Friday, November 2, 2007

The critique and Dan's piece: by catherine hendrickson (sorry if it posted twice!

I thought Dan's piece was amazing- the concept of a performance piece was especially unique and intriging. I looked at his piece when i first walked in the critic room and admired it for only a few seconds. While he was discussing it during critique I took time to further examine it however, not to the extent I wish I would have. Dan moved closer to it and picked it up; then before I knew it, it was gone. He dropped it on the ground and it was gone forever. I felt a saddness after the initial shock because I realized it would longer exist in the world as it once had and for some reason that really hit me hard. That realization made me appreciate the piece even more.

The critique went very well overall- It was much more insightful for me to do a class critique with the pieces displayed and not just have the artist talk about the piece as it sits on a desk in class. The gallery space was almost crucial in order for all of the pieces to be seen to their full potential. I enjoyed every piece in different ways from the full body to Tisa'a work, to the tree stump! All of the pieces were well thought out.
I enjoyed Ben's piece the most- it really seemed to capture my imagination. I found it interesting how my take on the piece was very different from most of the other class's take but that's also something that makes the piece most interesting- It has the possibility for many interpretations. I loved how the piece had the wire wrappede around it as an added effect- it not only portrayed the sucking in of one of the faces, but it also pulled in the attention of viewers. Very nice work, Ben! I though all of the pieces in the show were great!

5 comments:

Lauren said...

I think you critiqued Jon's work. You critiqued the right work but accidentally used the wrong name. Dan's piece was the architectural mixed-media structure. I also enjoyed Jon’s performance- it really caught me off-guard.

Bec said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bec said...

Jon's piece caught everyone off guard! At first I thought it was even an accident and I was like oh no holy crap!! haha. However, I still think that if it had been at least bisque fired it would have made more of an impact. Also, Im not sure if I ever caught his concept--I was so focused on the performance aspect that the whole idea of natural vs artificial slipped my mind

kerri said...

I agree with Bec. I'm not sure if I understood the whole natural vs artificial concept but the performance was great! I think it was perfect timing how Lauren just gave some constructive criticism about the piece and then all of a sudden Jon just flipped it over. It kind of made me wonder if Lauren was in on it the whole time since it seemed like one or two people knew about the performance. I think I liked the aftermath better than the original piece. And I agree with Catherine about the fact that it makes you appreciate the original piece more because now since it is gone forever.

Jon Irving said...

I was gonna comment on how my name was Jon and not Dan. You guys beat me to the punch by days.

Lauren was not in on it, it was just good timing. In my mind, I viewed the thrown vessels as the artificial - the idea of using a machine to manufacture something on a large scale. Even though we use our hands to create the cylinders, the idea is to create similar symmetrical shapes in large quantities. In my mind, this contrasted with the pre-smashed form, which was compiled with pieces of the thrown vessels.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch!

Glad I got a strong reaction out of everyone, couldn't have asked for more.