October 2022

1. What did you learn?

   The process of doing the research based on only two keywords was fun and challenging for me. I think I’ve learned a lot not just the overview information about my topic but also have a basic understanding of how intricate and interconnected a system should be. I think the potentials for perspectives are unlimited and what usually is thought to be the definition or norm is one of many phenomena that have been socially naturalized.

2. What feedback did you receive? Any reflections on the critique itself?
   
   I received some highly conclusive feedback on my topic, which is the hierarchy existing in our anthropocentric views on nature. I’m sure the information is so compact within that one term and it helps me understand my standpoint more clearly.
3. What might you do differently in terms of process or content?
   
   I kind of wished among each research session I did, should of taking smaller leaps in the research direction. First of all, within a broad research topic, I probably should of settle on one interest quickly to make sure later I can have sufficient information. Secondly, the direction I choose needed to be more specific. These two might efficiently help with the research process.
4. What was inspiring? What parts?
   
   Interviewing people was an inspiring experience for me. Before conducting the actual interviews, I had much anticipation about what questions might lead to the information I was looking for. Following the interview guide, I didn’t say much during the interviews. Turns out interviews are much different than having conversations where people interchange information, an interview is a one-way flow of information collecting, to neutrally listen to someone who might not share the same perspective as you.
5. Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc…
   
   My critical lens stated to be animals, but really through animal right protection activists. The audiences suppose to be companion animals but really the people lack information about the unethical breeding industry and animal welfare.I might do better on metaphoric system thinking, though I think using best-of lists for human traits to serve animal needs is some kind of analog usage of form. But I am not sure.

6. 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

   The research part was challenging because of the amount of reading and material sorting that were needed. And sometimes I get confused about whether the new piece of information just got was actually helping the research move forward or distractions. It also came down to the later process of fitting pieces of information into the puzzle.I should of spend more time on experimentation. I think next time when making a research-based project, the experiments and research should happen together.

    

1.What did you learn?

I have learned a lot, because I never did critical research before, so this is a new thing for me. I have learned a complete process of studying and understanding the system. I know from which channels to learn information and search for literature. Then draw a mind map. And it happened that yoga was also a topic I had never covered before. With the help of teachers and classmates, I went through it from beginning to end and gained very valuable experience.

2.What feedback did you receive? Any reflections on critique itself?

I have received many feedbacks. The most impressive thing is Monika’s feedbacks to me. I often pay too much attention to the form, but the most important thing is the point. Danni also stressed that if too much emphasis was placed on form, it would be technical exercise rather than critical research. I think my final is still more formal, so I will pay more attention to it in the next topic.

3.What might you do differently in terms of process or content?

Maybe I will add some interactive parts? Or turn it into a physical book?

4.What was inspiring? What parts?

I found that art and religion are inextricably linked. I never noticed this before, because now many arts are very commercialized and have little to do with religion. But my research found that early art is basically bound with religion, which is the case all over the world.

5.Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc…

I mainly focus on the topic of Yoga. I may not fully express the umbrella topic space.

6.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

Research is more difficult for me. Experimentation is not particularly difficult for me, and I enjoy the process. But sometimes research is painful for me, especially when I don’t know what to do.

1. What did you learn?
   Before starting to create the satellite website, I only had little knowledge about satellites, orbits, and even never heard about the word debris. It was a great process to explore a brand new area and create a website at the same time, which is also something I have never done before. Not only have I learned the basic knowledge about satellites but also the critical view of space junk and damage to the environment.
2. What feedback did you receive? Any reflections on critique itself?
   I do appreciate that our folks listened to my presentation patiently and gave me lots of advice and a new perspective of view. I totally agree with the feedback on How to put more emphasis on the issue of space debris and provide a more critical thinking lens. People also asked if it is possible to add a scroll-down part to show how the debris falls back and some potential hazards to support your work from an environmental perspective. I think I will do that in the future.
3. What might you do differently in terms of process or content?
   I think my About and Trip sections are dull because of the long text block and need to be added to more interactions like pop-up pages to highlight potential issues or questions. My stance tried to be neutral because I think satellites and space are quite scientific and need to be precise, but I think tones such as satirical, humorous could have a better experience.
4. What was inspiring? What parts?
   I think the process of exploring a new area was inspiring, it really raised my awareness of taking care of the space above us.

5. Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc…
   I think I have combined the draft and final output very well, and the time when I was creating the Trip section I referenced the draft map I created at the beginning. Combining the feedback, I found my guide didn’t provide some examples of how space debris causes damage to space/earth, which drives more attention.
6. 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 more time learning techniques and experimentation, and I do need to pay more attention to research and organizing them to have my personal critical thinking. From system map to metaphor, they are both totally new methods of research for me, and I think I still need some time to make them as a research process not only the assignment.

• What did you learn?

I learned a lot doing this project. I haven’t done a lot of visual work (or any how-to style guides), so I had a fun time researching examples and trying to emulate them. I also learned a lot about the process of constructing landfills and the issues that can arise from a poorly made/operated one. They are very complex systems with their own micro biomes and chemical compositions. I also tried using Photoshop which I am not very familiar with, so I learned a lot about that too.

• What feedback did you receive? Any reflections on critique itself?

One piece of feedback that I received was that I didn’t get to the elements of satire quick enough or include enough satire. I totally agree. The main point of the guide were the pages towards the end that used the how-to format to illustrate real world issues (ex. pawning off trash and landfills on neighboring cities/states/countries). If I could continue the project or redo it I think I would condense the initial pages to give myself more time to complete the later ones.

• What might you do differently in terms of process or content?

Echoing the above, I would spend more time on the satire, point-of-view style pages and less on the technical ones.

• What was inspiring? What parts?

For me, it was really inspiring that I could even make the artwork for the project. I’m not a very confident artist, and I was really doubting my skills. To be able to put something together, artistically, that was cohesive and styled in a way I was proud of was great.

• Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc… 

I think I did have a critical lens, and I hope my point of view came across in a way that was obvious. The tone felt very satirical to me and using illustrations with a child-like style helped emphasize that a bit given how serious the topic is. I also feel like the metaphor carried well.

• 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

The research was definitely easier for me. I found a lot of technical and opinion pieces online and had no shortage of information. If anything, I think I could have have spent less time researching (especially the technical aspects) and more time on the experimentation. That was definitely the harder part and something I shied away from. I think I just need to continue working on art pieces to build more confidence and get more comfortable crafting visuals.

This blog is shown in bullet points since this is a collection of thought pieces.

• First of all, obviously, I learned how to make a pop-up book.  Also, system mapping helps a lot when developing a topic and researching.
• The most important thing I started to learn is being confident and firm. I was easily trapped in “the critique” itself in the past. This is the first time I have started not caring about the “points” the work is worth. This is the reason I came to IMA Low Res. Although this assignment is not “well done” by the old standards I lived with, I am happier than before, which is essential to me. 
• Most feedbacks I received are positive. One point in the feedback is that since I chose an abstract way to represent the work, the meaning behind the work did not successfully deliver to some of the audience. This evaluation is expected. The visual language needs some further development.
• I’ve taken some similar courses before in my undergraduate study, and I’ve learned what critique is and practiced how to be critical. I used to create works on social problems and political topics. However, I do not have the answer to why critical. And I don’t have the will to be critical. I’d rather keep silent instead. For now, I still have the same question, but I feel I have started to get the answer.
• If I need to do this once more, the workflow would be different. For this assignment, the topic is developed with each week’s lesson. I did not know what the next step was and how the work I did could support my work at that time. It’s like doing jigsaw puzzles without a frame or crossing the river by feeling the stones. Now I’ve understood the entire workflow and what are all these steps for. I can have a general structure in my mind at the very beginning.
• Imaging the big from the small is really helpful when having a large topic.
• Critical lens is something I have not fully understood yet. I am a bit struggling in this part, and I think part of the reason is that I have not been exposed to similar concepts in my native language environment. This is the part I need to figure out myself.
• I am trying to develop a tone with my personal style during my study in this program. Following the project I did for the summer term, this pop-up book is a step further as an experiment in the non-tech form.
• I am a bit too focused on the tone and the audience while developing the guide and the intention is a bit lost. The result is still something I want to express and show to the public, but it’s away from the intention. I next to pay more attention to balancing for my next project.
• For this assignment, I spent more energy on experimentation since the form is new and exciting to me. However, more time was spent on researching since I had no idea what my topic was at the very beginning. The research is not effective. I just forced myself to work more on the research part. I believe that methods come from practice.

My topic is Migratory Bird and Border, Migratory birds go on seasonal travel do definitely will go cross the border. so around this idea, I am open to exploring and researching my topic.

I make this system map with my team during class, and the function of this map offers obvious positives for the whole process. It is like a guideline to start research. But also making this system map is the biggest challenge for me. because at the beginning I don’t have any idea about what is Migratory bird, have no idea about the relationship between migratory birds and borders too, so this map helps a lot to find out the relationship if your topic combines more than one element.

What did you learn?

I’ve learned a lot of things, especially the system map, it is a very important key when you have no idea about your topic. it can help you to find out many different ideas relative to your topic.

What might you do differently in terms of process or content?

the form which is the way I am going to deliver my topic. I have a hard time making decisions to represent my migratory bird. I thought to go with a storybook or map, but all of them were hard to link back with my metaphor. but I made a lot of changes from the very beginning.

What was inspiring? What parts?

The image and the tone of my project part took a lot of time for me, I draw a lot of pictures as references. I researched many migratory birds, and compare many different color tones that I am going to use. finally, I used the Rococo color tone because it is also a way of metaphor, if people didn’t pay attention to this moment, will lose the beautiful creature very soon.

Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc…

I thought the Len tone become softer, became easier to accept. the way becomes more gentle but powerful( because I have learned more details about my topic, and found more resources to support my topic. ), in the beginning, the prompts were paler. and weak.

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

research is easier for me, because of all the information just over the internet. but experimentation going to take a lot of time from people. I did most of part of the research, took the experience from people who already researched a similar topic, learned a lot of experience from them, and combine my situation to make my work happen.

Bibliography :

Contributors to Wikimedia projects. “Symbiotic Bacteria – Wikipedia.” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., 4 Apr. 2006,

• What did you learn?

For the assignment, I learned how to find the path to do critical experience work from an initial topic. Thoughts and forms are deeply interwoven, making this kind of research a unique experience.

For the presentation part, I would rethink about how to organize and show the content to the audience in a short time.

• What feedback did you receive? Any reflections on critique itself?

Some suggestions are about better ways to deliver the idea and information, such as font size (revised, seems better now) and the content after the user answers. I’m glad that the critical thinking about indirect taxes resonated. I would like to know more about the audience’s further thoughts while the presentation time was limited.

• What might you do differently in terms of process or content?

Choosing one aspect and narrowing down the topic may extend the topic more concisely to audiences. It’s also important to exchange ideas with others earlier.

• What was inspiring? What parts?

The process gives me a new perspective to think about things. A small topic can lead to a lot of deep thinking. It makes me more curious about the world.

• Revisit the assignment prompts: how did your project relate to the original prompts, in terms of critical lens, audience, tone, etc… 

The topic “salt” under the theme “borders” was strange to me initially. So I’ve been looking for the connection during the process. In the end, the project focuses on relations between countries and inside a country, which closely ties to the prompt.

• 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 would say… both are not easy for me. I felt stuck on both sides. However, next time I’ll figure out ideas first, even if they are rough. I feel like the form can promote ideas, and more ideas also promote the form. And talking about ideas with others is a good way to move further.