October 24, 2008

R.B., P.H.T., M.T.

Rashad- I know you have a louder voice, and an expressive one, it would be nice to see you use it to talk about your work. I also felt like you skimmed the surface of your references. It would be nice to hear more about them.

PHT- It is funny that we laughed at the expense of your relationship breakup. Sorry about that. :) It was nice to see the span of photos but i felt like the little tid bits of other work could have been expanded on. I was kind of surprised how quickly they were mentioned. You have mastered the ability of giving a talk to people, not at us. I am envious of this ability because you can really engage the audience.

Meng- great to see the video. I am interested in seeing a lot more of your work and hearing you talk about it. I am curious to see how you could use film more when talking about your work. I think someone mentioned clips from your references. I guess I would like to see more all around, of your work and references.

September 22, 2008


I really enjoyed seeing Juanita's early work and progression to her current work in relation to the outside experiences affecting her art. I'm excited about her motivations to convey human experience and condition without directly using the figure. The length of the presentation didn't allow for many comments in relation to critique, but everyone in the class now has insight into her process for future conversations.

David's installation allowed the class to experience a situation and talk about initial responses before he contributed to the conversation. This format of critique is very beneficial for the artist to get a read of how the work is communicating, as well as the audience to experience the work without limitations.

September 19, 2008

Thanks & Self-Critique

First, I want to thank you all for your comments (blog posts or emails), they are incredibly valuable.
I definitely admit that my first studio critique wasn't a real studio critique at all, and the presentation format I chose didn't quite leave space and time for a discussion, as some of you already mentioned. However, I must admit that making that presentation allowed me to organize, see and evaluate my ideas and practice from an objective perspective, which is now helping me to understand where I am in this ongoing process. I look forward to having some new work done and share it with you in a physical space, instead of a boring flat slide.

I also want to share my experience with David's critique. I enjoyed the fact that we went to an unexpected "hidden space" inside the art department to find his piece. I think that the intimate space and general set up easily invited us to interact with the installation and discuss about it. However, ironically, it also potentialized the necessity of avoiding such evident intimacy. I liked that ambiguity. For this reason, it made me question if the experience would be completely different if we were to see that piece individually and not as a group.

September 18, 2008


I felt like I really got a much more in-depth idea of who Juanita is, and what her art is about through her presentation. I felt like I was in the same space as her in terms of knowing what it is out there in the world that motivates me to make art, but feeling somewhat unsure of what kind of art or practice is best going to communicate those motivations. I think she is doing the best thing by experimenting during her time here. I've realized that this is really such a rich environment of opinions, and this is what it's all about. Testing things out.
David's critique was a more traditional format, and that seemed to work for him as well. It seemed like he wanted us all to really get in and experience the work with him to see how we reacted. The atmosphere within the piece, and then the discussion taking place there was fun for me. I love work that removes me in a big way like that. Even if it's to a place that I don't necessarily want to go.


I thought Davids critique method was effective . I enjoyed being led into a space that I was uncertain of. I like that element of surprise. Davids silence allowed for our own interpretations. I feel he got a pretty thorough critique. I never think critiques are thorough enough though. I hope that in this class we can push that a little further.

It was nice to learn about Juana's background it gave me a much better understanding of where she is coming from in her work. This method though didn't allow for much time for responses.

I too would of liked to hear more from Dawei in both critiques

September 15, 2008


Given the short amount of time to prepare, i thought Juana and David's critique went quite well.

Established by both artist's questions, i believe they received usable insight. Two good conversations the commentary aimed at both artist's felt very thoughtful. While i am a fan of the artist run critique, i also question when and where the artist should withdraw. Not to say that Juana or David did this, it is only a question to consider.


September 13, 2008

donovan, david c

.......Just looked at the site and noticed I forgot to comment on some of the things asked.
I structured my critique with initial responses for my peers followed with me describing my process of the creation and ended with discussion. I chose this mode of critique because it allows me to see how others interpret my work. I am able to see if it has the ultimate effect that I am looking for. Then explaining my process I am able to get feedback in ways to improve. The critique went as i thought it would for the most part. Based of the initial responses and discussion I feel as though I am at the right place in my research and developing in the right direction. One thing that surprised me is there wasn’t much of any hard line critiquing. no "negative" feedback. One thing I would like to add is how Juanita showed a time line of development. I think that having the background helps the viewers understand the scope of the artists work.