Posts
In response to the crit from a few weeks ago, I'll address my goals from the crit. I wanted to find out what people get out of looking at the series. I also wanted to avoid technical concerns, and get down to content and inferred meanings.
I showed my paintings, and the source image, and talked a little bit about the source image.
The comments were mostly about things that I could do to it to get it to be flashier. i.e. some metallic paint, mirrors, beads, bedazzler, reflective things, etc. I don't think I'm going to go that route, until I've reached a breaking point with the materials I currently am using. I did, however, go to Pearl and get mad metallic paint.
The critique was short, and I don't remember anyone having any other suggestions other than experimenting with materials. There was no formal analysis, and no one seemed up to the challenge of talking about content. Which makes me think the paintings might be unapproachable, or difficult to access...
I take it the critique participants found the paintings a little boring, and not flashy enough. Though I'm not sure if making it more flashy would hurt the balance I am working on to balance a cultural critique with a minimalist painting. I wouldn't want the face value of flashy kitsch gems distract a viewer from focusing on extracting a deeper message. Therefore, I am going to ignore the only suggestions that I got, and keep on doing what I'm doing. Because I like it. And that's the only reason to make anything.
