This was a very useful exercise in both receiving and providing feedback, although it took a lot of time and week 8 study still needs some catching up. This was a further opportunity to have more eyes on my work to date and to see whether it is developing in line with intentions. Some issues I had previously identified. However, over time and with the benefit of further research and peer review, I can now validate the points and either remove them as concerns or figure out how to move past them.
The peer feedback was very generous in the time spent in watching and in providing a well thought out and balanced view on the work as it relates to the learning objectives. I’m afraid my reviews were not quite of the same articulate calibre. A couple of areas need attention, LO4 was a large oversight on my part and I barely touched on it during the presentation, however I have space in my 2000 word limit and some clear thoughts on how I want to position and present the work later. The other objectives are coming across ok with no glaring gaps, however over the coming weeks I need to refine my critical review of practice and make it a much sharper piece of writing. I think I have time for that and the fundaments are in place to build on.
Of more concern is that the work lacks a certain bite (punctum) and unfamiliarity with the artworks used in the composite images may make it too sophisticated. The latter I am aware of and took steps to both increase the range of artwork used and to include captions with each image to anchor the viewer and identify the artwork in the composite. Reaction by others to the work has been mixed, with some thinking it is quite powerful, and on the flip side it may not be powerful enough given the topic. I agree the work can be lacking bite due to its construction and reliance on old paintings to create a metaphor that questions our relationship with meat.
Rather than revising the composite image format, I am going to investigate how I can reinforce the work through the introduction and use of alternative mediums. I don’t think I have enough exposure of the work yet to conclude it misses the mark so much that I need to scrap it and come with a fresh line of thinking. I see room in the current work to enrich it, which I want to explore and experiment with further. Although this could solve some identified issues, it will probably create new ones.
Tutor feedback on the presentation was positive and some areas for improvement noted which I am going to take into my research and preparation for the review paper. I still have books to finish reading and other practitioners to review which can lead to new insights which I can bring into my critical review.
Great presentation. I really find your intent interesting. This is definitely a topic that should be explored and visualised further.
Your images are interesting. I missed the fact that you had edited paintings and people into your images. I actually thought it was already there.
What you are saying about our ability to ignore what is unpleasant or inconvenient is true. I believe I have once watched a documentary on how sausages were made. Which I later have decided to ignore. Due to my love for sausages. The documentary was not pleasant to watch.
People turning away before they have understood your work. Even though this might happen, I still believe your intent is important. I had no idea how brutal the meat industry could be. The media usually tells us that everything is okay and that nothing bad it is happening. The animals are killed in a non-harmful way. And that their living accommodation is good. But seeing your research proves my understanding wrong.
One last thing; LO4: Professional Location of Practice. I am not sure you spoke about this, but it would be interesting to see how you want to present your work.
Your video and commentary were really clear, your presentation shows a very clear intent with a well-researched background (LO6).
You reference to a range of contemporary practitioners and how they have dealt with similar ‘invisible ‘processes and I can see how this has influenced your own work (LO3). It is an important topics and farming practices should be important to everyone, regardless of whether they eat meat or not.
It was interesting to see the development of your work, from your first shots of the bins to the development of your composite work which I feel is particularly strong. I think that your use of iconography makes a powerful statement and invites the viewer to question what they are looking at and the significance of it.
You’ve obviously thought very carefully about how a potential audience will react to your work and the extremes of feeling that it might generate and how you are aiming to strike a balance. It will be interesting to hear how you decide to disseminate your work (LO4).
Really enjoyed watching your video and getting added information from what I have heard and seen in the webinars.
You articulated a clear intent in your work and support this with clear research and reflection.
For me, you made reference to a number of contemporary artists who have covered similar areas, within their different practices and it was possible to see how these connect and informed your own practice.
You clearly showed that you have been appraising and analysing your work as the project has developed and showed how this has changed and progressed.
You mentioned how the subject matter could be perceived by viewers of your work and how this is in your thinking, so I am interested in what form you are thinking about showing your work.
This is a fantastic subject to be tackling, and something I feel very strongly about. You have provided a very thorough explanation of the vastly complex layers of farming/agriculture industry, highlighting that the problem is not just a matter of meat consumption but an amalgamation of factors such as waste disposal, energy supply and food production. The homogenisation of crops for feed & the consequently devastating impact on biodiversity is an issue a lot of people are unaware of. The hugely worrying effects of water run-off from farms using pesticides/herbicides or the growth hormones seeping their way into water supplies are also issues that are not well publicised – I feel your project is an important exposition of these issues!
It is clear that the intent of your work is to encourage conscious consumption and raise awareness of the layers of environmental damage. I appreciate your comment early in the video, (something like) “by just stopping eating pig, doesn’t remove pig products from the market”. I also like the awareness of the risk of “moralising”, as opposed to activism – this is an important contemporary issue as people are too ready to “virtue signal” on their social media, but are far from taking any real action to back up their claims of concern.
The consideration of ‘beautification’ vs ‘shock-tactics’ is particularly profound in relation to your subject, and it is interesting that (in the work presented here) you have chosen to remove any reference to flesh/blood/physical meat. You debate the benefits of both methods – I wonder if you will experiment with more graphic images?
As you mention towards the end of the presentation, accompanying text to further translate/imbue meaning for a wider audience I think is crucial. I do not have much knowledge of classical painting, and feel I could easily miss your intended message. The composite images are sophisticated and strongly conceptualised, and I appreciate that you are trying to avoid the work being cliché or unoriginal. However, for me, the images here lack Barthe’s “punctum”! Perhaps they are too ‘sophisticated’? I’m sure viewing the work in a still format (not as part of this video), such as in a gallery or book would help me to relate and find reference within the images.
– very clear articulation of your subject matter
– Was it my connection or do you have low image quality for some of the images? The captions were not readable to me.
– The book you refer is a good one that gives further context to your work.
– In general, you developed a strong critical approach to meat industry and the discussion around disassociation of meat from animals is a good one.
– good reflection on the development of your work on the shift to create composit images with paintings.
– good self criticism and questioning of what the iconography adds to your narrative in relation to beautifying.
– clear articulation of what you aim with your work.
– more reflection on how you plan to engage with the audiences could be made. Sometimes the quotes felt a bit long to me that felt like a intruption to your own ideas.
In general, I would say it is a good presentation. well done