Response to midterm
I feel like I more or less recieved the crit that I needed at this moment. The critics had some good questions about my project, which I largely need to address by pushing the connections between the programs, particularly in a specific, detailed oriented way. Something along those lines was actually brought up at the last review, i think by Karen, who said that my entire project could be wall sections. The idea of the "shortcut" that was discussed is something I should really look at more. I've thought about something like that in a subtle way, but maybe I need to look at it more directly. One of the critics also said something about my project being "too smooth," and being that I have always wanted the program to be a bit messy and disjunctive, perhaps I have lost sight in the past few weeks.
Since the most relevant criticism I recieved seemed to be largely focused on the work I have done, rather than my intentions behind it, I am going to interpret that to mean that my project is developed enough to stand on its own and I need to spend the rest of the semester exploring and refining the possibilities of what I have made. Though I don't have a specfic schedule for this, I am going to complete the assignments I have written so far and also creating several new ones, tayloring their completion to focus on the criticism I recieved. Though in some instances, the representation may need to be very technical, for example I would like to develop some wall sections, I think it is time for me to go back to means of representation that are more experiential/narrative.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
i need to look back at your schedule...but what about the full scale steel construction? i think it may be an opportunity to refine a lot of your intentions with the first full scale construction on the courtyard...regardless...i think you are on track with this post
Post a Comment