I have found that trying to explain my “artistic process, aims and influences” in a detailed fashion inhibits the function of the work itself, and influences the viewers’ methods of interpretation. So if I were asked to define any particular aim or goal in creating the work, it would be an avoidance of directing the viewers’ process of selection in their interpretation of the work. I do realize, however that attempting not to direct the viewer in some way is an endeavor in which I must inevitably fail.
By viewing it do you try to figure it out as though it has some final solution, imagine different outcomes, or ask “why not words”? Do you keep on investigating the work after not getting a satisfactory answer?
These are systems, but systems of what?
—
Tray Drumhann is an artist, photographer and poet whose work has appeared in such publications as VLAK, The Round: A Literary Journal Based At Brown University, 3:AM Magazine, Ars Medica: A Journal of Medicine, the Arts and Humanities, Rune: The MIT Journal of Arts and Letters, Western Humanities Review and Rampike.
—
PENDULUM First published in 3:AM Magazine
RANGE First published in Western Humanities Review
INTERPRETER and COUNTERPOINT First published in VLAK 4
