Overcomplicating things is dangerous (and for me overcomplicating comes eeeeasy and keeping it and myself in check does not).
Another issue is making it both brainy & attractive. Luckily, the attractiveness is not a difficult issue for me to handle, for I do strongly believe that things have to look good. And they look even better if they are brainy.
It all makes me think 2 years back when I had an interview at BBH London and the top planner there criticized my advertising portfolio because it was...too polished. Mind you, he did find substance there, lots of it, but the fact that it was also too aesthetically pleasing spoiled the whole thing for him. I still believe in what I told him then: I believe that if you are smart, you should be able to tell if things (or people) have only looks or if they are blessed with both looks and brains.
At any rate, I received a wonderful compliment today from a wonderful friend of mine, a real art-coniosseur. She said that my pieces 'make people look at art differently'. She nailed it - this is exactly what I want to happen. Of course it's an easier task with people who already look at things - everything - in a different way, but I believe that little by little some big things might change. Or if not, 'brainy cuteness' might be a GM subproduct I'll come up with.
So I just finished working on my 'reading' jewelry line. And as usual during the research phase I stumbled upon some paintings I've never seen.
Hands of the artists are quite recognizable - at least 1 of them is (test yourself) but it brings me back to something I've been pondering on for quite a while now - how does it happen that some paintings by an artist become very very famous, while others remain obscure.
"Known/unknown" is another series of jewelry I am working on, logically enough.
And it has every right to be very brainy.