Studio-crit: Reflections of the work done so far

I thought of sharing how the studio crits have benefited me in improving the quality of work.

I will give a brief of what the crits are meant for and its basic structure. The idea is that as ADP (Advanced Diploma Program) students we should get critical feedback/ discussion over the quality of work. So during a crit, we present one or two works to a panel of minimum two faculties.

As of now I have had two crits. I will add a brief summation of the inputs received on both the crits.

Inputs received:

Crit 1(Mine the City_ Assignment 1_Basavanagudi_The Rambler’s Voice):

•             The assignment did not reach the depth in terms of placing the work with respect to the community.

•             I need to analyse what public art is.

•             It is important to refer to the local materials, and where and how they are used.

•             I need to look at the ‘text’ from a broader view and not just typefaces on the shops. Text that is prevalent on the surface of monuments, the kinds of text that people are acquainted to regularly through loudspeakers, vocabulary etc. also needs to be investigated.

My reflections: Being the first crit, I was nervous. I had made a presentation but it did not show the process properly. Also the timing was not too good. The crit was held on 12^th September and the first assignment was already over. I did not see any scope in improving it. But the lessons learnt during the process and afterwards through the crit were invaluable.

I had initially written my doubts regarding the materiality. Please refer to the previous post from 3^rd September. The crit helped me understand the point better. Materials are not random especially when one deals with public/site specific art. I am not sure of the religious powder that was suggested during the crit but I feel something like flowers that surround the area (there is a flower market and it’s also used in the daily rituals) could have suited. Also I could have tried this on a smaller scale and experimented to check if things are working or not. I do not see this as a failure though. This was something new I did. I am not sure when I will repeat a process similar to this again. But I learnt few important lessons which can be applied universally.

·         When dealing with a community/ specific person, it is important to see them as valuable source. By understanding and engaging with them one could get valuable intangible insights that one might otherwise not find in a library.  

            Research/ process happen in layers. References like internet, library plays an important role. But after that it is important to get to the ground where all the action is happening.

·         Another important learning lesson was the discussion on what constitutes the public/ audience for the work. This is one area that I never thought of deeply. I normally took it for granted that people should ‘enjoy’ the work. But I did not ask ‘how’. I now think that by knowing one’s audience the work can be closer to the context.

To the plus side, I also mentioned about the independent project, and it generated enough discussion and gave me good insight on how I can take the idea of vegetation further.

Crit 2 (Mine the City _Assignment 2_Commute in the city):

•             I need to work on the narrative.

•             There is a need to be honest to the representation and not manipulate the image based on personal generalizations.

•             Improve the observation skill and bring the minute details/intangible experiences into the work.

•             Need to open up to more experimentation to give myself freedom of expression.

•             Bring out the textures that are there on the surface.

•             I need to work in the context, engage more with the space as it can be much more enriching. (Reflection: Not too sure about engagement in this particular assignment because the journey was a very personal experience, but I will definitely give this suggestion a thought)

My reflections: After the first, I was patiently waiting for the crit. I had called specific faculty who I felt could be more perceptive to the works.

The above assignment had consumed too much time and I was not really enjoying. I could see that it was faltering at several points yet I was not sure where to work on nor did I have the time. So I showed to the faculty how I came to the final images. I started with the storyboard> mind map> illustrations> drafts and then the> final unfinished slides. We had an hour long discussion. I expressed my concern with the anatomical problem. I learnt that more than the anatomy it is the sensitivity to the space that makes all the difference. By making an extremely sterile and composed environment I had removed it from the reality. The discussion went on to photography (how a photograph differs from the illustrations). This was led by my point that by restricting photography I felt restrained. But no matter how flexible photography is, it cannot capture the smell in a crowded space and textures associated with a specific crowd. This is where illustrations come into play.

Initially I was so conscious of the dateline and the final presentation that the work almost lost its essence. Also the process had got restricted and was mainly depended on the quality of the execution.

As we wrapped up the crit, I was ready to see things with a fresh perspective.