First!

A piece I wrote for the 4th issue of Bones Magazine: http://www.bonesmagazine.co.uk/?page_id=479


What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question has, over eras and centuries and epochs, scrambled the brains of many. How can one thing be without the other thing being first?

You could argue that the egg came first, because other animals, like dinosaurs, had been laying eggs long before chickens existed. There must have been one egg, laid way back in prehistory by some now extinct animal, which gestated the universe’s first ever chicken. Mummy bird/lizard hybrid was expecting to see baby bird/lizard hybrid staring back at her and instead she got a feathery surprise, like a genetic Nestle Kinder toy.

But if you’re a purist and insist on the egg being entirely chicken in its origin in the first instance, then the answer is that the chicken came first – it emerged from its hybrid Kinder surprise shell as the universe’s first ever chicken and in all the excitement squeezed out the universe’s first ever bona fide egg.

Either way, it’s pretty hard to fathom unless you see it for the red herring that it is. That is to say: the origin of their existence isn’t the question, their existence is the answer. Forget looking at it as a 3 dimensional question: the chicken, the egg, the winner. You need to throw a fourth dimension into the mix – Why either at all?

The most perfect designs, whether in art, engineering, nature, are those that solve a problem. Before the egg, before the chicken, there was the nascent need-state requiring that both should exist in the first place; from then it was only a matter of arriving at a solution by way of a piece of design so perfect that it has lasted thousands of years. Thanks, nature!

It is this process which has provided the template for inspired conceptions throughout the ages. Would we have had high heels without the insecurity of short monarchs? Would we have arrived at a point where Alvar Aalto designed his famous cantilevered chair without first the ancient problem of sore buttocks? Would we have had the Coca Cola bottle without a landscape of soft drink container mediocrity? Would we have had the ipod without first the irritation of fiddly buttons?

Problems are the genesis of all invention and with that, the point of inception for almost all great designs. No one thing ever exists purely in and of itself only. Even the most self-indulgent, ostensibly useless works of art are a response to their creators’ own internal needs for recognition and expression.

That’s why, when striving to find an answer, you have to first look beyond the question to the problem that gave birth to it. Only by continuing to find solutions do we keep evolving. Never stop asking questions and never stop seeking answers because the day all problems are solved will be the day that marks the death of creativity. Conundrums like the chicken and the egg are important because arguing over what came first will give rise to what comes next.

ASEAN

The ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations), is a geo-political and economic organisation formed of 10 countries, one of which is Burma. Despite 8 of the 10 countries being what you might describe as regimes of varying degrees of fascism and therefore already of dubious credibility, Burma (a '10' on the fascism scale) was allowed to join because Indonesia and Malaysia felt it would 'boost their numbers'. Okayyyyy.

ASEAN has a charter that was drafted by the member countries in 2008 in which all member countries agreed to abide by the following guidleines, summarised thus - 'We won't act like horrible genocidal maniacs':


a) respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity and national identity of all ASEAN Member States; b) shared commitment and collective responsibility in enhancing regional peace, security and prosperity; c) renunciation of aggression and of the threat or use of force or other actions in any manner inconsistent with international law; d) reliance on peaceful settlement of disputes; e) non-interference in the internal affairs of ASEAN Member States; f) respect for the right of every Member State to lead its national existence free from external interference, subversion and coercion; g) enhanced consultations on matters seriously affecting the common interest of ASEAN; h) adherence to the rule of law, good governance, the principles of democracy and constitutional government; i) respect for fundamental freedoms, the promotion and protection of human rights, and the promotion of social justice; j) upholding the United Nations Charter and international law, including international humanitarian law, subscribed to by ASEAN Member States; k) abstention from participation in any policy or activity, including the use of its territory, pursued by and ASEAN Member State or non-ASEAN State or any non-State actor, which threatens the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political and economic stability of ASEAN Member States; l) respect for the different cultures, languages and religions of the peoples of ASEAN, while emphasising their common values in the spirit of unity in diversity; m) the centrality of ASEAN in external political, economic, social and cultural relations while remaining actively engaged, outward-looking, inclusive and non-discriminatory; and n) adherence to multilateral trade rules and ASEAN's rules-based regimes for effective implementation of economic commitments and progressive reduction towards elimination of all barriers to regional economic integration, in a market-driven economy".

Now, let's examine those guiding principles as they relate to the philosophy of Burma's peaceful endeavours. Or rather, don't. At least that's what a very bright, articulate and argumentative American lawyer tried to do in this morning's debate when she put it to the speaker that the charter is at best, flawed and at worst totally useless due to its failure to adequately deal with Burma's continued flagrant human rights abuses.

Ahhh, but you see it's not the fault or responsibility of the charter because it specifically says that no member countries are allowed to interfere with the running of other member countries, explained the guy on the panel. So hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil is actually the best policy. Also it doesn't matter anyway because nowhere in the charter does it deal with the issue of non-compliance - i.e: it's not considered a binding document!! So really, it's just for fun. I guess it makes them feel important or something.

Also, everything agreed on the ASEAN agenda must be done by consensus. If one member country doesn't want something to happen, it doesn't happen; even if the 9 other countries do. Yes, that's right, amongst this collective of governments with sketchy human rights track records, minority actually rules! What a brilliant system. So wide open to abuse that it just takes one malevolent faction with an ulterior agenda to squash policy before it's even got off the ground.

In summary, the ASEAN have written a charter that is not binding upon anybody; and have designed a decision making process that could only possibly be made more obstructive to decision making if it dictated that no one was allowed to make any decisions at all. Ever.

In the meantime, these busy fools with their feet under the UN General Assembly's table are happy to ignore the genocide and terrorisation of ethnic people that continues in Burma.

Hesng Keoh Fah, English editor for the Burmese news agency based in Chiang Mai, says, "The more I hear about the politics of it all, the more I just want to run away". "The international community doesn't seem to care that the biggest problem in Burma is the displacement of the ethnic people. That needs to be sorted out first. The people wouldn't even mind even if the junta just stole their land, but they hurt them too; that's why they're scared and that's why they run to Thailand. Because even if they give up their land to the junta without a fight, they still get raped and murdered."

Then she told me how she'd read a report the other day that told how a 6 year old girl from one of the ethnic regions in Shan State had been raped by one of Burma's military. And I wondered where in the charter it said that that was ok.

Photos Inspired By Whisky

I read on the Independent's website today that the photographer, Rankin, has shot a photographic essay for Macallan single malt comprised of shots 'inspired by whisky'.

If 'whisky inspired' photographs were what Macallan was after, they could have spared themselves the cash and simply gone on facebook.

The single malt is a generous muse. Have a look at some of my own whisky inspired pics here. In your face, Rankin, you wanky bastard...


















Whisky. Rank(in)

Steve McQueen

I wrote this piece for a site a couple of weeks ago and it got killed, so I thought I'd put it up here where at least someone might read it!




Official war artist and Turner Prize winner Steve McQueen was commissioned by the Imperial War museum to create what would turn out to be his polemical piece, Queen and Country. Together with the families of those who have been lost to the Iraq war, McQueen has created a cabinet containing a series of sheets of postage stamps, each depicting an image of a dead soldier which has been donated by their family. Queen and Country has been exhibited all over the UK, however until the images are turned into real stamps, the work remains incomplete.

McQueen gave an interview to the Guardian’s art critic, Adrian Searle, at the National Portrait Gallery where Queen and Country is currently being exhibited. Searle began by asking about the Royal Mail’s reluctance to agree to make the images into actual postage stamps.

“No one is more deserving of being on a stamp than people who have died for Queen and country”, says McQueen. “If you really think I’m wrong in thinking that then convince me and I’ll step back. I don’t know why Royal Mail are so resistant to the idea, they could do with the good PR and the money.”

Apparently the Royal Mail’s objection is based on their assertion that the stamps would be defaced by the post mark and that that would somehow undermine the subjects of the portraits, but as McQueen points out, “The queen gets defaced thousands of times a day”.

Could it be more to do with the fact that they’re just a bit squeamish about war and death? Perhaps, but the public response to McQueen’s work has been overwhelmingly positive, making the Royal Mail’s reluctance seem even more unnecessary. Queen and Country manages to bypass all the usual media sensationalism and politicking associated with images of war and present an intimate and moving commemoration of the individuals who have died fighting for Britain. It sounds jingoistic but in fact the work is far from it; Searle describes Queen and Country as anti-monumental and McQueen agrees.

“Stamps have a certain value because they’re so small and you have to handle them carefully, it makes them all the more precious. Also the small portrait requires extra attention and therefore makes it more poignant.”

That’s why it’s so important to McQueen that the images are made into real, postable stamps, “because then they would be in circulation among the population so anyone can access and participate in the art.”

Presumably contributions from the revenue from special edition commemorative stamps bearing a Turner Prize winning artist’s work would be welcomed by veteran’s charities all over the country. Seems like Royal Mail are missing a trick. Whatever. But their loss is still our loss, and especially the families’ losses.

“When I first started out with this I didn’t expect to get any response from the families and feared I’d failed before I had begun”, says McQueen.

“But slowly the images started to trickle in accompanied by hand written letters thanking me. To hold those images in my hands and sense that you could almost smell the houses that they had come from, I could empathise and get an inkling of what that loss must have been like for them. I tell you, had to have a couple of drinks after that.”

Whether you agree with the war or not is not the point. Regardless, thousands of young men and women have died fighting it and Queen and Country is an individual, intimate tribute to them that, in the words of the National Portrait Gallery’s Director, Sandy Nairn, “forces us to contemplate in a different way”. Work such as McQueen’s, that can contribute in an empirical way to the wider conversation without an agenda, is about as honest an example of public art as you can get.

Queen and Country is exhibiting at the National Portrait Gallery until the 18th July. Go see it, and while you’re there buy the book because some of the proceeds are donated to veteran’s charities.

Old Jamaica TV Shoot

I went to Jamaica to shoot a TV commercial for Old Jamaica Ginger Beer. I know, jammy right? Here are some pics, the good ones are courtesy of our fantastic producer, Amyra Bunyard; the crap ones are mine.

Social Responsibility Poster Campaign Fail

Personally I prefer to wake up to a cup of coffee and maybe some breakfast radio, but to each their own...