Crtique responses and Dead Dogs!

Holy late post!

I found that there was plenty of excellent feedback thrown about during our critique last week. I definitely received excellent comments, suggestions, tips, etc. It is nice having such a large class because it allows one to hear a large quantity of views about their work. The dialogue between the various members of the class was also quite excellent. WITH THAT BEING SAID: the fact that we have such a large class does mean that there is a lot of ground to cover in only a few hours, and I think that in future critiques a set time limit per piece will help move things along so that we don't have rush through the last 6 pieces, and so that we don't get stuck talking about one piece for 20 minutes. Overall I would consider it to be a pretty solid crit. Whammy!


Anywho (not a real word), in response to Tracy's piece (animal heads and convenient chair), I enjoyed the idea of creating an experience for the viewer, and leading them to view your piece in a certain way (the chair). Directing the viewer to look at your piece a particular way is a great way to enforce an idea, and I think that was executed very well. The fur on "Fluffykins" (spelling?) was downright slammin', however in comparison, it made "Dawg"seem considerably less realistic. This distracted me a bit because it left me wondering if I was to view the animal heads as realistic, or as the heads of stuffed animals. The fact that there were only two made this ambiguity seem unintentional. The names alluded a personal connection between the artist/viewer and the animal heads, which added a personal connotation to the piece. With that said, I would have liked to have seen more (cliche comment, I know, my bad) in addition to some variance in the look of the animals because they looked a little too similar. Also, the fact that every piece on that wall had two parts to it cause the animal heads to stand out a bit less, and I know this was out of you control and that blows, but it had to be said.