I talked about the project briefly at NUCA on Thursday as an example of what I mean by an integrated practice. I tactfully passed over the fact that it was about Francesco Clemente as I am sure he is as fashionable as spats at the moment. I was asked what I would do differently to achieve the same effects by just using the work of the artist and I said that I would be much more careful over the selection of the work of the artist. I would chose a set of work that more narrowly reflected one aspect of the artist’s work that would make the point.

The disadvantage of this is that it would only show the pupils one aspect of the artist’s work whereas my method this week showed them an over view, of sorts. My filleting of that then produced the educational point of the lesson. The other way would be to fillet it by careful selection of the artworks before we got that far and cut myself out of the loop as it were.

My interjection into the process does seem to have served other purposes too. Making it feasible, doable. If I can do it then anyone can, as I put it.

This was just a one-off lesson as part of a series of work on Identity so it was there to serve a purpose at the expressive end of a project about Identity which we are fumbling around with at the moment. It produced a set of images to go down a wall to impress the visitors from the LEA none of whom mentioned the displays at all.