- Mirror painted paper mache and wire sculptures

- Hand carved obsidian, onyx, and tourmaline stone game pieces

- Cement game board

The connection of bodies of color is a major catalyst in the creation of western pop culture.

This same culture then assimilates through abundance worldwide to shape language, fashion, music, etc.

Symbolism is then derived from these encounters of bodies, Wether through conflict or companionship, violence or harmony--

But who is in control of this connection? What hand do each of us play in shaping this connection, that shapes culture? Are you an observer or a player? Is there a difference between the two?

Visually referencing Yoko Ono’s chess piece Play It by Trust (1986), carved black stone “pieces” are placed atop a cement “chess” like board in the center of the room on a plinth with faces on the wall looking in on each "player”. Viewers are encouraged to encounter the piece alone or with a partner/opponent. the only light in the room being a spotlight hanging from the ceiling over the chess set, making the surrounding environment almost invisible.

Yoko's piece lacked a direct racial reference and was more of a statement on conflict and competition in general, so I decided to re-view and recreate with a "racialized" lens.

The game pieces themselves materially reference early European busts depicting Africans, also made from stone but materially altered to crystal evoke a more metaphysical idea of what "life" could be inside/represented.

People sometimes anchor spirituality on these (obsidian, onyx and tourmaline) or similar crystals, and in turn carry an inherent value above a somewhat “ordinary rock”.

There’s no set hierarchy to the pieces in Castle, unlike in traditional chess, nor are there duplicates. The carved design on the stones vaguely depicting faces on some furthers this embodiment of humanity/spirit within the stones.

The title Castle is a reference to a maneuver a player may play in a standard game of chess, and by the positioning of the pieces (if unmoved by viewer) are in a position visually similar to as if one was ready to perform this maneuver in an actual game of chess. The title can also be read as a reference to royalty, connecting to the lack of, or abundance of (depending on how it's viewed) "kings" and "queens" seen on the board.

The cement board itself extrapolates on this idea of humanizing the pieces, as the culture that is created from the metaphoric "bodies of color" represented by the stones in real life is often depicted as “street”, and are often stereotyped to have come from these same “streets”.

When we think of street of course this same cement of the sidewalk is Inherently prevalent.

The faces on the wall surrounding the installation are a reference to French philosopher Michel Foucault’s theory of panopticism, a term in which refers to a type of social control that operates through constant observation and surveillance.

The panopticon, a design for a prison created by Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century, is often used as a metaphor for the panoptic model of control. In the panopticon design, a central watchtower allows guards to observe prisoners in their cells without the prisoners being able to see the guards. This creates a sense of constant surveillance, leading to self-discipline and self-regulation among the prisoners.

“Foucault argues that this same dynamic is present in many aspects of modern society, including schools, hospitals, and factories. The panoptic model of control relies on the internalization of discipline and self-regulation by those being observed, rather than on external enforcement. In this way, it creates a more efficient and less costly form of social control. However, it also has the potential to be oppressive and dehumanizing, as individuals are reduced to mere objects to be monitored and controlled.” - Sheridan, Connor. Foucault, Power and the Modern Panopticon. Documents, 2016.

In society we often act like the guard in the tower in this exchange of control when we interact with cultures, hidden and invulnerable. I tried to juxtapose this role by using the mirror eyed faces. The surveillance being inverted forces the viewer to encounter an experience of the guard themself being viewed. This inversion is meant to not only evoke the level of vulnerability one would imagine this guard finally being viewed by its prisoners would have, but to also create awareness of this guard like invisibility we have on the cultures we indulge in.

I again pose the questions, who is in control of this connection? What hand do each of us play in shaping this connection, that shapes culture? Are you an observer or a player? Is there a difference between the two?

Reflecting back on this, I came up with the idea at a time where i felt very isolated at my liberal art school. I've done more writing on it but my experience there socially was so different than the life I grew up with for so many different reasons. With that being said, I saw the culture that i came from and was previously surrounded by, still shaping this very different culture that i was newfound in, yet unaddressed. I wanted to play with peoples weariness to address my cultures influence while its prevalence was undeniable lol. I wanted to see who felt comfortable "touching" "moving" or "controlling" these pieces when confronted with their representation, where as outside of this space they may be unaware of their similar interaction with the bodies in which the pieces represent.

Played with a lot of themes and ideas in this that I dont think i fleshed out all the way in this writing and also lots more thoughts on this that hopefully i'll get out about this project and the concept of "Spectacularization of the Connection of Colored Bodies", but wanted to get something out for now as its just sat in my computer for two years.😅🤦🏽‍♂️

Thanks for reading and as always feedback/discussion is more than welcome!!

- Mirror painted paper mache and wire sculptures

- Hand carved obsidian, onyx, and tourmaline stone game pieces

- Cement game board

The connection of bodies of color is a major catalyst in the creation of western pop culture.

This same culture then assimilates through abundance worldwide to shape language, fashion, music, etc.

Symbolism is then derived from these encounters of bodies, Wether through conflict or companionship, violence or harmony--

But who is in control of this connection? What hand do each of us play in shaping this connection, that shapes culture? Are you an observer or a player? Is there a difference between the two?

Visually referencing Yoko Ono’s chess piece Play It by Trust (1986), carved black stone “pieces” are placed atop a cement “chess” like board in the center of the room on a plinth with faces on the wall looking in on each "player”. Viewers are encouraged to encounter the piece alone or with a partner/opponent. the only light in the room being a spotlight hanging from the ceiling over the chess set, making the surrounding environment almost invisible.

Yoko's piece lacked a direct racial reference and was more of a statement on conflict and competition in general, so I decided to re-view and recreate with a "racialized" lens.

The game pieces themselves materially reference early European busts depicting Africans, also made from stone but materially altered to crystal evoke a more metaphysical idea of what "life" could be inside/represented.

People sometimes anchor spirituality on these (obsidian, onyx and tourmaline) or similar crystals, and in turn carry an inherent value above a somewhat “ordinary rock”.

There’s no set hierarchy to the pieces in Castle, unlike in traditional chess, nor are there duplicates. The carved design on the stones vaguely depicting faces on some furthers this embodiment of humanity/spirit within the stones.

The title Castle is a reference to a maneuver a player may play in a standard game of chess, and by the positioning of the pieces (if unmoved by viewer) are in a position visually similar to as if one was ready to perform this maneuver in an actual game of chess. The title can also be read as a reference to royalty, connecting to the lack of, or abundance of (depending on how it's viewed) "kings" and "queens" seen on the board.

The cement board itself extrapolates on this idea of humanizing the pieces, as the culture that is created from the metaphoric "bodies of color" represented by the stones in real life is often depicted as “street”, and are often stereotyped to have come from these same “streets”.

When we think of street of course this same cement of the sidewalk is Inherently prevalent.

The faces on the wall surrounding the installation are a reference to French philosopher Michel Foucault’s theory of panopticism, a term in which refers to a type of social control that operates through constant observation and surveillance.

The panopticon, a design for a prison created by Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century, is often used as a metaphor for the panoptic model of control. In the panopticon design, a central watchtower allows guards to observe prisoners in their cells without the prisoners being able to see the guards. This creates a sense of constant surveillance, leading to self-discipline and self-regulation among the prisoners.

“Foucault argues that this same dynamic is present in many aspects of modern society, including schools, hospitals, and factories. The panoptic model of control relies on the internalization of discipline and self-regulation by those being observed, rather than on external enforcement. In this way, it creates a more efficient and less costly form of social control. However, it also has the potential to be oppressive and dehumanizing, as individuals are reduced to mere objects to be monitored and controlled.” - Sheridan, Connor. Foucault, Power and the Modern Panopticon. Documents, 2016.

In society we often act like the guard in the tower in this exchange of control when we interact with cultures, hidden and invulnerable. I tried to juxtapose this role by using the mirror eyed faces. The surveillance being inverted forces the viewer to encounter an experience of the guard themself being viewed. This inversion is meant to not only evoke the level of vulnerability one would imagine this guard finally being viewed by its prisoners would have, but to also create awareness of this guard like invisibility we have on the cultures we indulge in.

I again pose the questions, who is in control of this connection? What hand do each of us play in shaping this connection, that shapes culture? Are you an observer or a player? Is there a difference between the two?

Reflecting back on this, I came up with the idea at a time where i felt very isolated at my liberal art school. I've done more writing on it but my experience there socially was so different than the life I grew up with for so many different reasons. With that being said, I saw the culture that i came from and was previously surrounded by, still shaping this very different culture that i was newfound in, yet unaddressed. I wanted to play with peoples weariness to address my cultures influence while its prevalence was undeniable lol. I wanted to see who felt comfortable "touching" "moving" or "controlling" these pieces when confronted with their representation, where as outside of this space they may be unaware of their similar interaction with the bodies in which the pieces represent.

Played with a lot of themes and ideas in this that I dont think i fleshed out all the way in this writing and also lots more thoughts on this that hopefully i'll get out about this project and the concept of "Spectacularization of the Connection of Colored Bodies", but wanted to get something out for now as its just sat in my computer for two years.😅🤦🏽‍♂️

Thanks for reading and as always feedback/discussion is more than welcome!!