Reflecting back on the critique of my first piece for workshop I picked up some valuable information about the interpretation of my work from everyone. From the beginning it was noticeable that the information wasn’t presented in a clear fashion. In some ways I wanted that to happen given the subject matter of privacy, barriers and our relation to them. I treated this piece like an infographic rather than a clear cut map. My collection of data was paired down to fit in important images and documentation that I found relevant to the subject. An ongoing question that was surfacing was what my specific stance on the matter was. I agree that I didn’t have a well-defined question laid out. Throughout this project I kept playing between multiple ideas. It became apparent from discussion that I was working with a few ideas.
Research led me in multiple directions further interesting than my original intention which was to describe the change of fences and boundary lines from containers to privacy barriers. I think the question I was posing wasn’t ligament enough due to one’s interpretation of privacy. Going back, I would have defined a clearer idea or narrowed down my research.
The idea of working with physical objects was meant to give the viewer a real like interpretation of a barrier between the viewer and the information. From critique, this idea seemed to go over well. The execution of the designed map behind interacting with the window could have been stronger. I think making the information clearer behind the window would have let the viewer understand the information better. The act of privacy would still have been shown with the window blocking part of the information, making the viewer work to see everything if they desire.
Moving forward I plan to narrow down my focus on the subject to convey a better idea. I'd like to focus more on why we create these private spaces in tight-knit neighborhoods and how we go about making them and using certain materials.