What did you learn?
Going into this project, I knew absolutely nothing about DMZs. Basically all of the information I was able to research about what DMZs actually are, how they are established, how they are protected, how they are contested, how they are governed, and how they are dissolved was new information was new to me. I chose to focus my research on the Korean DMZ, and I was able to learn more about the history of violence between North and South Korea as well as how the Korean DMZ fits into the modern landscape of the two countries. Through my research, I also unexpectedly learned information about DMZ tourism and new efforts to open up the DMZ to more civilians.
What feedback did you receive? Any reflections on critique itself?
My chose guide format was a Museum Map, and one piece of feedback was to include more text elements and descriptions. I think that would be very helpful to include in the future to allow a bit more space for my voice and personal opinions. Also, there was feedback about the sizing of certain elements. I could try to vary font and text size to achieve a better outcome.
I thought the critique process was very helpful since it allowed me to see how others were interpreting my work without my own biases getting in the way. I also felt like everyone was understanding and not very judgmental which made me feel comfortable sharing my work.
What might you do differently in terms of process or content?
I think my process was a bit disorganized. Since I found the segment of my topic that I wanted to focus on later in the research process, I kind of had a mad dash to the end. I’m actually very happy with the final content itself. I wish I had more time to add some nuance and refine the language/imagery, but given the time constraints, I’m proud of what I made.
What was inspiring? What parts?
I’m not sure I would say anything was inspiring per se, but I was definitely not expecting to be able to make such a put together product in just a few weeks. In the past, research projects and art projects could take months if not more, so I was surprised at what I was able to produce.
Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc.
I think the audience, tone, and metaphor were definitely in line with the original prompt. I think my critical lens was not as pronounced, but I do think my point of view was there. Especially in the satire commentary.
How did you balance research and experimentation? Which is easier for you? How can you focus more on the areas that you shy away from?
I spent a lot more time on research and it was the harder of the two for me. I knew absolutely nothing about my topic, so I needed to focus on the research in order to get oriented for experimentation. I also found a lot of the articles etc. to be really dry and hard to get through. That made the research even more tough. I wouldn’t say I avoided any areas, but I wish I had more time to focus on the experimentation aspect.