The liminal and the void are the same, not the same. They share qualities essences sensibilities and lacking. Yet the void by its nature must be empty. The liminal is thick and soupy,. In both locations references become null, maps Undraw themselves and time frays.
In both codes and coordinates unravel, like nets cast upon the world to create order. To locate the self.
But to exit the void leaves what?
To exit the liminal leaves the old behind and ushers forth the new, change, transformation.
There are a number of references which need to be kept apart and should not be used interchangeably. The liminal, the void, the in-between. The non place. The Third Space. The middle.
Specifically the liminal has a vectorality of the passage.
The liminal is full.
The void empty
Maybe in Kapoors work the void correctly identifies what is generated by imperialism, a consuming absence. Where as UvR’s work identifies the marginal liminal experience - not so removed. Not empty but ambiguous.
With my artwork things are the same not the same. I use an objects history to locate a vector, but replace it in time establishing another vector. In the materiality I am using its history. It’s Hauntology. With the fence panels I have in my work I am engaging in the history of a friend who’s now passed. It’s purpose haunts. A fence a boundary a margin. The materials history , purpose and materiality become part of the minor literature.