After the critique ...

I found the critique to be very interesting, inspiring and thought-provoking. I really enjoyed hearing about Hart's journey (not only his journey to Skinner's Butte, but the whole 'journey' through his thought process) and the process of which he went through. Very inspiring!

The other pieces were also very interesting, but maybe more so, the explanations and thoughts from everyone that talked about their pieces, but also how we, the spectators, viewed the pieces.

I found it extremely useful and informative to listen to everyones initial reactions to my piece. I was taken by surprise at one point: the fact that several of the girls were offended by it. In retrospect, I can totally understand it, and I find it very interesting. This is actually one of several reasons why I find producing art to be so difficult and challenging. In this case I wanted to make a piece of art that was communicating something I was against, i.e. the male dominance of the Church (also in religion in general, and in turn, in society in general) by showing a very typical attribute for the Church, a reliquary, or a shrine, with a not-so-typical relic, a pair of testicles. I see now that this can be interpreted as something personal, that I actually was worshipping my own 'manliness', the power I have through being a person with testicles. So, how can I make something that clearly can't be misunderstood? I don't want to make things so obvious that they don't have any room for interpretation. Maybe the ambiguity actually is what makes a piece interesting, that it is something I should try to achieve more than to erase.