Friday 17 June 2011
NO REST FOR THE WICKED!
Just as I thought I was going to sleep for a month and laze around watching daytime TV, Miss Insch, Headmistress of my favourite King Edward V1 Handsworth School, has summoned me to give three assemblies next week in which I show my film, 'The Plight of the Albatross'. When Miss Insch summons you, you go! Actually I can now reveal that it was she who transported me to college for the hand-in and offered to pay personally to relocate my TVinstallation. She accompanied me to the meeting with Sean and the Head of BIAD and sat quietly whilst I read my statement. She attended my Degree Show and gave me moral support. Since
Degree Show comments
The Degree Show was the culmination of three years hard work for all of us. Some aspects of it worked really well but others need to be seriously reviewed.
What worked well
The studios were presented to a really professional standard. Sean and the technicians deserve to be congratulated. We really were given the best possible venue to showcase our work. Some of us will never show in such surroundings again.
The 'Talking Head' videos filmed by Amanda Grist, Level 5, were the best way of describing student work the Show has ever used. She interviewed us about our work and then included images of our work to illustrate the concept. Sitting down to watch these talking heads taught me more about the work than I had ever picked up in group tutorials. It was a pity only nine of us chose this format to decribe our practice.
Room for improvement
Organisation throughout the run-up to the Show was abysmal. This was partially due to the apathy of the student body involved. It was also due to Sean failing to delegate. I know it was our group show, but a lot of the younger students had no clue as to how much organisation is involved in putting on a show. We had a trial run in putting on 'Workout' last year which, for some reason, ran much better. Sean needed to play to people's strengths and delegate tasks to people who can deliver. Everyone on the course is willing and helpful. They just need to be told what exactly it is they need to do. Ian liaised between Sean and the student body but it shouldn't have fallen to one person. I can sympathise with Sean's frustration at the lack of organisation but, to be fair, if he had offered some direction early on, the wheels would have run far more smoothly.
Utter Shambles!
The problem I encountered regarding the presentation of my work, leading to a formal complaint on my part, could have been avoided all togther with some forward planning on behalf of Sean. He blows with the wind with his decision-making. In trying to please everyone, he antagonises everyone. It is a fine line to walk between fairness and spineless. His remit as Course Director cum Curator cum Creative Director is to produce the best show possible which showcases the students' degree work to its greatest potential. Individual grievances and petty rivalries must be secondary to this primary concern. Throughout the year Sean has shown himself to vacillate but the gaping holes in his experience and lack of professional mettle were glaringly obvious during this Show.
At the time when Show Proposals are submitted, students are asked what their requirements are; an electrical socket nearby, wall space, hanging space, a corner location or a big floor space. As we are not having solo exhibitions, it is imperative that we compromise for the overall good of the Show. Sean needs to have some Show guidelines on Moodle. If you fail to meet a deadline, then your requests may be overuled by that of another student whose work is actually ready. If you have a problem with the content of another student's work, in my case the open sound, then you submit your objection to that student in writing no later than 7 working days before hand-in date. If you cannot come to an agreement, then Sean speaks to the students together and has the final decision. If you approach him on the hand-in day, ninety minutes before the deadline - tough! This is another area where Sean's lack of professionalism is evident. Under pressure (excuse the pun) when it comes to decision-making, instead of going into the automatic pilot mode of the professional leader, he makes basic errors of judgment. In order to raise an objection, students need to know which studio they will be located in well beforehand. For this Show, people were being relocated right up until the last minute despite the email from Sean (dated 18 May) stating that our studio spaces would be allocated by the end of the following week. This is something that would need to be addressed.
All students need to know that it is highly likely that a sound installation of some sort will be in their studio. Sean needs to have a blanket policy that either all open sound is permitted or it is banned. If it is banned, then a compromise could be that sound installation students are required to section off a separate area. Another compromise, which I offered and was refused, is to allow the sound to play once every half hour so that everyone in the studio has an equal chance to present their work as intended.
I am certainly not the only student who thinks decision-making for the Show left a lot to be desired. I can't quote them without their permission but in general discussion a lot of complaints have surfaced.
Labelling of work - or not, in the case of our Show
I emailed Ruth and Sean on the 18th May ask if we were responsible for our own labelling or, as rumour had it, there was to be a standardised format for all students' work. I was told labelling was to be standardised. This saved me getting a plaque made. Two weeks prior to the Show, I asked Sean what was happening with labelling. He said that was Ruth's department.
We had a Show meeting and were told to send in a description for our work by noon the next day. Mine was ready and waiting so I emailed it. I have never seen the 250 word description appear anywhere. I know when I go to a gallery, if I like a particular piece of work, I want to read about it. In the case of my film ,there was no sound if the headphones were being used by someone else and you couldn't even read about it to decide if you wanted to listen to it!
B-A-D curating!
Correction
I invigilated the studio on Saturday 18th from1-4pm. I could see that the descriptions of our work were on a printed A4 sheet lying on the floor by the door. When I looked at it, I noticed the description for mine and Ian's were not included. Ruth came in at about 10 to 4pm and placed another printed sheet on the floor. This included our descriptions. I don't think 10 minutes before the end of the penultimate day of the Degree Show is timely. Neither do I think a couple of A4 sheets lying on the floor is the best way to label a piece of work. Either a sign outside the studio with a separate description for each piece of work, if you don't want to clutter the studio, or a label next to the work. Call me fussy, but I think Ruth would have something to say if any Show she exhibited in failed to include a description of her work. As it happened, I asked visitors if they wanted me to tell them about each student's work. After I had, they said it had been really useful. I'm not sure every invigilator offered this service. This is where the Talking Head videos came in useful. People could watch them and then, if they wanted, go in search of the specific work that interested them. I had a few people comment, 'This is the Albatross film.' They had come in search of it after watching my Talking Head.
What a waste!
Down in the basement, next to the disabled entrance, are five unopened boxes of our Show brochures. There is only one box which is opened and half of them are still untouched. We raised funds for those brochures. They cost £1000. We put £500 and Sean matched it. They are of no use beyond the Show. Why are they still sitting there? Unless you need to use the disabled doors, you wouldn't even know they are there. You may as well recycle £5 notes!
What worked well
The studios were presented to a really professional standard. Sean and the technicians deserve to be congratulated. We really were given the best possible venue to showcase our work. Some of us will never show in such surroundings again.
The 'Talking Head' videos filmed by Amanda Grist, Level 5, were the best way of describing student work the Show has ever used. She interviewed us about our work and then included images of our work to illustrate the concept. Sitting down to watch these talking heads taught me more about the work than I had ever picked up in group tutorials. It was a pity only nine of us chose this format to decribe our practice.
Room for improvement
Organisation throughout the run-up to the Show was abysmal. This was partially due to the apathy of the student body involved. It was also due to Sean failing to delegate. I know it was our group show, but a lot of the younger students had no clue as to how much organisation is involved in putting on a show. We had a trial run in putting on 'Workout' last year which, for some reason, ran much better. Sean needed to play to people's strengths and delegate tasks to people who can deliver. Everyone on the course is willing and helpful. They just need to be told what exactly it is they need to do. Ian liaised between Sean and the student body but it shouldn't have fallen to one person. I can sympathise with Sean's frustration at the lack of organisation but, to be fair, if he had offered some direction early on, the wheels would have run far more smoothly.
Utter Shambles!
The problem I encountered regarding the presentation of my work, leading to a formal complaint on my part, could have been avoided all togther with some forward planning on behalf of Sean. He blows with the wind with his decision-making. In trying to please everyone, he antagonises everyone. It is a fine line to walk between fairness and spineless. His remit as Course Director cum Curator cum Creative Director is to produce the best show possible which showcases the students' degree work to its greatest potential. Individual grievances and petty rivalries must be secondary to this primary concern. Throughout the year Sean has shown himself to vacillate but the gaping holes in his experience and lack of professional mettle were glaringly obvious during this Show.
At the time when Show Proposals are submitted, students are asked what their requirements are; an electrical socket nearby, wall space, hanging space, a corner location or a big floor space. As we are not having solo exhibitions, it is imperative that we compromise for the overall good of the Show. Sean needs to have some Show guidelines on Moodle. If you fail to meet a deadline, then your requests may be overuled by that of another student whose work is actually ready. If you have a problem with the content of another student's work, in my case the open sound, then you submit your objection to that student in writing no later than 7 working days before hand-in date. If you cannot come to an agreement, then Sean speaks to the students together and has the final decision. If you approach him on the hand-in day, ninety minutes before the deadline - tough! This is another area where Sean's lack of professionalism is evident. Under pressure (excuse the pun) when it comes to decision-making, instead of going into the automatic pilot mode of the professional leader, he makes basic errors of judgment. In order to raise an objection, students need to know which studio they will be located in well beforehand. For this Show, people were being relocated right up until the last minute despite the email from Sean (dated 18 May) stating that our studio spaces would be allocated by the end of the following week. This is something that would need to be addressed.
All students need to know that it is highly likely that a sound installation of some sort will be in their studio. Sean needs to have a blanket policy that either all open sound is permitted or it is banned. If it is banned, then a compromise could be that sound installation students are required to section off a separate area. Another compromise, which I offered and was refused, is to allow the sound to play once every half hour so that everyone in the studio has an equal chance to present their work as intended.
I am certainly not the only student who thinks decision-making for the Show left a lot to be desired. I can't quote them without their permission but in general discussion a lot of complaints have surfaced.
Labelling of work - or not, in the case of our Show
I emailed Ruth and Sean on the 18th May ask if we were responsible for our own labelling or, as rumour had it, there was to be a standardised format for all students' work. I was told labelling was to be standardised. This saved me getting a plaque made. Two weeks prior to the Show, I asked Sean what was happening with labelling. He said that was Ruth's department.
We had a Show meeting and were told to send in a description for our work by noon the next day. Mine was ready and waiting so I emailed it. I have never seen the 250 word description appear anywhere. I know when I go to a gallery, if I like a particular piece of work, I want to read about it. In the case of my film ,there was no sound if the headphones were being used by someone else and you couldn't even read about it to decide if you wanted to listen to it!
B-A-D curating!
Correction
I invigilated the studio on Saturday 18th from1-4pm. I could see that the descriptions of our work were on a printed A4 sheet lying on the floor by the door. When I looked at it, I noticed the description for mine and Ian's were not included. Ruth came in at about 10 to 4pm and placed another printed sheet on the floor. This included our descriptions. I don't think 10 minutes before the end of the penultimate day of the Degree Show is timely. Neither do I think a couple of A4 sheets lying on the floor is the best way to label a piece of work. Either a sign outside the studio with a separate description for each piece of work, if you don't want to clutter the studio, or a label next to the work. Call me fussy, but I think Ruth would have something to say if any Show she exhibited in failed to include a description of her work. As it happened, I asked visitors if they wanted me to tell them about each student's work. After I had, they said it had been really useful. I'm not sure every invigilator offered this service. This is where the Talking Head videos came in useful. People could watch them and then, if they wanted, go in search of the specific work that interested them. I had a few people comment, 'This is the Albatross film.' They had come in search of it after watching my Talking Head.
What a waste!
Down in the basement, next to the disabled entrance, are five unopened boxes of our Show brochures. There is only one box which is opened and half of them are still untouched. We raised funds for those brochures. They cost £1000. We put £500 and Sean matched it. They are of no use beyond the Show. Why are they still sitting there? Unless you need to use the disabled doors, you wouldn't even know they are there. You may as well recycle £5 notes!
Degree Results Day!
I felt excited to go and collect my results. I expected a 2:2. I believed myself to be borderline 2:1 as I have made a significant improvement this year. It all depends on the way the marks are weighted. If they take the top 10 marks then I would get a 2:1 but if this years marks carried the most weight then it would be a high 2:2. Whatever the outcome, I am really proud to have got to the end. Despite my ongoing cognitive disabilities due to two strokes, my recent broken leg and then the shock of the last-minute 'headphone' decision, I had completed the degree to the best of my ability.
I collected the brown envelope from Sean and went out to the other gathered students, some of whom had received their own results. I opened the envelope and couldn't read a thing, the print was so small. I asked Chris what it said, '2:1!'. I had to put on my glasses to read it for myself. There it was in black and white - albeit small print. Vindicated!
We all congratulated each other. We will all go off in our own directions now. I wish everyone well.
I collected the brown envelope from Sean and went out to the other gathered students, some of whom had received their own results. I opened the envelope and couldn't read a thing, the print was so small. I asked Chris what it said, '2:1!'. I had to put on my glasses to read it for myself. There it was in black and white - albeit small print. Vindicated!
We all congratulated each other. We will all go off in our own directions now. I wish everyone well.
DEGREE RESULTS TOMORROW!
At last, three years in the waiting, the results are in tomorrow. I want to blog before I get them so that my comments are objective. My overall view of the course is that:
- I have never quite known what is going on because things change all the time. The Professional Practice module last year involved work experience whereas this year it was about research into your chosen field of practice. Just as I got to grips with sketchbooks for assessment, this year they have been replaced with a blog or documented report. It would have been useful to have an interim tutorial to check that the blog is as they want it.
- The visiting practitioners have been interesting in that they present the work they have produced and offer tutorials to students whose practice is similar to their own.
- Considering the student body is so small, I always get the impression they don't know who we are. I had an email from the CHC tutor, KL, chastising me for not attending her tutorial and making sure that my absence was noted in my file. I informed her that I was actually there and had a feedback sheet to prove it. She apologise stating she had confused mw with a Worcester college student. RC wrote a completely different surname on my tutorial feedback sheet. For the entire year she has been getting Merlene confused with Myrtle. On another occasion gave me ten days extension to a hand-in deadline, as set out in my Disability Statement, only to change it to five days because of the length of the report. When I explained that my Disability Support worker was only due back from holiday after the five day deadline had passed, she compromised on seven days saying, 'it will look like I don't know what I'm doing'. On the subject of Disability, over the two years of the Foundation Course and the three year full-time BA course, I have only asked for an extension to the essay deadline on two occasions. Both because of the absence of my Disability Support worker. My CHC essay was written but she types it for me. I went to the Course Director, three weeks before the deadline, to tell him I would need an extension and who did I need to consult, to which he responded 'So you're going to play the Disability card?' which I thought was a bit insensitive. I told him that sometimes I thought the tutors forgot that I had significant disabilities. 'That's good isn't it? You wouldn't want to be treated any differently to the others would you?' he asked. 'Well actually', I thought, ' I do need reasonable adjustments so that I am the same as everyone else.
- At the beginning of the year we received a notification of Etiquette. It was long overdue. I totally agree that students should arrive in time, especially when attending visiting practitioner talks. However, shouldn't this etiquette apply to the staff as well? We had a technician workshop. He arrived half an hour late. When we were all convened to meet in the studios to discuss the installation of our work, one of us had to go to the tutor office after fifteen minutes of waiting to find the tutors chatting. No doubt it was important. We were always kept waiting in the past but we thought this Etiquette policy would improve things. It hasn't.
- There is a culture of arrogance and disdain within the leadership towards the student body. They operate on the principle that the stick is far more effective than the carrot. I have never seen so many grown people come out of tutorials crying. We all dislike criticism of our work but appreciate constructive critisicm as this moves us forward. Our work is often met with derision or the tutors walking away in disgust. This is hardly encouraging. This would be excusable if it was a one-off but it is the norm. I have commented to Sean about this because my concern is not for the mature students, who have been in a professional field and are used to tough treatment in the workplace. Some of the younger students are destroyed by the negative comments they receive. It has led to a lot of dropouts. I had been trying to put my finger on why there was such a low morale on the course. We have lovely studios to work in and the students get along very well despite the age range. One comment made by a tutor during a group crit underlined the attitude of some members of the Department. This tutor, who shall remain nameless, said, 'I have no personal investment in any of you lot'. I thought, 'how can you be in this job with that attitude?' This is the same tutor who when I told her I had been nominated to attend the Public Art Strategy at Twycross zoo in collaboration with Commissions East commented, 'Don't expect anything to come of it.' Thank you for your support!. It then dawned on me that the Department is all about their reflected glory. You can have the best facilities going but if the interests of the students are not uppermost, the only way is down.
- Another concern has been the personal relationship between two of the tutors. This should not be a problem but some students have felt that if you have a problem with one tutor, you cannot complain to the Course Director. This is further complicated by the fact that they are also internal examiners. I don't think that this would be a problem as there are measures in place that ensure fairness, but it still creates tension amongst the students.
Wednesday 15 June 2011
Technical problem!
Received an email telling me that the team can't operate my film without instructions. Film is not playing on a loop. I am trying to get someone to take me into college with my disability scooter. Ho Hum!
Tuesday 14 June 2011
Degree Show, Bournville, 13 June 2011
What a night! It began at 5pm when my friend transported me to college with my mobility scooter. We went into the studio were my TV installation was located. It wasn't switched on. My friend went in search of the TV remote. She found it and I started the film. The sound was over the headphones. We left to go to the fashion show out on the Green.
At 7pm we returned and I was pleasantly surprised to see quite a few people moving through the studios.When about eight people were looking at the film, I asked if they would like to hear it. They said yes so I pulled the headphones and we had live sound. I talked a little about the concept of the film; the impact of marine litter on the Albatross population due to the mother feeding its chick on plastic debris, leading to a digestive blockage and slow starvation. People asked questions and I was encouraged by their interest.
One man approached me and said he has first hand experience of this very problem. He has a holiday home in the Caribbean and ships actually dump litter which is then washed up on the beach outside his house. He cleans his area of beach but there are two empty properties either side of him which he cannot enter so the rubbish is left and he sees birds feeding on it. He said this problem should have a higher profile.
Another fella, a film maker himself gave me some useful tips. He was critical of certain aspects but I had asked his opinion and appreciated the benefit of his expertise. I finished by asking him, 'was your first film this good?' He replied, 'No'. That was good enough for me. 8pm soon came around and the visitors began to disperse. I closed down my TV and reinstated the headphones. If the amount of people, possibly 50, who watched the film with open sound had had to do so through headphones, it would have taken hours. I rest my case.
At 7pm we returned and I was pleasantly surprised to see quite a few people moving through the studios.When about eight people were looking at the film, I asked if they would like to hear it. They said yes so I pulled the headphones and we had live sound. I talked a little about the concept of the film; the impact of marine litter on the Albatross population due to the mother feeding its chick on plastic debris, leading to a digestive blockage and slow starvation. People asked questions and I was encouraged by their interest.
One man approached me and said he has first hand experience of this very problem. He has a holiday home in the Caribbean and ships actually dump litter which is then washed up on the beach outside his house. He cleans his area of beach but there are two empty properties either side of him which he cannot enter so the rubbish is left and he sees birds feeding on it. He said this problem should have a higher profile.
Another fella, a film maker himself gave me some useful tips. He was critical of certain aspects but I had asked his opinion and appreciated the benefit of his expertise. I finished by asking him, 'was your first film this good?' He replied, 'No'. That was good enough for me. 8pm soon came around and the visitors began to disperse. I closed down my TV and reinstated the headphones. If the amount of people, possibly 50, who watched the film with open sound had had to do so through headphones, it would have taken hours. I rest my case.
Thursday 9 June 2011
Compromise?
My friend came back into the studio. Seeing my utter dejection, she asked what had happened. Sean came back into the studio. My work still had not been signed off. My friend asked if we couldn't compromise on the open sound? Sean had mentioned two empty studios. My friend offered to pay for and provide the carpenters for the installation of my work in one of those, in order to have my film presented in the way it was intended throughout the process. Sean flatly refused as this would mean calling back the Health & Safety officers and did I want to risk jeopardising the whole Degree Show? Of course not.
I asked him if, for my assessment on the following Tuesday, the examiners could see my film with open sound as the other artists wouldn't be involved. Again this was out of the question as the presentation for the assessment has to be consistent with that of the Degree Show.
Sean asked me at what distance from the screen I wanted the headphones to reach. He told me to position my mobility scooter and decide. I asked him where I would get headphones from? He told me to go to see Boris, the technician. He left the studio. I moved backwards and forwards on my mobility scooter but the whole thing was becoming a blur. My friend asked if we should go to Currys to buy headphones. They would need to be PAT tested before I could be signed off and, by then, Sean had told us Boris the technician was off sick. Sean came back into the studio bearing a set of headphones and we thanked him. We now had to get off to B&Q to source a hook. Sean signed off my work. It wasn't the best way to remember hand-in day!
A Sleepless Weekend
It wasn't until that night that I realised all the implications of this change in presentation of my work:
I really felt that Sean had held a gun to my head. I was coerced into agreeing to the use of headphones because of a) the 'problem' had to be resolved before sign-off. The deadline had already passed. b) There was no reasoning with Sean. His decision was made. c) There was no compromise as Sean had pointed out that bringing Health & Safety in again could compromise the whole show.
Result! It pays to know people who know people in high places. Due to the community educational art projects I have been involved with, I have quite a few contacts in academia. They felt that Sean's action was outrageous and passed me on to whoever they thought might be useful in this situation. By Monday afternoon I received confirmation that a meeting was being called between myself, Sean and John Butler, Head of BIAD for Tuesday. It was to take place after my scheduled presentation assessment but I was grateful to have this meeting so soon as I don't think I could have dealt with the anxiety much longer.
Presentation to Internal Examiners
If any BCU students with a problem read this, take heart. I went in with my points prepared in a statement. John Butler allowed my friend to sit in with me. I did not want her to contribute other than in a supporting role because my nerves were in shreds from lack of sleep and food. I was allowed to read my statement and then Sean had his right to reply. I offered the compromise of only showing my film with open sound once every half hour. Sean made no response. John Butler gave me a fair hearing. Whatever the outcome, I feel that the decision will be made by fair-minded people.
I asked him if, for my assessment on the following Tuesday, the examiners could see my film with open sound as the other artists wouldn't be involved. Again this was out of the question as the presentation for the assessment has to be consistent with that of the Degree Show.
Sean asked me at what distance from the screen I wanted the headphones to reach. He told me to position my mobility scooter and decide. I asked him where I would get headphones from? He told me to go to see Boris, the technician. He left the studio. I moved backwards and forwards on my mobility scooter but the whole thing was becoming a blur. My friend asked if we should go to Currys to buy headphones. They would need to be PAT tested before I could be signed off and, by then, Sean had told us Boris the technician was off sick. Sean came back into the studio bearing a set of headphones and we thanked him. We now had to get off to B&Q to source a hook. Sean signed off my work. It wasn't the best way to remember hand-in day!
A Sleepless Weekend
It wasn't until that night that I realised all the implications of this change in presentation of my work:
I really felt that Sean had held a gun to my head. I was coerced into agreeing to the use of headphones because of a) the 'problem' had to be resolved before sign-off. The deadline had already passed. b) There was no reasoning with Sean. His decision was made. c) There was no compromise as Sean had pointed out that bringing Health & Safety in again could compromise the whole show.
- In the 2000 word illustrated document I handed in I had made no mention of headphones anywhere. I had an entire section on presentation and sound. Did that not look like an oversight on my part that I had omitted to mention headphones? I also had a section on 'professional use of my film'. Wouldn't the examiners think it odd that I intended to show it to groups as the basis for an art workshop through headphones? It was never at any stage my intention to use headphones consequently I made no reference to them.
- My presentation was due the following Tuesday, before which there was no time to appeal about this headphones ruling. I had no idea as to what my student rights were. Was I entitled to a student advocate? I was beginning to feel really sick.
- I felt that my work was being unfairly penalised because it simply didn't suit three other students out of the entire student body. Isn't this a form of censorship? Other people who had sound installations were permitted the use of open sound. There should be a blanket policy - either no open sound for anyone or reasonable sound permitted for everyone. I was the only student with an audio installation penalised in this way. Was this flouting equal opportunity rulings?
- Then there was the logistics of the Show itself. My film lasts 5 minutes give or take. Using headphones, only one person can watch it at a time. No other person's work is limited to an audience of one. How would Ian react if only one person at a time were permitted to enter his 'particpatory art installation' and the rest ushered to wait behind a barrier? Who is going to be prepared to wait in line for the use of the headphones?
- There is also the issue of the viewer's engagement with the piece. I had planned for months how to present it with the greatest impact. The music is integral to the piece. Every image is synchronised to match the ryhthm of the music. Take that away and you only have half a film. You have changed the dynamic of the piece and the interaction between viewer and work.
- I was seriously worried about my presentation to examiners the following Tuesday. Sean insisted that the presentaiton for the assessment had to be consistent with that of the Show. How was I going to present my work when it is in a different format to what I had planned all along? Was I going to pretend that the headphones weren't there or was I going to pretend that I'd planned to present it that way?
Result! It pays to know people who know people in high places. Due to the community educational art projects I have been involved with, I have quite a few contacts in academia. They felt that Sean's action was outrageous and passed me on to whoever they thought might be useful in this situation. By Monday afternoon I received confirmation that a meeting was being called between myself, Sean and John Butler, Head of BIAD for Tuesday. It was to take place after my scheduled presentation assessment but I was grateful to have this meeting so soon as I don't think I could have dealt with the anxiety much longer.
Presentation to Internal Examiners
If any BCU students with a problem read this, take heart. I went in with my points prepared in a statement. John Butler allowed my friend to sit in with me. I did not want her to contribute other than in a supporting role because my nerves were in shreds from lack of sleep and food. I was allowed to read my statement and then Sean had his right to reply. I offered the compromise of only showing my film with open sound once every half hour. Sean made no response. John Butler gave me a fair hearing. Whatever the outcome, I feel that the decision will be made by fair-minded people.
Wednesday 8 June 2011
Instant decisions
I began to justify my use of music - which I have outlined throughout my blog posts - but it fell on deaf ears. Sean had decided that the use of headphones would be a preferable way to present my film. I was stunned. Throughout all the previous group crits, informal discussions, tutorials and emails, there had never been mention of headphones to present the film. I asked if I could think about it. Sean said that until this 'problem' was solved I could not sign off my work- the 1.00pm deadline had already passed. Feeling totally intimidated and pressured, I conceded to headphones. Sean then asked me how I wanted to present them. A pedestal? a hook? I had taken months over decisions regarding the engagement of the viewer with my work, now I was expected to make instant decisions about something I had never even considered before. The other three students left the studio, then Sean made his exit. I was left there in stunned silence.
Now here's the problem...
Sean and myself waited for the other three, who arrived together. He began by saying that our pieces worked really well together. Kayleigh's work depicts war and military machinery which has a huge carbon footprint, Ian's piece is made of shiny plastic, which appears in my film, Carly has three paintings of Hollywood actresses and film at that time used harmful chemicals and film is cinematic and my film is about the environment and shown on a screen. I was wondering where this was all leading and then Sean asked, 'is there anything that doesn't work?' to which Ian replied 'the music'. My music. It turned out that my music was contentious because it impacted upon the viewing of their work. Given the fact that we had a hand-in deadline at 1.00pm I felt it was a bit late in the day to raise this matter.
Hand-in deadline shock!
On Thursday 2 June, I went into college for the first time since the Bank Holiday re-opening. I was impressed at the work going on in the studios. All the walls had new display areas built by the technicians and painted white by the students. The technicians, Graham, Boris and Pete were busy building my TV installation. It comprises two panels of MDF about 6 feet tall by 4 feet wide. They had concealed the wiringand were on the final stages of screwing down the side struts. They told me it had taken since Tuesday to install because of all the precise measurements. Because of my broken leg, Sean had overseen the locating of my TV installation and he had done me proud. My friend, who had transported me in, because I am still unable to walk, painted the panels white ready for the TV to be installed. I was to share a studio with Ian, who was constructing in situ a framework with reflective plastic panels for his 'participation art' piece, Carly, who had mounted three paintings of actresses from scenes in old movies and Kayleigh, whose embroidery work was a comment on Guantanamo Bay interns. As we left the paint drying on Thursday, I felt a sense of 'almost there'. It was just a question of putting the finishing touches to the paintwork, mounting the plasma TV screen, plugging in my memory stick and my film was ready to go for the hand-in deadline the next day at 1pm. Months and months of work and just one day away from hand-in.
Friday 3 June. Hand-in day.
There was a buzz in all the studios when I arrived at 10.00 on Friday. Ian came over to me and said there was a problem with my sound installation, had I received his email last night? I thought he meant that there was a technical problem with the wiring. I had looked at Moodle and my emails at 9.00pm the previous evening before going to bed, after putting the finishing touches to my report - nothing new.
Sean called to me from a platform in the far corner of the studio that there was an objection to my sound from the other studentssharing the studio. He cupped his hand over his ears and said 'emails have been flying about'. He said he was convening a meeting for the four of us at 12.35 after the Health & Safety officers had left. I could see that he was up to his eyes in it, so I made myself busy in the meantime. I saw the other three students from my studio go off into a room together. I looked around the studios on my mobility scooter. Sean told me not to be conspicuous as he feared the Health & Safety officers might find a problem. He needn't have worried as there was ample space for me to move and where there wasn't, I asked students to move their personal belongings. I went off to find myself a quiet corner, out of the way. I worked with Steve on drawing up a sheet with turn on/off instructions for the artists who were using equipment. Steve is another student working on a film. His film is about violence in an asylum. He is really into goth. His work has come on hugely over the three years of the course. Sean gave the thumbs up that the Health & Safety officers had given the all clear and I made my way to the disabled platform to be ready for the group meeting.
Friday 3 June. Hand-in day.
There was a buzz in all the studios when I arrived at 10.00 on Friday. Ian came over to me and said there was a problem with my sound installation, had I received his email last night? I thought he meant that there was a technical problem with the wiring. I had looked at Moodle and my emails at 9.00pm the previous evening before going to bed, after putting the finishing touches to my report - nothing new.
Sean called to me from a platform in the far corner of the studio that there was an objection to my sound from the other studentssharing the studio. He cupped his hand over his ears and said 'emails have been flying about'. He said he was convening a meeting for the four of us at 12.35 after the Health & Safety officers had left. I could see that he was up to his eyes in it, so I made myself busy in the meantime. I saw the other three students from my studio go off into a room together. I looked around the studios on my mobility scooter. Sean told me not to be conspicuous as he feared the Health & Safety officers might find a problem. He needn't have worried as there was ample space for me to move and where there wasn't, I asked students to move their personal belongings. I went off to find myself a quiet corner, out of the way. I worked with Steve on drawing up a sheet with turn on/off instructions for the artists who were using equipment. Steve is another student working on a film. His film is about violence in an asylum. He is really into goth. His work has come on hugely over the three years of the course. Sean gave the thumbs up that the Health & Safety officers had given the all clear and I made my way to the disabled platform to be ready for the group meeting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)