In this exhibition, Sasmita reimagined the traditional Kamasan painting technique, a style dating back to the fifteenth century and traditionally practiced by men to narrate Hindu epics. The scrolls are panoramic and long. The way you physically walk through the scroll, seeing it in sections rather than all at once, makes it feel more like a comic than a painting. That shift in format really stood out to me.

There is something I still have not figured out about her work. Her art style is clearly inspired by Kamasan techniques, but what about the themes? The drawings are beautiful and technically amazing, but the imagery covers a lot. Some parts feel heavily inspired by western religious iconography. That is where I start to feel a bit confused. The work speaks about ancestral memory, rituals, and migration, but when I see elements that remind me of western religious art, it feels like a stretch. Or maybe I am the one projecting. Maybe I am too conditioned by western frameworks, since that is the culture I know most deeply.

What I keep thinking about is my own work. What is my stance? Will my audience understand the abstract imagery in my prints next to the very physical presence of the armor? In the case with Paul, the answer was no. That is a problem I need to fix, but I am still figuring out how. This exhibition made me worry a bit. If I am confused while trying to interpret her work, how confused will people be when looking at mine? How clear do I need to make my message?

Besides the themes, I really loved her use of materials. The python skin and braided hair in the central piece gave it the feeling of a ritual about to happen. The lighting was also very effective, focusing most of the attention toward the drawing at the center. That moment, standing in front of it, felt quiet and powerful.

I love the Pitt Rivers Museum. Stuff upon stuff. How can one man be so rich and so determined to collect that much in a single lifetime? I really like how the exhibits are displayed in that museum. Everything is cramped and compact, with descriptions and nameplates floating all around, but somehow it is still clear and easy to read.

This trip got me thinking about how to display my armor and mace. I actually copied the way they display weapons to make my mace installation. I still do not fully know why this method of display attracts me so much. When they are spread out like that, they start to look like a weapon swinging in motion. Each one becomes a frame in an animation. Maybe adding that sense of motion to the maces makes the whole piece more interesting.

Numbers really matter. Comparing my four maces to the display case with ten maces in it, mine feel pale in comparison. Variation and quantity are what make the Pitt Rivers Museum such an unforgettable experience. I might not be able to create a lot for the degree show, but there might be a way to create an illusion of abundance by reusing old armor pieces that I am casting now as experiments.

The little description bubbles in the museum are also a great touch. Maybe I can use that format for the artwork descriptions in my show. It could be a nice way to add context without being too formal, and it fits with the archive feeling I am already leaning into.

These Moai pieces are lovely as well. They are so small compared to the real ones, they almost look like charms that people carry around for good luck. Charms are something I want to include in my exhibition too, but I do not think I will have enough time for that.