Class Commentary-March 31st

Today Guest speaker Brandon Boan came in to give us a quick once over of his work. I always find it interesting to see where people who graduated from this school find themselves a couple of years down the road. I would have liked to have seen or known Brandon while he was in school here. Just to see if he himself has transitioned and grown as a person/artist. He reinstated or reitterated on numerous acounts that he has always been interested in how "you can watch things move through other things" or "see objects turned into images of themselves through activity". I know that some artists stick with one concept for their whole careers, and maybe it's just me and not understanding his work or its ryhme and reason, but I don't see anything in it. It looks like a mess to me. I guess that's my problem with a lot of artists and their work who use found materials. I understand some of it and love it and then others I loathe. It's hideous to me. Like Brandon's "Groveling Gleam", I thought that piece was beautiful. I loved the idea of the light travling and trying to search for something or lose itself. But then the "robot letter sloshing machine" looked like one big mess. I don't know if it was because oft he way Brandon documented the material, but I thought it was hideous. Or maybe it was his verbal interpretation, and unlike the "Groveling Gleam" I couldn't paint a picture in my head of what the hell it was supposed to do or act like. This somewhat proves the point that artists can't present their own work. They can't verbally explain or interpret what it is. Because they don't know half of the time, or the other half they have a bunch of jumbled thoughts going around inside of their head and can't make sense of them. But they made sense enough of them to make decisions for the art piece. Makes no sense to me? I get's that's where I differ as a designer. There is a reason for me doing something in my work and I have an explantion for it. And I can verbally explain it to anyone that asks.