tutor report and feedback, Assignment 4.

Below is the tutor report for Hornet Tree.

The tutorial happened once I had left the site and returned home. It was incredibly useful to draw together, notably, where this piece of works sits in context to, and is wider than a single environmental intervention/ performance/ installation, but also more than a family conversation.

I am copying the notes I wrote in the research section of the report to illustrate this:

Research(Student): Context,reflective thinking, critical thinking, analysis

  • Incredibly helpful was to take a step back from the assignment piece as conversations but to consider it less of a flag (it is not straight enough, taut enough) but a white flag (empty, but also to surrender, a peace offering) and then to realise that Gerrard’s Western Flag (see A3) but also Geertz/Shalev-Geertz The Geese from Feliferhof as two pieces about military order and discipline has entered this work.
    Also: Jeremy Deller’s Battle of Orgreave and questions of artefact/ event
  • Also really good were the questions around shadow and the materiality of the tracing paper: what is happening with the screen (sensorially, with a sense of wonder) >> the discussion made me realise the connection between the screen as lens, as device which bears some similarity (or: share key characteristics) with the photocopier plate and lens (a shallow depth of field). The tracing paper becomes lens-like
  • Who is the piece for and about? The submission text raised this already, here the ability to expand, relocate/reposition and move the audience towards a different public
  • AP: to write a post to speculate further on the material aspects of the tracing paper
    • Larger scale, focus, shadow play, lens
  • AP: to write a post to site, location and audience
    • What would happen to Hornet Tree (1) in gallery- large scale projection
    • Can this be taken to the street, a park?
    • >> go one step beyond what you envisage, both in terms of technology and reflection
  • >> these concerns would fold this forward into the Parallel Project (the other plan for the Parallel Project is to bring together the different spaces that I have explored for this module, and the how; likely as a video piece); for A5 I will experiment along both of these lines to test which is more viable one for the final Project.


I will write another more reflective piece of the tutorial feedback in a few days (I need to process it a little further). The discussion was great as Doug offered me to structure the meeting around a series of questions. Which we did, and also spent a good bit of time to discuss the remaining pieces (A5, Critical Review and Parallel Project) to wrap up the module in time for everything to be at the OCA by 28 September.

There are two good lines of investigation for A5 and either can then fold towards the Parallel Project. The time is tight but the material is almost there, so it feels quite manageable.

Gesa Helms feedback_part_4_GH