The introduction of this concept in Stuarts class totally rocked my world. It is an idea I have been wrestling with internally for many years, and the way in which we explored it in this class, was pivotal for my understanding of my own preferences in my work. The delicate balance between these two is so important and had never been named and discussed in this way. I learned that in my work I like to keep things ambiguous in certain areas, (Ie. I do not like to come right out and say "this is good or this is bad" and make specific statements or judgements on things). I do however like to make things more literal in a sense so that people can relate to the elements to a certain extent, and frame it in a way that it paints a picture and moves you in a certain direction. I like people deciding for themselves what that direction is which results in many interpretations with no one being right or wrong per se. I am thankful for this exploration that has influenced my thinking about my work.
Reference: Nato Thompson (2015). The didactic and the ambiguous in the panoramic age (pp. 29-54) In Seeing Power: Art and Activism in the 21st Century. London: Melville House Press.