What I was looking for ...

I am always looking for 'fresh' work as well as new ways of looking at things. This does not always mean non traditional or innovative, but may include the kind of reworking of older forms or ideas in a careful and considered way such that you can see them almost for the first time. I value work that springs from primary experiential sources (looking/ experiencing/ wondering and questioning) rather than secondary (copying forms that are not about the artist's experience at best, or that may have descended to the level of cliché at worst)

The work submitted was quite variable in both skill level and conceptual sophistication, some works being mature and resolved, whilst others were relatively immature even allowing for the fact that this is a student exhibition. The immature works generally suffered from falling back on cliché, rather than suggesting a close examination of materials/ processes and inspirations - ie REALLY LOOKING at what's in front of you rather than replicating what has already been done. The careless use of various art terms that have quite specific meanings in the descriptions of the works ('abstract', 'installation') is to be avoided. It was also quite striking how much of the work was unglazed, and I wondered why this was so. Perhaps that level of technical understanding is yet to come? As the level of study of each of the entrants was not stated, it was a bit hard to judge the works in a way that might have been appropriate to stages in course progress.

Overall, the standard seemed good, and I was impressed with some of the explorations within what may well have been set projects - i.e. working with slabs of clay in a sculptural way.

Regards,
Janet