Reflection on the Bargehouse show and feedback of my work.
Putting up this show was a real challenge due to the state of the building and the consequent difficulties in practically putting up the work, but at the end we managed to set up everything in one day and i am so proud of the overall outcome.
A lot of people showed up at the opening and gave us professional feedback.
Now that we have taken down the show, it is time to reflect on the feedback received.
Some of the most interesting points of view regarding the installation include:
- Great visual experiences, transformative environment
- Psychedelic, drug experience, because of flashing, distorted bright Images
- Just when you start getting an idea of what It is, it changes
- The confusion misinterpreting each other
- Seeing language as a relationship
- The mirrors make you feel like an extension of the work
- Viewing language in an abstract way
- Physical + digital forms of communication
Almost all the interpretations given to my work connect in a way or another to my original Intent, which Is good. Confusion among the audience was something I was looking forward to create.
The introduction of the mirroring surfaces, built with mylar, allowed the spectators to get involved into the visual experience but was perceived as an aesthetic choice. I believe myself that the way it came out was not effective; my initial idea was to physically recreate this sort of echo chamber environment through the distorted reflection of images across the whole room, but what came out was a sort of kaleidoscope effect.
The size of the room, although I would have wanted a bigger one, made the piece feel more intimate and more suitable for reflection.
The feedback and following discussion in the studios really helped on where to go next or what things to look up.
Even if it finally came out as a different piece than what I planned, the work was a success. Things to improve include thinking more about the role of the spectator, giving it a role or challenge its function.
People have also suggested to make the viewer able to manipulate the work somehow, maybe through movement or voice in future works. Further opinions on how to go ahead with this were for example to take the digital material and bring it back to analogue, process the work into physical a one.
I don’t know if I am going to go back to analogue but I will definitely think more about introducing physical materials in my installation, making them more interactive and giving the spectators a function within the work.