The Problem of the Yummy and the Necessity of the Divorce
The session today was focused on work I had brought down from my studio. DS and SJ both said what I had made was basically technically proficient, very layered with evidence of a 'yummy' quality. The group’s reaction to the pieces—calling them pleasurable, delicious, and ‘knowing’—simply highlights the trap I’m in. DS said he thought I can produce this type of work blindfolded; it is my ingrained language, and it gives me a dangerous sense of resolution.
The only piece that truly excites me in its resistance is the one where I deliberately went against my own colour sensibilities, doing everything in the 'wrong place.' That act of defiance, of giving up the need for perfection, is where the genuine feeling lies. The technical investigations in Unit 1—the silkscreen, the cyanotype transfers, the mono-printing—are strong, but they risk becoming just another layer of ‘mouthwash’ that makes the final image ‘deeply pleasant’ unless I push them into awkward new spaces. This was hard to hear in its honesty - but really needed.
The suggestions were to use my sketchbook energy/excitement: I need to research the use of those sketchbook collages as a source for painting. I am drawn to the physicality of composing by cutting and tearing, and I want to see if that decisive, selective energy can be translated, rather than just endlessly layered. DS spoke about a sketchbook piece which exists between two sections—a painting on one, a print on the other—he suggested using brooms or larger marks - working larger in the same way I do in my sketchbook. The crit really focused on those small studies I love in my sketchbook, and all present felt these had an energy to them that my work does not have on a larger scale.
Expanding: Confronting the Conflict
The emotional intensity of the session came from addressing the true conflict: the MA work vs. the mortgage-paying work. I feel married to the commercial practice because it’s a lifeline—it pays the bills. But it has begun to have less life to it, and that lack of life is making it unsustainable. This course is here to test that dependency. I need to instigate a creative divorce. SJ suggested that the feeling of being in a relationship after it should have ended is what he feels about my relationship with my practice.
My language right now feels like ‘dressing up’—using voices I’ve taught myself to achieve resolution. The terrifying part is stripping that away to simply 'dress as me.' The goal is not just to make paintings for domestic spaces, but to make paintings that challenge those spaces, not just serving as a backdrop for a sofa. I want the 100% conviction the group spoke about, that feeling of raw energy I see in other artists.
The appearance of landscape and botanical forms in the work—the flowers, the river imagery, the things I’m surrounded by—is highly interesting. They are the personal islands of information I’ve collected (photographs, drawings), and they tie directly into the idea of hybridity and archipelagic thought. They provide the necessary image-based starting point to layer against the pure marks, asking what they are and why they have emerged for years in my practice.
III. Materialising: The Strategy Forward
The most critical decision is to develop two distinct bodies of work. This separation is the only way to safeguard the vulnerable, experimental practice from the commercial pressure of the February show.
-
The Sketchbook-Focused Strand: This is the space for the 'true self.' It will be fast, energetic, non-resolved, and will be where I tackle the issue of overthinking. This work captures the energy that is currently missing in the larger pieces.
-
The February Show Painting Strand: This is where I test the ability to translate that raw energy and selectivity into a resolved, presentable body of work.
The scale enigma is the thing to overcome, the boundary I’ve set for myself. Why can’t the bold, singular attitude of the sketchbook translate? That’s the rub. I am truly uncertain about scale, but the solution cannot be to simply stick to smaller work. The challenge now is to take the attitude of the sketchbook—the decisiveness, the limited layering—and apply it to the big canvases, without defaulting to the safe, 'yummy' language I know too well. This is where the work will happen, and I need to stop asking myself questions and start trying to answer them.
The last question this critique left me with was questioning the premise that my own exploratory work is not commercially viable, so I need 2 strands, which might not be a truth, but a fear. What if the truth was enough - my own practice was enough. Surely it is for the world to tell me this, not for me to decide on it. So the question is 2 practices or just 1 with more emotion and higher risk?
