AMEN: CRIT FEEDBACK

The crit was an awkward one for me. I myself have not been fully happy with the stylistic direction and 3 screen installation medium I had been working on. I do however wholeheartedly believe in the idea and the story that I am trying to tell. The piece was again compromised a little due to it not being screened on 3 big screens which is my intention but it was projected fairly well and did give a fair idea.

Firstly screened some of my Siblings piece from last year as this contextualized where my practice was and where I was moving on from in the creation of the Amen Brother piece. This went down well and the audience were very engaged. I also said how painful the journey had been to create this stripped back version of a documentary and to leave all the bells and whistles along the way to get the purity of this piece. Looking back the irony of these comments was not wasted on me when I got feedback on Amen Brother!

SIBLINGS FINAL VIMEO WHITE BG from Jon Saward on Vimeo.


Next I screened V2 of Amen Brother which was the 3 screen installation version. I decided not to bring the single screen trials I had been experimenting with which looking back seems stupid as it would have been great to show them this too. I did not want too much of an introduction to the piece and wanted to see if it could stand on it's own two legs so screened it without too much of an introduction. We then discussed it and the feedback is outlined below and the main issue was that most of them did not get the preferred reading or the concept and message I was trying to communicate. Even those who were at the big crit (Emily and Val) and understood my intentions still did not feel the message was clear enough and communicated. Following the discussion and explanation of the piece I screened the work again and the audience did now pick up all the clues and appreciate the intentions.

AMEN BREAK V2 3 SCREENS from Jon Saward on Vimeo.

The general feedback from my peers is below with my thoughts on this underneath.

The piece was overcrowded with too many focal points and too much happening. Strip back for audience. 1-2 key elements so simplify.
This I do agree with. from the installations I have seen though I have felt that they were a little too slow and dare I say it lazy and boring. I like having lots of interest but if this is detrimental to the message I will have to re-think. My work with single split screens and design hierarchy of elements may be the way to go and I agree that at times I am simply looking for content to fill there screens NOT just simply using the right content.

The use of the drummer was good and possibly try and incorporate this more. Foundations and inspiration of the piece is the drums and drummer.
Daft one to miss this and I 100% agree. The drummer and the drum solo are the very centre of the piece and are the DNA for everything else on screen so of course they should be more integral to it and play a much bigger role. Possibly combining images and drumming using templates and effects rather than a drummer simply playing would work?

Too many themes and ideologies going on and this confuses the message. Music, pop culture, religion, appropriation, pop icons, representation etc.
I love the idea of this and of art asking questions and causing debate thought, speculation and discussion which is surely one of its main purposes so this left me a little confused. My thinking is that due to the multiple messages and readings the preferred reading is getting lost. Perhaps if I keep with this approach of many messages a hierarchy of ideology is needed so the celebration and acknowledgement of the influence of the drum solo and GC Coleman is front and centre. Then the other issues for consideration more in the background. However am I putting too much in? Are the other ideologies elements merely misdirection and red herrings? More thinking needed here definitely. This is also leading to the use of multiple assets and content which as mentioned earlier is bombarding the audience with possibly too much information.

Were 3 screens really needed? Simply holding on to Sibling pieces idea? Would one screen be a better option?
Very good point here and I agree. It is a mixture of laziness, trying to create installations to be more Arty in my Practice to satisfy expectations I feel the course has put on my work (rightly or wrongly) and sticking with the safety of a medium and technique that is tried and tested and I know I can make work. I am going to have to experiment more and as mentioned earlier I wish I had brought the one screen split screen test version I have been playing around with to screen to them. Possibly three screens with so much differing content is too much and too diverting and it is hard to do without giving each screen a fairly equal balance. Possibly one screen is a better way to go. Experimenting with documentary more for TV or single screen installations and playing around with scale, form and hierarchy of the elements is certainly the way to go.

The revelation aspect I was aiming for was not there. However the piece did work better second time round once the concept was explained.
Still not there first time and am I getting too hung up on this. can i use narrative more to try and clarify this but drip feeding it so there is a revelation that way. Is a revelation needed. Could it be an aural one when the audiences ears finally tune in to the drum beat only and the penny drops?

The use of the word Amen was unclear and possibly carries too much weight and significance. Possibly use The Amen Break? The theme of worship comes across strongly due to the word Amen. Worship of pop icons/culture?
Fair point and certainly worth looking into. I have become a little entrenched with the word as I love all of the connotations nit brings with it but perhaps this is muddying the water too much and less could be made of it. One of my original ideas was to use the break to comment on the different huge amount of different religions 4200+ compared to the Amen Breaks 2300+ usages. I was going to use the Amen break to braw parallels between these and perhaps I am still hanging onto this subconsciously. Amen means "so be it".
As far as worship of pop culture and pop icons goes this is perhaps as mentioned earlier a layer of ideology too far and is confusing the preferred reading. Once again as I mentioned earlier also though surely art posing and asking questions and causing debate thought, speculation and discussion is not such a bad thing and one of the main points of it.

Audio first and then visuals approach as mine seemed to be the other way round. Quote from sound designer on Eraserhead/David Lynch. More experimentation with audio. Overlapping, crash edits, speed, manipulation etc. Audio only piece? Collaborate with a sound expert to see what is possible.
IU am first and foremost someone who works with and is comfortable with the moving image and sound generally plays second fiddle to this so there is a definite point in here. The thought of flipping this on its head and doing sound first image later is scary and also problematic as some of the sound and image is linked (music videos) and sinking picture to them afterwards is a nightmare. However it is something I need to explore. An audio only piece is worth looking into but my love of the moving image I feel needs to be in there somewhere. But starting from scratch with the audio first and then visuals later is certainly worth a try.
I have a little bit of a tin ear and whilst appreciating sound am not as comfortable in this area as with the moving image. I have done some tests but my appreciation and knowledge left me a little short so possibly more research would help here. Further experimentation would be good though and collaborating with friends who are more comfortable with sound is a great idea.

Make the message clearer. Use text on screen for a little exposition to get audience up to speed and fill in the gaps. Also more on the story as this is really interesting GC Coleman and the subject is really interesting.
Very, very strongly agree. Somewhere amidst all the elements this has been forgotten a little. This the whole point of the piece but as well as that the story is really interesting and the character and narrative elements of the man behind it have been lost. These need reinstating. Possibly VO, on screen graphics/titles or more in the way of details in the gallery/ More thought and testing needed.

The issue of ethics was raised legality etc of using these clips. Was it my own work or a collection of the work of others?
The concept of the appropriation art movement did not seem to be grasped by the group and the impression that I got was that I was just collecting elements and re-purposing them and how much of the work was then my own. I did explain the ideology was the celebration of the genius of one unsung hero but also the irony of using appropriation to do this by re-appropriating the creative work of others who had appropriated from him. I feel this needs to be stronger and possibly gallery notes would help this or stronger pointing to this in the piece. I explained I had researched the legal and ethical considerations and felt I was within them.

The visual style was very formal and could be more creative. Possibly crop of distort the music videos as these were the most arresting and attention catching images. The piece was not all that different from the last version screened at the Big Crit. Possibly drastic rethinking of how to communicate the idea is needed.
I have mentioned this above and agree to some extent it is very format, boxy and could be more creative and freeform and this may suit the content better. If I move away from from three screens it does open a lot of doors. Some of the assets and content are working or are close to working there BUT visually it is a little uninteresting. I have been looking into techniques and approaches and maybe combining these with this piece may work. Also playing around more in After Effects, on one screen and with filters and effects would be the way forward.