Here we go (part 1)

I have my mark for the studio paper back. I got an A- and this great comment, which I have dutifully transcribed in full:

Dear David – I'm handwriting this in the hope that you have the annoyance of transcribing it into that nice typeface you use on your blog site. My annoyance is having to write this out as 'good copy' from a previous draft – public document that it is and all!

To be clear to your readers, what you presented for assessment was: a link to pointlessandabsurd blogspot, three wall drawings (to be considered as one work) and [three] smaller works on paper, each titled separately.

You were 'derailed' (I presume by me) from producing a book ... which is a little overly dramatic for what was essentially a suggestion that, for your your own interest and entertainment as an artist, you might like to consider a number of other ways common-sense nihilism could expand its horizons – good practice usually ... looking for ways to get work to a place it wasn't at before and thinking through ideas, making decisions that might add qualitatively to the work itself.

Many of our conversations this year have been within this territory. I posed a series of questions to you about how you would approach the blog now that it was seen in relation to a set of assessment criteria, to which, for better or worse, it would be referred against.

You are an astute mind and without a doubt there are moments of acerbic and comic brilliance in the project (as a whole). It rides an uneasy line of having to contend with the requirements of this institution and your own (frequently 'cuntish') dismissal of all that this stands for. BUT:

Two thoughts

Yes, you have got your feet squarely in both camps. But it's a compromised position and it needs more work to compromise it further or it risks heading into dullness, repetition, and ceases as 'critical' entertainment or to advance the 'thesis' of the project.

OR, on the other hand, it's now a signature work that is becoming sure of what it does best and has clear editorial decisions and some clever manipulations at work, steadily developing its 'argument', and kicking the walls that it hits up against ...

?

Obviously, I needn't have bothered with the bloody drawings.

Which reminds me that I should post some pics some time.