After my critique, I had studio visits with several faculty. This provides a different format for feedback. The focus is less on the success of pieces presented, and more on how to continue. I got a lot of advice. Even though some of it seemed contradictory, it was all good. You can't expect professors to tell you what to do with your art. That is your own job. They will ask you questions and offer ideas to consider. It is impossible to follow all of this advice.
I am learning that I need to focus my work better. As one professor put it, I need to make sure I answer all of the "stupid" questions, the things that may be obvious (or unconsidered) are the ones that hang viewers up. If any spaces are left conceptually empty, viewers will supply their own ideas to fill them. I need to be in the moment with my work when I am creating it. It's ok to be in a mental zone where I am just focused on working, but if I let myself fall into making things and not being present with them, the quality will suffer.
I'm also learning that there isn't one true answer. Every professor and student I've talked to had different ideas about what did or didn't work. the trick is to read between these different ideas. There isn't a formula to make better artwork. Improvement is the result of having a better understanding of what causes people not to connect with a piece. Addressing those doesn't mean following the exact suggestions, but it is important to consider them. Even though I will probably not cover everything by the next critique (which is in three weeks), I will have tried. Chances are that things will go better.
No comments:
Post a Comment