Done and dusted. Speaking to art students, trying to appear neither too self-obsessed and self-congratulatory, but to share some of the amazing things I’ve been a part of the past year. 

It went quite well, I didn’t ramble excessively, or shake or sound overly emotional (common public speaking problems in my world), but in wrapping up my talk (38 minutes – get me) I found myself indirectly asking questions rather than wrapping it up. This was quite pleasing.

Environmental Art, and what is it anyways?

What about the audience?

Define art? 

This one at least I do have a bit of an answer for, or at least a current opinion – art is an indicator, or a highlighter; encouraging looking at, and by looking at, engaging with something more.

Site specific art, and the role of documentation

Why public art?

My good friend Mairi reckoned on the lack of questions being from students being that I didn’t really give a proper artist talk – I didn’t really talk about my work all that much, other than telephone boxes (of course). I did largely talk about the Stove, and the exciting things that we’ve I’ve been doing alongside them (need to stop speaking in plural when I mean singular) – I thought about a larger debate about the role of other art versus the hyper art of art college, but sort of gave up. The lack of response, the fear perhaps of rejection or something may have also had something to do with it. I wondered if art students really need someone talking about their own work, maybe it’s more relevant to talk to students about the practicalities of that ‘being an artist’ thing, than chatting through why I produced this work or that. Perhaps next time, a different format would be more useful. More engagement, artist talk as public art? Dialogue and debate may have been more meaningful. 

Watch this space. Or perhaps more correctly, watch an arts space near you – I feel a plan coming on.