‘Quo vardis’ and Making technical mistakes
This is a response to the course work related to A3 on page 51. There are questions about reflecting on the direction of the work and also using technical mistakes.
I am not sure where I am going at A3 and I think that this is related to here being a mismatch between my intention and what I have produced. There is a lesson in the material from the study notes about chance and I have written about that is a previous blog post.
My tutor advised me to experiment with ‘surrealist subversion tradition’ images, such as ‘chance’ and ‘assemblage,’ as in the works of Man Ray and Sarah Lucas, and use vernacular and medical paraphernalia to create still life assemblages that are my reactions to medical and political events played out during the Covid-19 pandemic (Man Ray, 1944; Lucas, 2019). Lucas challenges stereotypical notions of gender and identity, my series is morally evaluative of medical and governmental institutions.
This experimental work is being played our on a collaborative padlet. It seems to articulate what I want to say about Covid.
Making technical mistakes
20th December 2021
At the time I read these notes in the handbook I did not see a way of applying this to my work but it remained in my mind. But that changed at A5. A technical issue with the ‘Remotely’ room images was wide angle lens distortion of the edges of the room (A3). Initially I corrected these ‘mistakes,’ but after reading a quotation by Wendy McMurdo in another student’s blog to “always embrace mistakes,” I decided to re-process the ‘Remotely’ images to make a virtue of and exaggerate that distortion.
BEFORE – A3 processed images
AFTER EXAGGERATING DISTORTION – A5
I have written in more detail about the technical issues here.