There is no meaning in converting a conventionally destructive, random, chaotic act into a directed, aesthetic, meaningful one?

The fact he has a portrait of Kamala Harris called “glass ceiling breaker” and one of the victims of the Beirut explosion called #weareunbreakable suggests that you don’t need to dig particularly deep to find meaningful subtext in the choice of material and technique.

If anything it’s maybe a bit on-the-nose.

> but I believe "the medium is the message"

> I don't think there's anything particularly meaningful or evocative about shattered glass as opposed to any other planar medium

These seem contradictory? If the medium is "uninteresting", then how it can be the focus of interest?