Progress towards process?

After the discussion today with Brandon, I felt like I got a better understanding of what I could do to get the whole project starting... At the same time, Brandon did confirm my fear that we actually are asked to invent the wheel all over again. Of course, it is always easier to invent something that has been invented before, but never the less ... What really helped me though, was when he told us about a project he had been doing himself, in collaboration with another artist from Sweden, that made me think much more about process, and the process itself, and not so much the finished 'product' ... I think that, maybe, this is also some of the key to this class, that we are supposed to think 'process' and not so much 'product' ... Still, there are parameters that can be altered and should be considered even for 'process' works also, like: is it just about the process, and not about the end product? Is it important that it 'looks interesting' (whatever that means) or does it also have to 'be interesting' in that it creates some sort of reaction to the viewer other than just 'looks nice' ... I have a suspicion that artists that manage to make something that looks good, much easier gets away with it in terms of what an artwork 'is' or communicates or creates reactions in the audience. I sort of hope I am wrong about it, and I know of course that there has been a lot of art that has been praised (especially after a period of time, ala Duchamp) but much of the art that only 'looks good' will never even have to be questioned as good art or not... OK, I know this can be discussed, and I will try to get back on it later ...