The most recent crit we have had took very different structure to all so far on the course. The idea being that 3 people take part – a speaker, a responder and a listener. The speaker speaks about their work and presents a challenge or problem they would like help resolving  uninterrupted for 15 mins. The responder then answers/responds to this for 10 mins and the listener sums up and takes notes. It seems quite a formal way of undergoing crits – but a welcome change from the more ambiguous ones we sometimes have.

Although our group didn’t stick strictly to this format, it was definitely more structured and felt like something was being achieved in each case. In my own case the questions or challenges were based on the issues of:

The meaning in the work – how it can be successfully portrayed, not just “put in” – or even if it needs to be implicit?

With the ambiguity surrounding the potential meanings, for me this is appealing but I wonder if this places too much responsibility on the viewer.

Is it necessary to have agenda or imposed meaning or can it be ambiguous and really about many things on different levels?

Can form and aesthetic be more important than meaning and intention?  As sometimes abstract aesthetic doesn’t feel enough..

I really should have included a discussion topic of suggestions of what to do next(!) but maybe that is asking for too much…

Throughout the discussion I really felt like I managed to answer my questions myself – which is definitely a positive outcome. Almost the “defending” of one’s practice makes you understand it better which in turn allows you to resolve certain aspects with greater ease.

However, I still struggle with the idea of having a particular meaning and aesthetic not being “enough”. It feels as people are constantly searching for meaning and the possibility or necessity of providing that seems to weigh heavily. I feel I need to resolve this in whatever way I want to and not be apologetic about it.

Verdict: Have a little more faith or conviction in the process, and what I am investigating.


After a difficult time in January, things have definitely picked up this month.

Unfortunately the course has crammed in almost back to back tutorials, crits and seminars the last few weeks which can be a bit frustrating when all you want to do is get on and make some work to be able to talk about it. However, make some work I have done. Taking the numbers a bit further by making a whole set – this time a bit more practically sized and made using a laser cutter. They have come out as quite beautiful objects, sharp and solid.

Originally thinking to put them in a domestic space, I decided to first create some sort of installation – pseudo domestic/mixed with a more intuitive feel for colour, shape and pattern.

Framing views by using the camera, in an attempt to show the more encompassed feeling gained from experiencing the work. It is a quick way to work, changing objects and views to rapidly see how things work together. This way of discarding and editing comes quite naturally and has an intuitive way about it – it also gives the work an essence of temporality, something not quite permanent although the individual objects themselves are quite solid.

Now a period of editing and planning for the next step.