I had a tutorial conversation with Clive on Friday, regarding my submission for Assignment Four. That submission included the tabloid version of ‘Portraits’, the Google search outcomes for that project, the ‘wherenothingisreal’ website, the sequenced slideshow version of ‘Textbook’, plus a set of pdf notes bringing it all together and discussing the choices I seem to be facing just now. The outcome wasn’t quite as I’d expected. I had thought we would probably discuss the pros and cons of continuing with both projects or concentrating on, say, ‘Textbook’. Actually, even allowing for due modesty, I have to say that he seems so enthusiastic about ‘Portraits’ that it’s hard to see how I could even consider side-lining it. Indeed, it might even be argued that he would favour ‘Portraits’ over ‘Textbook’! Really good to have enthusiastic support and positive feedback, flattering even, but it leaves me with, maybe, an even more difficult situation regarding assessment submission. There’s a fair bit of time, of course, but potentially a lot to do as well. And I don’t want to fall into the trap of submitting so much that it’s hard for the assessor to look at it in enough depth to really appreciate the work that’s been done.
We certainly spent quite some time on the complications of presenting ‘Portraits’. Clive really likes ‘The Stan’ tabloid and wouldn’t change anything about it. He also feels that some/all of these images should be presented as large-scale prints – and I agree. But neither of those formats can do justice to the broader ‘virtual’ context in which the images exist and, in some ways, come into their own. They are ‘out there’ as, potentially, ‘real’ identities, so how do we do justice to that aspect in bringing the work to Assessment. I do have an idea for another website that might do the trick, but it’s going to require more work to put it together. The ‘wherenothingisreal’ website doesn’t do the job – but I have in mind a more ‘conceptual’ idea that would build on some of its content.
Clive didn’t have too much to say about ‘Textbook’. I’m not sure it appeals to him quite so much – which is fair enough – and he did raise, again, the question of copyright and appropriation; which I’ve mentioned before myself and which would certainly have to be considered in the Sustaining Your Practice module. We didn’t get into the editing of this work at all.
And mention of Sustaining Your Practice brings me to a final reflection that I should make here. I think it’s time for me to enrol on that final element. In fact, it occurs to me that the issues I’m struggling with are precisely those that should best be resolved within that module. Of course, I’m thinking through the question of Assessment Submission format for BoW, but this is also bound up with ‘How do I take this work to the outside world?’. A significant part of that module is about networking and seeking feedback on the work and perhaps it’s that wider feedback I’m in need of if I’m to resolve everything in a meaningful fashion.
So – fantastic to receive positive and supportive comments on my work from Clive, but a lot to do to resolve it for the various audiences and I may have to go looking for advice on a broader basis.