Work in Progress

Ive been mostly working on figuring out what i need to do for the exploration study. Ive compiled a draft version of the exploration study, i have included a completed list of contents which would hopefully give you an idea of the areas i would be including in the study. I wanted to get this done as then i could get your feedback on whether or not i am doing it correctly as its still kind of a gray area.

So far with the plan ive worked up the existing and preexisting elements of the site. The layering which you suggested on tuesday. I will be moving on to making probably a series of similar drawings that will further explain how my concept ties into the choice of the site etc as i felt i was rambling on tuesday as i didnt have a concrete stand on how the site connects up. The fact/fiction connection to porosity/compacticity is working well i feel, so by next tuesday ill have more drawings to tie up the entire idea.

I havent started on the edits on the portfolio that you suggested just yet, but will get on it and complete it by tuesday. Same for the exploration study(just wanted to know if i was heading the right direction and what i was including was relevant + im not really sure if i need to include the mapping, i still have included it as its the beginning of the narrative)


Exploration Study Draft

This other ‘What do you see?’ attachment, is something i just wanted to quickly try out. taking my inspiration from the photography gallery we visited on tuesday.

What do you see


One thought on “Work in Progress

  1. We really like the what do you see series of images and the act of framing them and placing them in a gallery setting gives them a sense of legitimacy as a further layer of fiction! As the series at the exhibition did, you should include the height at which these images are taken so we understand them as a zooming in and zooming out of the context.

    As for the exploration study – it’s coming along. The strongest and most technical page is probably the one about binaural sound – try to make similar technical pages for other parts of the device and draw the tech and research behind the brainwave study in as much technical detail as well. However, on the binaural sound page you need to show that you understand the equations. To copy the information does not show that you have understood it or that it has informed your study.

    The plan also seems to be coming along but try to annotate the different layers of landscape in time, don’t make it too illustrative and add a good balance of line drawing – maybe analyse anything built on the site as a line drawing and keep the images to just landscaped areas.

    You are currently looking at existing and pre-existing elements of the site. How does an existing/pre-existing binary relate to the fact/fiction one? In your plan you have identified the current built forms. Are there built forms that precede these but are no longer there? Does a demolished building become a fiction as you – the filter for truth – cannot see it? And what about proposals that were never executed – when does a plan become truth?

    On Tuesday we talked about what it means for a landscape to be thought of as original. For an insight into the 1609 landscape see The Manahatta Project, a study to recreate Manhattan’s ecology in 1609, when Henry Hudson first sailed into New York Bay.
    Will you go further back than 1600 to see the formation of the site topographically? Of course this is up to you but think what it means to have 1600 as the date that you begin from. Did you begin with 1600 (1609) as the year Henry Hudson made the passage through what is now the Hudson River? Is 1609 a datum for facts and fictions of what became New York to Europeans? This is perhaps also the date of the earliest maps – are you saying something about the act of documenting as being an act that creates fact or fiction?

    Finally, we are unclear on the relation of fact/fiction to the idea of porosity/compacticity, what do you mean by this?

Leave a Reply