own thinking and artwork during Painting 1 (Level 1). I found considerable enjoyment in failure or to be more specific, the scrapping the paint from a canvas that moments before I may have thought was finished. This sentiment is echoed by Ryan Gander, who is quoted by Fortnum, “If I make a work that is successful, and I know how, then it’s no longer challenging.  (Fisher and Fortnum, 2013).  

The concept of a studio as a “privileged space of imagery freedom” is an interesting one. A place of creation or restriction?  Fortnum presents a balanced argument with no clear conclusion. I don’t believe that there is a definitive answer as I am sure all artist will have their own ideas as to what defines a studio space, and more importantly, how it is used. I am fortunate to have a studio, but when the weather conditions permit, that space spills out into the garden. The constraint of my studio is space – not creative thinking. Although it could be argued that these are intrinsically linked.

Fortnum discusses working from ‘intuition’; defined in the dictionary as the ability to understand something instinctively, without the need for conscious reasoning. The ability for an artist, or anyone to push beyond their comfort zone and into places they didn’t know existed is not a natural instinct. As defined by Freud as the “hidden familiar thing”, can we really ignore or rebuff our intuition. Perhaps Fortnum’s suggestion of “creating space for not knowing, both physical and intellectual”, will go some way to achieving this I I hope so!

An array of media platforms has given greater access to artists, and artists to the public, critics, collaborators, collectors and alike. The notion that artists writing or speaking on their work limits further development of the ideas or processes seemed somewhat illogical, as was considering this as a conclusion rather than an explanation of their practice. If this is the case, we must also consider the audience or how an artist portrays or markets themselves, and/or their artwork. Whilst this may be true for some artists, further explanation and context may have been helpful to draw conclusion.

Developing a greater understanding about physical and intellectual ‘space’, the need for ‘not knowing’ within the creative process, and our ability to resist notions of knowledge and push boundaries that may even scare us, has been though provoking.

---

Bibliography

Fisher, E. and Fortnum, R. (2013). On not knowing how artists think. 1st ed. London: Black Dog Publishing, pp.70-87