Reflection on tutorial feedback for A2: a photocopier manual

The tutorial is already almost eight weeks ago and I am only now sitting down to write up my reflections on it (the tutor report is in this post here, the assignment submission here). The time distance blurs some of it while it also shifts into focus some other issues.
What sits at the fore of my mind is the suitability of site: to make a working environment the subject of my investigations and what that allows for but also what is or becomes problematic in this. — That came up in the first tutorial and has remained a question for me, mainly in terms of access, being inside but also about hiding/visibility and notions of professionalism. They are all issues that have concerned my work for some time, so they are not unusual questions and still I hope that throughout this course some will become clearer but also for me to leave some of the sheltering that I have tended to seek out for my work.
What I have taken serious is the idea to keep devising my own inquiries and I have done so, notably with Green. The tracing paper project still remains to be done, I hesitate over it as to the visibility it will mean for my body as drawing tool.
The tutorial itself was really good and inspiring. The mode of conversation was unexpected, it seemed like a shared enquiry, and I felt my academic, professional interests could come to the fore and inform my drawing enquiry. In that, I also felt that some of the doubts I keep having as to whether my work constitutes drawing have both been able to become articulated but also put to rest.
As to the submitted work, the discussion we had about individual parts of the Manual was useful and insightful, notably the feedback as to where I took risks in feeding different analog processes into the performance and thus moving away from a self-referential system. Also the recognition of humour (and play) as elements of my work. The two critiques of the manual concern the choice of book to take the rubbing from; and the closing point (the broken printer), for both, he usefully linked the work to a wider socio-political context, the Luddites and I think that particular contextualisation is really insightful, and similar to A1, also allows a point of refinement, conclusion. (At the same time, it was really good to hear that his concern at this moment isn’t so much a neatly refined submission but a rather systematic, expansive testing of thoughts, materials, processes, and I realise that his pointers for further development are pointing towards doing more of that (possibly rather than settling too closely on a particular project?)
I had expected to have to move much faster or explicitly with both the critical review and the parallel project than the timeline that Doug suggested towards the end (to have a clear sense of project for either by assignment 4). I found it extremely helpful how attentive Doug would pick apart my positioning and articulation (notably about Generative Systems as focus for the CR) and to point out that my work sits elsewhere, provides more agency, has a more performative element to it and his encouragement to keep attending to that (also in distinction to e.g. some of Karen Barad’s work). — I think that level of critical engagement has been new in my tutorial interactions and is extremely valuable. Re-reading the feedback, the areas of development and pointers for next assignment are all to the point and very helpful (see below).
The encouragement to explore further and become clearer about interdisciplinarity in my work but also the relationship between theory and practice is great to see and receive. I feel it is that kind of focus which will help me to integrate not only the photography and expanded drawing field but also to allow for a more confident grounding of my artistic practice within the academic and theoretical fields (and e.g. writing practices) of mine.
— there are more posts to come as a follow up, I will link to them as I write them
Pointers for the next assignment (tutor)
  • Reflect on this feedback in your learning log. (done)
  • Test processes of making like using the tracing paper on a window that I suggested. (done both inside corridor and outside)
  • Continue to think about your personal approach to making and theory; this will help you as you progress towards the end of this unit. (ongoing, note/reflections generally included in various posts)
  • Continue to identify artists that interest you/are related to your interests, see if there are any shows/performances that might ad (done and included in the outline post for the assignment)
Strengths Areas for development
 Your creative learning across both subjects of photography and drawing is evident and clearly of benefit.  Continue to develop your interdisciplinary creative thinking as part of your work.
 Strong creative approach to theory and practice in the creation of your drawing piece.  Allow yourself time to experiment/test other processes as well as consolidating ideas into a final piece.
 Very strong approach to analysis of contextual research.  Develop your own line of enquiry that if needed moves away from Barad towards themes we have been discussing.