Having been at this for a very long time, I'm less and less certain that there's even a “self” here to explain. I am more mystified than ever about where ideas come from, and how they manifest in the world the way they do.  Many artists say they get ideas before starting work; others report getting them  from working.  I am one of the latter usually, but my creative experience tells  me that the complete idea of a piece is often not clear until AFTER its making.  Its fully resolved “meaning” can emerge only when the work is over.  (Paul Klee is just one well-known artist who also understood this.)  I often start with an idea, but find that the process transforms it into something  else. The choice seems to be either to fight this dynamic, or to flow with it.  The  final result has a life of its own; it needs to be looked at as it is, without one's usual associative baggage. Yes, this strategy often leads to “inconsistent”  outcomes. So what? Is this “bad?”—Only if one is striving for a “brand.”

Thanks for looking.  KP