I like Jump’s work but I have no idea what to do with it.
She mentions her conceptualization revolves around ideas of ‘memory’, ‘belonging’ and ‘home.’
It’s not that I think she’s misjudging her own work. It’s that if those are her primary considerations–then they are not readily apparently in the work (at least not without enough mental squinting to prompt a migraine).
I’d venture that the work is about those things insofar as each of those notions involve some degree of fragmentation. Memory–I remember it like this, you remember it like that but the truth was likely somewhere between contradictory accounts. Belonging–do you accept me for who I am, who you think me to be, who you want me to become? ‘Home’–as a very wise person once told me: home is the place you can’t leave fast enough but once you’re gone all you do is count the days until you come back.
It’s as if she’s trying to produce work that matches the vision in her head but in doggedly pursuing that vision, she loses sight of subtle course corrections suggested by the ways product contradicts process.
Like she makes wonderful self-contained images that are visually dynamic (1, 2) yet convey a strong sense of temporal-spacial distension–as if the viewer is a voyeur watching a dreamer experience their dream.
But such cohesive and clear photos are placed side-by-side with the above–which is lovely, yes; but there’s something languid, informal and uncertain to it.
Interestingly, as dynamic as some of the other work is, I get caught up wondering what I’m missing with the image above. And I can’t help think that if whatever is absent was at least pointed to by the photo, I would probably prefer this to the more compelling but distant considerations.
Still, I think Jump is talented and she clearly has a solid enough foundation that if she continues to make work, I have no doubt her work will become more focused and incisive.