Trash Replication Towards Content
All of the replication projects possess a theme of deception. That is, all objects appear to be the same upon first glance but as the artists, we know that one is an original and one is a replica. This theme raises an issue of judgment. Which object possesses more value? The original, because authentic trash, or the replication, because of its almost indistinguishable character? Needless to say, the theme of deception is applicable to any kind of replication project.
The content does not seem to shift much between the pieces within our group. Rather, all of the objects that were replicated are consumer items, which are of no value to us anymore, hence, the reason why they were trashed in the beginning. If I could have selected anything to replicate, I would have replicated something more functional and/or aesthetically pleasing. The ironic thing about this project is that by replicating trash, we have created more trash, whereas if we had replicated an object that was functional or had some aesthetic value, the replication would also have some value. Nevertheless, the replicated trash possesses artistic value, which comes from the amount of time spent and skill required in creating the structure and replicating the details.
The required presentation makes people appreciate the art work because otherwise, the replication may very well be overlooked as just another piece of trash. Mounting it on the wall, however, draws attention to itself and causes people to wonder why it is being presented, which leads to a deeper interaction between the viewer and the work. Ideally, I would present my piece on the floor, as if it was carelessly tossed, to see if people might pick it up to throw away. Then, I guess I could consider my work a success. ;)