The works in Instigation Translation utilize various semiotic systems to deliver an insult. With written language, use of drawn symbols, and playful cynicism, the works muddle up the usual semantics. The outcome is a frustrating puzzle that might leave the viewers wondering if they've been seriously insulted or simply teased.

The "burns" are examples of the methods of communication that leave out important indicators of meaning, like body language and intonation. Certain genres of text are relevant in this case, including internet messaging or cell phone texting, in that these commonly involve inclusion of symbolic faces and acronyms as representations of body language and emotion (i.e. :D or lol). While Instigation Translation involves an emotional indicator (it is done by hand), these exemplified texts (messaging and texting) are delivered without any human quality in rendering, only screens with pre-existing text styles and formatting serve to deliver the message.

Beneath the layers of symbols and humor, these insults also touch on serious topics of bullying and judging types of people in society. When insults suggest different races, genders, or sexual preferences, they are ultimately devaluing those with the race, gender, or preference. Instigation Translation comments on societal tendencies to use insults in befriending processes. These insults indicate a community's undermining of certain types of people.

This series consists of photographs with manipulation which culminate in a group of works that express who I am by showing who I am not. The self-portrait is transformed into a process of elimination, finding certain characteristics that I am not, and removing them to conclude that I am the opposite or something other than what is presented.

These photographs expose our social dialogue, showing in a light-hearted manner how easy it is to categorize by presenting some of our stereotypes.

While every piece states that it is not me, I am the subject of all of the images. I cannot, however, physically be two-dimensional (and still be alive), nor can I be an organized, electronic representation on a screen. That is, if we are talking about my physical body.

With our society's use of networking sites and notions of the digital self, this series of portraits is highly relevant in its being done entirely with digital processes. The works propose that we might falsely represent ourselves using our digital identities. Furthermore, our digital identities are gradually replacing more of the social roles and situations that would have previously occurred in the physical realm. Is it correct to say that our identities are partly digital, provided our social lives partly take place in a digital arena?

These works and the experiences created by them can be reproduced easily with simple copying and pasting, continuing an important question of where the original work is located and how the value is affected by its reproducibility. Might we question the solidity of the identity of a work of art, if it is in multiples? Would this equate to a human's multiple personalities?