Since the relative success of the 'Youths Dead' exhibition' i began to review the finer elements of my practise. Without getting too wordy, i decided to start experimenting and really trying to branch my practise out from first year. I made a series of decisions at the start of the first year, from refining my organisational techniques and 100% studio commitment and attendance to keeping a regularly update blog giving my practise in its entirety complete coverage. So here is a sample of the documentation of 'Face (Untitled)', a completed work displayed on the 02/11/2010.
This work was critiqued by my tutor group at university, a diverse group consisting of members from 1st, 2nd and 3rd year. The Feedback was both unsuprising and astonishing. How you ask? I will divulge.
Initially the group started by pointing out on simple observations, for example one student noticed only one of the eyes had a set of eye lashes. The head had no shoulders attached to it, there are no pupils and also that it was darker on one side; obvious i know but these simple observations are often what leads to greater more concrete realisations.
Then with the help of the tutor the conversation manifested, another student said, 'I don't know if I get it, but i don't know if I’m meant to'. The holy grail indeed, the mother ship of all comments when you make experimental work relating to ambiguity and vagueness, specifically removing the context from something. In this case, simply leaving the eyes out, removing the shoulders creating a bust look and leaving out a set of eye lashes begins the process where the viewer is having to construct and apply the context themselves.
The group encountered my work and immediately commented on what wasn't there and the way that made them feel and think. If i was to be as bold as to make comment myself i would say that this was a success for an experimental piece of work. Although to call it a complete success would be a falsity. As I’d hope for and expected there where elements of the work people would have liked to of seen differently. (Being a conscious human being i am a complete advocator of the fact the different people have different opinions. Also looking to further my developing practise it's important to get negative constructive feedback.) The presentation of the work was raised, in several contexts; the first of which being the frame, someone suggested that because of the 'coming out of the wall element' perhaps the frame should be wall mounted card or at the very least white to maintain the neutral atmosphere the work promotes. They referred specifically to a concept of 'camouflage'. The other presentational link was an array of comments regarding the proportions of the drawing, this is a perfectly just comment and fully expected in the world of art critiques. HOWEVER. I had to personally raise the issue that the face came across out of proportion because i had cut along the headline making the work deliberately distorted depending upon the angle you look at it from.
Now the fact that the gap behind the head and the reason for it's existence wasn't discussed is not the fault of the group. It obviously didn't strike people as something particularly important to comment on. This for me was the astonishing part, it has directly informed the next few steps i will be making. No doubt i will keep it from you. Read this space! Overall a very exciting group crit of my work, it's given me fuel and direction regarding the next thing on the agenda regarding my practise. Thanks’ for reading.
0 comments:
Post a Comment