 Head I , completed late in 1948 , is considered more successful than Head II . Although it is well @-@ regarded critically , Head II is seen as something of a creative <unk> @-@ de @-@ sac , while Heads III , IV and V are usually considered as merely intermediate steps towards Head VI . It is exceptional in <unk> 's <unk> that works of their relative poor quality survive ; he was <unk> self @-@ critical and often <unk> or abandoned <unk> before they were completed . When pressed again by <unk> in 1953 to produce works for a New York show that she had been <unk> for a year , he was full of doubt and destroyed most of what he had been working on , including several other <unk> . 
