Communication. If I'm trying to invent my own visual alphabet so I can invent my own visual vocabulary so I can tell my own visual story then I'm going to have to accept that no one is going to understand me -- not at first anyway.
I've been sharing my latest pieces with friends and getting feedback -- "Where's the figure?" "Why so much white?" "Are they done?" -- the list goes on. These are people who know me. These are people who know my work. These are people I thought would have a head start understanding my visual language. And on one level they do. Their questions are them trying to learn the alphabet. -- "Am I supposed to see two figures?" "Is that an arm or a leg?" "Why is that line there?" -- But it is interesting how much their satisfaction with the work depends on understanding the intent. What was I thinking rather then what do they see/feel/sense.
One friend talked about "stained glass" and I thought that was a good, but was it a rational response to the lines thinking they looked like leading or was it an emotional response sensing something more spiritual about the abstrated space?
One friend talked about "veils" and I thought that was good, but was she responding to the obscuring of the figure or the sense of space being filled in with something hard to see?
One friend talked about "a bright light" and I thought that was good, but was it a response to the "whiteout" technique or were they seeing the illumination of the unknown darkness of separation?
As an artist I want to say something with my work. If someone thinks it's pretty while someone else is busy trying to find all the different figures -- isn't that enough? How much meaning has to be intended and how much does it have to be perceived?