Feedback Notes & Reflections:
- Visually, it works. The idea of collecting text and creating new meaning was interesting. As well as collecting traces of texture and human affectation to layer over. The connection between the text and patterns are a bit unclear or ‘too big of an area to focus on.’ How can I highlight the connect between the two?
I feel like it makes sense to keep these different elements of image, text, textures, signs, symbols etc. They all make up the of the ways in which we communicate and leave behind traces of human action and I don’t want to lose out on those complexities. - The form of print works – using layers, transparencies and textures to translate the qualities of a physical space. How can I push this further. How can I play with size, scale and different materials.
I would like to continue to expand on printed form. I am interested in print as a means of documenting/evidencing and disseminating knowledge/information. can include or print on physical ephemera actually found in the space. - But conceptually, it’s not about creating a response or outcome. But evidencing an exhaustive process of investigation.
On reflection, I definitely feel like I can be a lot more detailed in illustrating my actual process of moving through and experiencing the space. What were the questions I was asking of the space?
It needs to be more clear in the presented findings what my thought process was. Showing my notes. My understanding of what I was seeing.
Can I map more clearly where the pieces of text were found? Where were the visual materials collected? Can I map or illustrate or diagram that process of collection?
Can I present my process from the source images to processing to responding and presenting my findings more clearly. - There was some conflicting comments on whether the ‘statements’ ‘new meanings’ worked or not. “The statements were maybe a bit ‘Didactic’ or ‘Prescriptive.’” “I like them. They sort of mirror the aesthetics of protest.” “I like the idea of using found text and connecting them to make new meaning”
I think I would like to keep these meanings as one of the experiments. I don’t think I’m trying to force meaning or my perspectives onto the space. I dont think this particular bit of output removes me as some outside observer and claims to be a neutral replication of what was found. But very much acknowledges my lens. I think I am more trying to illustrate that people can choose to absorb and reproduce information subjectively. I feel like the meanings I have created acknowledge their subjectivity and individual position. And are not descriptive of the space as much as they are reflective of my response to show ‘discomfort’ or ‘opposition’ to the dominant kinds of ways in which we communicate in public spaces.
Our preoccupation with consumerism, buying, selling, corporate identity, access (or inability to access) space clearly manifest in most of the ‘legitimate’ text and imagery collected. I found it interesting to find ripped up or scratched out bits of graffiti, stickers, self-made posters, handwritten signs that showed anger, asked for support, reflected communal activities, independent businesses and promoted alternate music or art or political movements like extinction rebellion. Once these bits of text were collected, the only way to respond was to be uncomfortable or oppose that certain types of information, language or methods of communication were given legitimate space in the ‘public’ while others were maybe not.
It seemed like an interesting way to respond to it. But I need to be a bit more clear on the reasoning behind that response in the actual evidence of my investigation. Show more of how I arrived at the narratives made? I can also develop a more comprehensive directory of the text collected and try to create connections that may be considered more banal / are guided by a system rather than my lens?
Also ask myself what is the point of this very clear position of opposition to the dominant forms of language used in the space. And whether this response is actually critical towards the idea of accessing means of communication in public space? What is the purpose of the aesthetics of ‘criticality, activism and protest’ as a graphic design output? Do they serve a purpose at all? Maybe/maybe not? Maybe acknowledge that this work isn’t meant to presume some sort of ‘changemaking’ ‘activist’ ability, but is just a reflection of an individual thought process. - What’s missing is to illustrate more clearly the context of the actual space.
The work presented deliberately ‘removes context.’ But to evidence my exploration it might need to ‘layer back in some more information’ and re-contextualise my findings in Caledonian Road. Situate myself and the findings back specifically in the space.
How does the space relate to the investigation. And how is the investigation related to the ‘new meanings created’? More evidence of being present and observing the space.