My MA project proposal can be found here (link). That summarises the issue I am trying to explore but doesn’t really give readers and idea of how I see my current practice. This post aims to address that.
This is the feedback I received from the final two modules of my first degree in photography.
The key for me is in their difference. The first set of feedback is from a set of images entitled Paralysis where the outcome was driven by my inner feelings and emotions. It gave rise to tight strong imager like these below. You can see for the full set here: (link)
The second set of feedback reflected the fact that I had moved away from the issue of impairment and focussed more on the social construction of disability. This created some real challenges that I don’t think I fully addressed. For example, in this set of landscape images the meaning I was intending to evoke was anchored through the following accompanying text:
The Landscape of Disability
My impairment – spinal cord injury – means that I can’t walk. We’ve invented lots of devices to enable me to get around such as wheelchairs, but for access to work my needs have to be recognised and not ignored in the physical environment. Here is a set of 12 images that talk to that subject in terms of the physical landscape that are the result of decisions in social administration, organisation and ultimately people’s attitudes toward me.
The problem as seen by the assessors was that the images were too obvious and not personal enough. The whole set can be seen here: (link). So what does this mean for my work here?
I want to connect with people through art and share my perspective, which is both personal and political, but art is ambiguous by its nature and so some people don’t “see” the meanings I aim to evoke. This is a challenge as I see it, but can’t see a way though this yet.