I have revised this document many times as something about it hasn’t sat well with me and has been niggling away in my head. Even when I drove to the far north of Scotland, I took my computer and a copy of the text, which I continued to work on.

My latest version is shown below:

“My project is a deeply personal and emotional exploration of the spaces between life and death inspired by my daughter’s eighteen-month journey through cancer to her death and by my own parallel journey as I watched her die and tried to cope with life without her. Scatter is a project born from the desire to make sense of loss, which might, in some small way, contribute to the understanding of grief in society. Initially, I had no plan to show this project, but the healing process demanded that I reveal it and not lock it away in the dark. The artworks I have created to explore my experiences have the potential to provide others with a way to delve into their own depths of sorrow. I believe that grief is not something that can be cured; it is a feeling that never truly leaves us. However, my engagement with death and my gradual acceptance of grief have been enriched by the process of creating this project. Grief and art seem to be a good match; they provide a way to make sense of the raw emotions and turmoil surrounding death.

My daughter’s name was Rebecca. Although Rebecca does not feature directly in this exhibition, her presence runs like a thread through my project.”

I will ask for feedback on this before I settle on the latest version. Even at this late stage, I wonder about the line where I state that my project might contribute to the understanding of societal grief. Is this too bold a claim and should I remove it? Are these words and meaning repeated when I say that my experiences have potential to allow others to engage with their sense of sorrow?