doll forest

is doll in the forest because she is hiding, waiting? is she waiting to be found? is she there because she is part of the forest, and has no identity separate from the forest, the undergrowth, the soil?

how did she get there?

(she was born there) when she leaves this place, she carries the essence of the forest with her; shadow spaces, depth, mesh forms (veils). the whole of the forest can’t be found, there is no centre (even though there are edges). the forest is mist in living forms. light reflects, refracts and absorbs in the forest, so that no source can be found. the forest glows… it’s light sources are eyes which both receive and reflect light. the forest hums, a noise of a million languages and symbols naturally packed into a continuous blur.

doll has the same qualities as the forest, her environment suffuses her body space. though she is doll (and not the forest) she exists in harmony with the forest. this harmony may be quiet and still, or violent (the violence is absorbed). what is this violence? it is just what we project onto her, our experience of feelings of decay.

doll/forest is a melancholy place because all its internal energy adds up to a great stillness and silence. looking into the depths, past visions, viruses, dreams and hallucinations, what would we see there? neither cold, dark and damp like towards demons nor warm and liquid like wombs? down deep past the chasm, non-place, with no walls.

doll forest

doll forest
2007
digital c-type print, 56 x 40 cm

doll forest transform

doll forest transform
2007
digital c-type print, 56 x 40 cm

doll forest green

doll forest green
2007
gicleé print, 50 x 50 cm

doll forest cell

doll forest cell
2007
gicleé print, 50 x 50 cm

doll forest red dissolve

doll forest red dissolve
2007
gicleé print, 50 x 50 cm

~

this is a composite, but the progression is that each layer of the doll contains parts of the surrounding background, which merges with the chosen single background. i.e. the composite of the background only extends a short distance around the body – as drawn lines/wireframe rather than substance.

‘doll-probability’ is the expression of a static doll using composite images of the doll in different positions.
doesn’t just encapsulate the doll – it also includes the background (environment). the doll carries around with her elements of her womb (cell). doll and not-doll are part of the same thing: doll.

paradox of doll:

doll + {not doll} = doll

where:

doll <> nothing
{not doll} <> nothing

~

a composite is 2 things:

the idea of the expansion of the still, lifeless body/object into a moving, dynamic state
the idea of the reduction of a moving, living body into a static, lifeless object

this is a either 2 opposites co-existing in a paradoxical state, or the 3rd idea that it is really just about creating a balance of the 2 opposites, life and life-less. giving these 2 opposites equal share in a single composite idea, means either reducing life into a paradox, which is to deny life, or it means understanding that what we experience as living is not the same as what we think of as life – there is a mismatch between what we think we are, and what we really are. understanding lifeless matter – physics – is the same as understanding life. matter vs life: it is not that they are the same thing, more that they are the junction of 2 aspects.

at a very small granularity matter becomes pure mathematical concepts, since that is the only way in which we can represent paradoxical states, where waves and particles are the same thing. this physics is no longer about the mechanism of the machine, it is about the machine itself, and the machine itself is it’s own soul. when art expresses the paradoxical nature of reality, it is expressing the same idea as physics. we only perceive of subject and object, instead of what is really there, which is both subject and object at the same time.

To the alchemists, it was not about finding God as though He were separate from She, but understanding that the only way God can exist is as his own creation. A Maker outside what he has created is against Nature; the idea that there is a higher state beyond God, which is Nature. Since there is nothing higher than God, by definition, it must mean that God and Nature are equals. God invented Nature, and Nature gave birth to God.

the alchemist’s symbols and the physicist’s symbols and the artist’s symbols are all representing the same thing. so perhaps at some point they might all coexist as single expression

(every line feels like a tortuous swinging between competing differential equations
every mathematical symbol hides a story of unimaginable coincidence and intuition)

doll lives in a forest