What to do about the inkblot’s bad reputation
The inkblot is infamous! It suffers a bad reputation in the nondynamic Psychology world where it is considered more art than science. Ironically, in the art world there are those who see it as more Psychology than art. One shared perception has to do with the idea that visually it signifies a test. In Psychology it is attacked for being a poorly constructed test. In art, the viewer’s inability to get past the concept of test or, that I am somehow using the blots to read minds, discourages visual interest such that the poetry and lyricism of the inkblot images are not even processed. So, the question is what to do about this test signifying situation? Do I appropriate Andy Warhol’s strategy and exhibit it like a test of some kind, thereby neutralizing the criticism that it is a test? I have tried to vary the formal aspects of the blots (see phase II images) so as to disassociate them from the test situation but the problem with that is that it sacrifices the associational value of bisymmetry. I have also tried to expand into figurative work but that promises to continue the problems discovered by my phase 2 work which is to say that people, upon focusing on the figurative imagery lose sight of the inkblot imagery.
No comments yet.