While landscape theory is the basis of my research, my object-based work hovers between abject and simplistic. The connection between the two is the idea of history. James Elkins describes history as a characteristic of landscape as opposed to nature, and as the pieces evolve, their history is the accretion of events which accumulate as the objects develop.

Process-based and materials-driven, the objects also connect to landscape through the attributes of spatiality, temporality and materiality. Something happens along the way and the pieces amass and complicate. Once they achieve a certain criticality, they then start to disintegrate or dissolve, like an exploded view or particle diagram. Sometimes the central idea simply collapses and disappears, the residue of the making all that is left; other times the fragments open up individually like a landscape view unfolding along a journey. Immersive or intimately scaled, the works reveal a bodily relationship

Although narrative is not consciously considered, it unavoidably clings to the works, the making leaving clues and indicators of what has just happened.

The experiential works, again like landscape, initially engage the senses through materials used, time needed to experience or actuate/perform the work, and the direct relationship to the body. Here the dominant eye is deliberately disregarded (nothing much to look at), allowing peripheral or unfocused vision to centre the viewer spatially and haptically.

But some works claim all these territories: The Act of Looking is both an object not much to look at and an experience, bridging these aspects of my practice.