006. Thought Experiments: A Conclusion

I’ve realised that the Thought Experiments I’ve conducted have actually been much more effective than I initially felt. To recount;

I started with the idea that alchemy was simply about the union and transformation of opposites to create something of value. I also thought about the self portraits I’d done before, and the way in which they dealt with the influential factors of childhood. I remember them to address the idea that daydreams are compensatory – I took this to relate to alchemy, in the sense that these daydreams are conjured in attempt to fulfil something greater. At this time, I also thought about the way in which all people, despite their situations, are somehow connected through their developmental stages. Despite some processing, I still had difficulty refining my formal theory of alchemy into something more sophisticated and detailed. I was also stuck as to how to combine that definition with the idea of universal experience and the compensatory figure. That’s when I turned to Jung’s theory of alchemy, knowing that amongst his philosophies was also the notion of the collective unconscious (the universal connection linking all people). I also remember his theory to include the statement that much of what we experience in terms of dreams/daydreams/relationships has to do with a search for finding the whole – to TRY to engage the part of oneself that is currently suppressed, in attempt towards fulfilment.

It turned out that Jung’s theory of alchemy was not quite to my liking. I did not like the idea of the four basic stages of transformation, death and rebirth etc. I found it to be to instructional. However, I was able to discover the relationship between alchemy and the collective unconscious. Here, the collective unconscious holds the archetypal figures. It is these characters who then prompt people through the alchemical process. The archetypes aid, causing you to make certain mistakes and decisions, all from which one learns and as a result, moves closer to wholeness. At this point I began to confuse myself slightly. I rejected the idea of the alchemical process as a four stage course, and I also tried to combine my ideas of a compensatory figure and the archetypes. I understood that the archetypes could very well be the compensatory figures in the sense that they prompt people towards wholeness. However, this didn’t quite work. The archetypes are characters that push one towards fulfilment, moving towards one goal, whereas the compensatory figures I had in mind were more representative of the nature of fulfilment – the healthy/ unhealthy ways in which humans tend to fill gaps. These creatures deal almost solely with the emotions, not the spiritual being as a whole. I turned to disregard my compensatory figures and their theory, I suppose this was because I wanted to create a work that was universally reflective. I thought it would make more sense to represent a pre-established theory (Jung’s).

After a while, I became quite frustrated. I felt that in representing Jung’s theory of the collective unconscious and the archetypes, I could not create something truly dynamic. I thought my piece would just end up a flat visual portrayal of the theory. I was afraid my piece would lack the dynamic and evocative nature that I believe all artwork should have. That is when I reverted back to my original theory of compensation. This was the idea formed from my ‘instincts’, and I feel much more engaged with this idea. I’ve now realised that I could very well link this to Jung’s understanding of alchemy. As opposed to linking it directly to the four stages of alchemical process, I can connect it to his idea that daydreams/dreams/relationships are the self attempting to achieve wholeness (as mentioned before).

I know I’d previously wanted to make something more universally evocative, and this is more personal, but I suppose that ultimately the evocative nature of a work comes down to the successful use of visual language. I don’t need an established theory to create a universally engaging work, just a good sense of what makes visual impact. If I can do that, then narrative interpretation becomes redundant.

Now, onto refinement.