Functional considerations:
I do not see many issues with the traffic flow in this
space, because it is wide and there is room between the sculpture exhibits for people
to move through without being blocked.
Some of the materials look fragile and could be easily
harmed unintentionally by distracted guests. Jodi’s pieces are very intricate
and are projected a short bit off of the wall which could get caught on someone
clothes if they got too close or did not realize their distance to the piece. The
oranges that are on the ground are not as durable either because they could be
moved, kicked, or tripped over.
The labels are hung comfortable for me they are just a
little bit below eye level. The only issue I could see is a tall person would
have to look lower to read the text on the label.
The most dangerous aspect of this show would be the loose
oranges on the ground that could easily be overlooked by a guest who is focused
on the art or a conversation and may accidentally step on one and fall. A disabled
person would be able to experience the exhibit because there is no levels to the
exhibit space and there is enough room for a disabled person to maneuver around
the space without running into anything.
The typography is easy to read and is done in a professional
looking font that does not unnecessarily distract from the work.
Formal
Considerations:
A basic font is good for most pieces unless there is a way
that the font can enhance the work. If the artist created a theme in their art
and found or made a font that intentionally relates to the theme and adds to
the overall effect of the work.
There is a unity within the exhibits created by the same
artist which is easier to determine a certain artist, but all together the show
does not flow together. In a show with several artists it would help if all the
art had to have one simple element or theme that could connect them all to make
the show feel more connected.
Most of the work seems to be conceptual instead of representational
and the art is contemporary and abstract.
Conceptual
considerations:
The overall theme of this show for me seems a mix of organic
and architectural works on the wall remained me of building and technical plans
for buildings, organic elements the ducks, and animal paintings.
There is no defiant beginning point or end point a person
would go in and begin on either side of the exhibit and not get confused or
lost.
The sequence for this exhibit works because it is a display of
several artists work so there is not a real way to organize it in a beginning
to end point.
Visitor observations:
People under 25 might not be as interested in more conceptual
focused art because most of the intent of the art is not instantly visible an
needs to be thought about. People under 25 mainly children and teenagers would
be more interested in fun colorful and interactive pieces that are more visually
appealing.
People over 25 will be more interested in the more thoughtful
artwork that leaves more to interpretation. The art that would be less popular
would be the more self-explanatory work where there is not as much to interpreted
or think about.
Most of the work is up to interpretation because there are
no descriptions from the artists to explain the complete concept so people can
bounce their interpretations back and forth off of each other. It might be
helpful to add a rhetorical question to the description of the work or in the
title which could encourage more discussion.
The only thing that I thought would
be an issue is the free rolling oranges that could cause tripping hazards to be
taken from eh gallery, or even taken by guests. I think if the oranges were
held in place by something in designated areas out of the walking path it would
e better.
