Post on 07-Apr-2018
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 1/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
Betti Pettinati-LonginottiAdvisor, Ben SloatGroup 3, Summary of Residency 3July 17, 2011
End of Semester/ Preparing for the residency:
The end of the semester is always hectic for me. The end of a school year, giving exams, closing
up my art classroom for the summer, on top of making sure everything is shipped and packed for
the residency. I think that this program is significantly more stressful on students out-of-state,
and for those that have more sizeable works to ship. Not only is there and an additional expense
for the shipping costs, but the time to bring work to a conclusion is also abbreviated due to the
time in advance that work needs to be shipped. I only bring this up because the shipping
consideration is a huge one.
This past semester, after learning from an ordeal last semester, I invested in a professional
shipping case, that I had custom built for the Uomini Famosi archive I am working on. I
designed it to eventually hold 50 pieces. Though I suppose this is something I am learning about
that is integrally important to my work. Having some practice with this now is informative to
future experiences that require the packing and shipping of my work, especially my glasswork. I
thought it was humorous that the evening before the residency, some students were in the
Newbury building, and a student I didn’t know came by. I have learned since that he is sort of
one of those controversial characters. However, he asked me outright, if that was my shipping
case. Of course I replied that it was. He exclaimed, “Are you crazy?!” I laughed it off, but he
is a local. He has no idea what it is like to participate in this program, having to make decisions
about all these extraneous pieces. I am not reviewing this so much to gain sympathy, but it is a
considerable issue that is not discussed in any formal report within the program.
1
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 2/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
Crit Space:
I was placed on the 3rd Floor again for the 3rd time. I suppose this is the logical choice for my
work, because I always request access to daylight and a wall I can nail into for the glass pieces. I
have learned to arrive a day early, after my experience first residency. It was just too stressful to
arrive on Day 1 of the residency. Arriving early allows you to scope out your space and work
out any problems if ones exist. This past residency I was initially given very little space, just two
kiosk walls. I reiterated to the powers that be that I needed a wall to nail into, and that I had
large paintings to hang. So my area was adapted before we started hanging work. I think this
must be a huge ordeal to arrange everyone’s ‘crit spaces’ and to make everyone happy. I have
recently read on a few blogs that several people were unhappy. There is a kind of pecking order
though, that students think about being chosen for the 1st floor (floor 2), ‘that if you are chosen
for that floor you are a stronger student’. It seemed to me that most of the students that were on
the first floor this past residency were also placed there last residency. The placements on the
floor changed but the players were the same.
Critiques/ Information Gleaned:
I thought it interesting that my two group critiques led by faculty were the ones that led my
group critiques first residency. I did not get to critique with them last residency, so I was
anxious to hear their remarks about the direction I had gone in a year’s time.
Faculty Crits-
My first group critique was with John Kramer. He took a very creative approach to our first
critique, in that the artist was not allowed to say anything about their work, to explain or to
2
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 3/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
defend it. It was a clean strategy to have members comment on your works, what they were
about without any foreknowledge. I enjoyed it, learned a lot about my work, but also learned
that in the real world of the exhibition, titles, catalogs and artist statements do assist the viewer in
understanding the work. I can say it was extremely difficult to sit there and not be able to
comment on your work. It was a little unjust for some of the group, as the students in their first
residency had already given their talks, so we did have some foreknowledge of their work and
intentions. It was rewarding though to have feedback that revealed my progress had come very
far within a year’s time.
My second group critique was with Deb Todd-Wheeler. My critique with her during my ‘first’
residency was quite radical and scalding. So I felt a little cowering knowing she would be
leading a critique. Some of her comments during first residency still stir inside me. I do not
want to dwell on my recovery from that critique, but do feel that faculty should know how
devastating remarks, may be. Despite my memory trauma that lingers, the critique this past
residency was quite beneficial and bore little residue from the first one I remember. Deb’s
comments revealed to think more about the lighting of the archive as an integral component to
my installation. She really did not like to votive tea lights, and thought they cheapened the
quality of the overall piece. While I know that the lighting is something that I need to make
some decisions and choices about, I feel the votives help to make a statement about the sacred to
the secular which is a metaphor implied in the piece.
Hannah Barrett was my advisor last semester, and we had some good discussion propelled from
the research papers and the blog entries viewed through the semester, while commenting on the
actual works. I think she was a little disappointed that I did not bring my actual 40 x 40” stained
3
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 4/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
glass assemblage, Homage to Kollwitz . But the expense to ship that round trip from NC to
Boston would probably cost another $600.00 in addition to the $700.00 already spent on the
actual work brought to residency, not to mention the cost of the shipping case built. A
photograph would have to suffice for the stained glass assemblage. She gave me good
commentary though on my paintings in addition to my glasswork, that was lacking in most of my
critiques, especially the group critiques. In my blog I commented on how difficult these were to
photograph, and I think the actual pieces cannot compare or were able to reveal their textural
qualities. Within the program I have had to walk a thin line in the use of glass, and this is
something that I had to really learn to defend with Hannah. I chose her initially as an advisor
consideration, because she is a painter, she does work figuratively. I do believe myself to be a
painter, even with my glass works. I do think myself to be a sculptor. Although my first mentor
suggested I think of myself in this way with the archive installation, I was just beginning then to
conceive. Hannah though could not see my connection from painting to glass that conceptually
has always been there for me, since my first seduction with glass as a material. I think that
through my papers and our conversations over the semester, she was better able to see those
connections and what my vision is for my varied strands of work in painting and glass.
Hmmm… Ben Sloat, what can I say about him? I must say that after first viewing your faux
stained glass piece of Michael Jackson, I had and interest in working with you. I sincerely also
like seeing how your direction as an artist has evolved from what you were trained to do, to what
work you are actually doing. I so appreciate that you have embraced the medium of glass for
me, which is something I have had to, as I previously stated, ‘walk a thin line’. I like that you
have sought out some contemporary references for my work, such as Spencer Finch, and the
4
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 5/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
sculptural / environmental glass works of Gerhard Richter. During our varied critiques and
discussions you asked me to consider conceptual and architectural approaches. In regard to the
architectural, mostly dependent on commission work to financial support these endeavors, I had
pretty much agreed and come to the conclusion to put these opportunities away for the duration
of this program. I feel through your reiteration to look for some potential opportunities, and have
since researched during the first part of my 3rd semester, varied public art projects that might
include architectural glass. My only objection to this is that at this point in the program when I
need to be focusing on my thesis, that it is probably contrary to that direction. However we will
see where the opportunities and potential proposal concepts lead. In almost every critique, the
discussion mostly evolved around the archive of the glass portraits and the issue of lighting these
more profoundly.
Faculty that I signed up with for critique:
Tony Apesos was my mentor 1st semester. I have a profound respect for his opinion and where
he was able to take me in my work from my first residency. I think that it is important within
this program that you have at least one faculty member that can see your growth and how you
evolved. Tony through my research helped me to form my concept for my Uomini Famosi
archive, although the technique that I am pursuing for this has changed since my idea first
semester. I enjoyed observing him look at my varied work. I think that he took the most interest
in my paintings. He asked me if he could touch them, and if about my process, and technique in
building up the texture. He looked like he was going to climb into my paintings. We discussed
the photomontage elements in the paintings and their purpose within the compositions, and
whether or not to include these.
He also really liked my murrini assemblages, what I am now calling ‘vitreous femmage’. This
5
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 6/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
is a strand of my work, I thought I would leave behind this semester, but his positive opinion of
him has swayed that decision. I may continue with these, but feel a need to focus more in
completing the archive, continuing my painting series just begun, and working on conceptual
exploration.
Jan Avgikos gave me, in my opinion, the most valuable critique of my residency. She was
drawn into the Uomini Famosi archive and gave me succinct commentary on the other strands of
my work. She was able to look at my list of women artists and who was already represented and
see what the holes or deficits were in my potential archive. She elicited varied names of women
artists that should definitely be included such as Cecilia Beaux and Hedda Stern. She also gave
me clear tutorial on women’s art collectives and including them as meta-narrative threads within
my archive. She had a definite opinion about the Guerilla Girls, and I am finding some really
love the group, and some have a poignant disdain for them. In the end I know that it my
decision, and if I keep them I need to learn how to communicate a defense for their inclusion.
She absolutely did not like my paintings. She said they were just too large and too greasy. In
retrospect it made me laugh. I said to colleague Dwight later on I might have a new name for
this painting series, “Big Greasy Women”. I have learned that the controversial opinions out of
critique can totally turn around within a semester. What some will dislike they find an affinity
for later on and vice versa. I have an interest in continuing, because it is still an area of pure
exploration and development. My paintings are for myself at this point, and whether they are
formally shown or not will ultimately be my decision. However, I already know that they will be
shown at an upcoming solo exhibition I have been granted at Salem College in February/ March
2012. I realize technically these are more radical, but I like knowing that my work is not overtly
myopic in scope and style.
6
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 7/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
Sunanda Sanyal gave me my very last critique. Jan and Sunanda I chose this semester to critique
my work because I had not had any prior interaction with them in looking at my work. In self
-evaluation of the program, it occurred to me that there are some faculty that you might never
interact with. So my critique with Sunanda took place after the conclusion of Critical Theory III.
He was captivated with my artist statement and had a direct commentary about the archive and
the hyperlinks of the collective having their presence online. He said, that is what would be
conceptually contemporary. So that is a piece that no one else picked up on or gave me any
opinion about. I think that our Academic Faculty brought other concepts to the table than
looking only at the aesthetic strengths and weaknesses of your work. Within the archive he
could clearly pick out Faith Ringgold and I learned that she was one of his professors. He also
had an interest in my homage to Käthe Kollwitz and I learned that his dissertation was on
Kollwitz.
Grad/Student/Peer Crits-
The graduates that I selected to have a critique with were Melanie Carr Eveleth, Betsy Hubner
and Cameron Bennett. With Melanie, again the critique seemed to circumvent mostly around the
archive. Melanie encouraged me to look for more references that were contemporary, and it has
since occurred to me that the artists I am depicting are not necessarily the most prominent
references to the aesthetics and concepts of my work. Perhaps in the critique of my work, I
should be more vocal about what my contemporary references are. Betsy was my buddy coming
into the program. She did a good job with that role and we have a bond. I enjoyed seeing
Betsy’s work evolve over the three residencies that we were together. We discussed the entirety
of the work I brought to the residency. In our discussion, I thought about an important concept
7
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 8/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
to stained glass, that could be applied to my archive, that I have not researched fully or
articulated yet, which is the history and origins of stained glass within the sacred, being a vehicle
of education for the illiterate. I think that is at the core of the conceptual intentions of my
archive: Do we know women’s art history and how have they been embraced within the art
canon? How many women artists are references to contemporary artists? I think there is still
illiteracy about women artists within our contemporary culture.
I chose Cameron Bennett because I think the man is so misunderstood and represents a style and
competency in painting that is disappearing or at least minimized within this program. He is a
student that many of his peer colleagues disliked, but I think those are personality issues. If you
can look beyond those issues, you will find Cameron has a lot to offer. Cameron and I spoke
about the sacred to the secular concepts within my archive and the possibility that many people
might not understand the meaning of the tea lights in the archive vitrines utilized as votives.
With so many of our contemporary population being un-churched and the loss of votives within
the ecclesiastical environment, that many might not get the connection. However, as an artist, it
is my symbolic metaphor and my connection and one to make about the ‘canon’ sacred to the
secular. We also had good conversation about my paintings. We discussed mostly technique
and material and he offered me some advice on process of acrylic versus working with oil.
Group Critique with Sally Knight: Sally led our group critique, and I may have signed up with
her if we were not assigned to her. Sally was in my first group, when she was in her 3rd
residency. Sally mystifies me a little, and I am still trying to figure her out. I can’t say that I
really understand her work, and mutually I do not think she understands mine. Responding to
Sally’s work, I related better to her earlier work and the work represented in the catalog, more
than the work shown in the exhibit. Regarding the group critique with her, I think that at the
8
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 9/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
point in the semester when the group critiques are scheduled with the grads, our minds are
already mush. Some students want to skip out on these critiques. Sally’s approach just
regurgitated discussion we already had as a group, but that was new only to her. My last two
grad critiques in prior residencies were far more personally productive, and so I found the
experience with Sally disappointing. I think it is instrumental to myself though, to learn what
works and what I find most meaningful to the critique, what might I offer new to the
conversation.
Critical Theory III: Critical Theory III with Sunanda had us all unnerved prior to the residency.
Our group has a private Facebook group page, and we rant, rave and discuss the program through
the semester. The amount of reading Sunanda gave us was huge. I think the problem with that
is, that to read it all prior to the residency, retaining all the concepts for discussion by the time
the seminar approaches is unrealistic. We though had really dynamic discussion within the
seminar, very often diverging from the main outline of the established concepts for the session.
The discussion is still something that resonates, and concepts tend to become even more
engrained as you look at art, and experience things in life and have discussion with others. I
believe the main core of what I will bring to dialogue in my next paper, Critical Theory in
relationship to my work, will naturally focus on the readings that circumvent around feminist art
and the art canon; and the monograph versus the universal; and ‘otherness’ within visual study
relating to diachronic and synchronic paradigms.
Elective Seminar: As a student in my 3rd semester/ residency, our elective seminar was
Professional Development with Laurel Sparks. I was impressed with the booklet of information
that Laurel provided and the connecting illustrations and discussion we had on the material. As
9
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 10/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
an older student in this program, and a teacher that has worked actively as an artist, I wasn’t sure
what the workshop might offer. I was really impressed and found I have a lot to work on.
Specifically I learned differences in a teaching resume to an artist resume that an artist statement
can vary to the venue or purpose. Our visit to the Steven Zevitas Gallery was eye opening, and
we even saw some of your work from the storage area, and your new work, Ben Sloat Notables.
The workshop was very constructed around the New York culture, and I found myself having to
translate opportunities to my own compositional culture available in North Carolina. I think that
for a program that brings people together from so many different areas across the nation, that
focusing on primarily the New York culture is a little unproductive and unrealistic, at least at this
point of being represented or participating. Even Steven Zevitas was very discouraging about
approaching galleries right now. I have the highest opinion of Laurel Sparks, but I think the
focus of this workshop needs to focus more on successful approaches that we might segue into,
finding opportunities to venue our work.
Closure and transition: Since I have been back from the residency, I have had the opportunity to
meet one time with my mentor. I quickly realized some of the challenges that are presented in
this semester, opposed to my past two semesters. My mentor is further away, within the state,
but not local. Travelling and making an appointment to visit, will be a little harder and to
arrange as by product of distance. Pam Toll has a global reputation, and one of the most
significant reasons that I proposed to work with her, but her studio, which is absolutely
wonderful, does not have access to the Internet. With my work being fragile and in oil
(paintings), it will be harder to find approaches to share my progress with her. I will have to
think about this more and prepare ways to share my work that does not rely entirely on Internet
10
8/6/2019 Summary of Residency July2011 BPLonginotti[1]
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/summary-of-residency-july2011-bplonginotti1 11/11
Pettinati-Longinotti
access.
Last semester, as a gesture of thanks I had a closure meeting with my mentor (Terri Dowell-
Dennis) after the residency, sharing my experiences and gaining some more objectiveness to all
the reactions and input. I would like to do that again with my mentor from this past semester,
but have not been able to make contact with Glenda (Wharton) yet, since I returned.
11