The possibles of sculpture
“The possible of sculpture, or I shall suffocate! “ 1
The above epigraph, associated with the thought of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, can be traced back to Sören Kierkegaard.2 The initiator of existentialism, Kierkegaard envisaged the possible as an exit from a reality that has “become necessity or banality.” As a means of existence, inscribed in the subject’s heart, the possible is brought to life in religious experience. Deleuze and Guatarri, on the other hand, applied the possible to the field of aesthetics, especially the creation of art. To create, thus, is to create the possible. As a “being of sensation,” the artwork is a composite of percepts and affects that transpose new possibilities for existence into various materials. In this essay, I undertake a brief reflection on these transpositions as practised in the field of sculpture – specifically, in several recent works by three young artists: Chloé Desjardins, Dominic Papillon and Francis Arguin.
Before we get to that, though, it is important to remember that modern sculpture first made its appearance in sculpture workshops. It was in this space, devoted to artistic labour, that sculptors distanced themselves from artisans. This shift in status, however, entailed continued respect for a tradition involving the principle of imitating nature. In the view of Winckelmann, one of the first art historians, imitating the beauty of nature was an aesthetic requirement for any artist wishing to excel in his art.3 On the other hand, imitating, he emphasized, is not copying.
…