We organized a peer critique for the 14th of December to discuss our work. At this point most people are midway through their projects. About 12-15 part-time and full-time MA students attended the workshop. I presented a video and photographs from a recent installation test. Here are some points of reaction to my work: > Simple, yet effective

> Interactive without the use of very complex technology. Since the user is essential to viewing the artwork.

> Use of technology is secondary to the concept.

> Prefer to see it projected on walls, instead of floor since it's more natural.

> Want to see more animation: people, events, day changing to night.

> Want to see a more dramatic difference between the two skylines.

> One person interpreted the "real" city as a doomsday city since it contains images of poverty and burning buildings.

> Important to note how most people who view the work generalize it to any city rather that Mumbai, unless specifically told.

> Prefer the rough sketchy version of the city.

> Almost a film.

Overall, I realized how different each person's work and philosophy was, from Fine Art to Animation finding common ground is not easy since its like each person is from different planets. At the same time it was useful to see how a fine artist or animator would react to my work. Additionally, various topics such as self-reflexive films, and the "axiomatic" were discussed. I also discovered a piece of work which later became vital to my understanding of my practice. It is called Circle of Confusion by Joana Hadjithomas and Khalil Joreige, 1997. See my notes on this work here.