I didn't record my breaking the boundaries progress on this blog because of the nature of the audience - if I was sent an image by post, it is likely that I would google search the artist to see what their other work was like. I was disappointed that the painting I felt was most successful was not returned which taught me something about the trust and cooperation you need with your audience. The questionnaires reflected some ideas which I had intended to communicate and highlighted some which I had not. Two of the recipients said that the images reminded them of something which they related to personally and one picked up on the twin aspect. This suggested to me that the viewer looked for something in the work which they could relate to - having the image in their hands rather than passing it on a wall may have forced them to look at it more carefully. Both titles suggested indicated that something had been or might be wrong i.e. 'Double Trouble' and 'Aftermath'. It was interesting to me that the pieces were given these titles by the viewer. I wonder how a titled piece would have affected their perception. All commented that they felt the eyes were an aspect which was most important. One commented that they found the image frustrating as they couldn't tell what it was about. This perhaps reflects that my narrative appears ambiguous or that my intentions are essentially unclear which I will need to address. The comments about use of paint were quite perceptive, although none of them commented on the fluid nature (maybe this is less evident than in the oil paintings) but one wrote about movement and the others the contrast between colours, light and shade as well as 'hardening expressions, bright eyes'. I have tried to create contrast in different areas of the painting to heighten some parts so this was partly accurate although the use of media didn't communicate in the conceptual way I had intended. This may be an example when the viewer needs some interpretation to measure the impact. In terms of the mood they described the works as 'still', 'spooky', 'reflective', 'pensive', 'melencholy', 'sad', 'introverted'. I felt that these works were quiet and their expressions watchful and this was communicated clearly. As the viewers recognised that these were young people, the mood may have seemed jarred with how they perceive childhood adding a sense of unease.I was really nervous about conducting the interviews but found that this was a more personal way of recording a response and allowed me to develop the questions. Both hosts of the painting responded more favourably at the end of the day than they did at the beginning and again they found personal aspects which they could relate to in the image. The key aspect was time - I had time to talk with them, they had an extended period of time to engage with the work and formulate an opinion. This is something to consider when I am trying to exhibit work and possibly create a more interactive experience which will cause the viewer to consider more that a fast visual response to my work. I may experiment with installing paintings at other sites, or working in books to allow the viewer to handle the images and look through at their own pace.
I found this task a challenge but can see why it was important for me to consider and find my audience, and gain feedback from individuals outside of my usual demographic.