What I didn’t understand:

• “There is a considerable problem, if objects recede from one another, forever enclosed in a vacuum of their individual existences, how do they ever interact?” I feel this is so broad to where humans will never quite understand this, because clearly objects do interact but they are all individuals… 
• “The relationship between the first object and the second offers the clearest rendition, insofar as a metaphor is ever really clear”
• “Physical reductionist positions hop to erase the subjectivity of experience by explaining it away via underlying physical evidences”

I have spent the easter break in Fiji hospital with a stomach virus, but was a good time to get a clear grasp on the readings i.e. chapter 3 of Bogost. I quite enjoyed this chapter as it made me look from a different point of view. Rather than understand what it is like to be an object, it focusses more on what it is like for that object to be that object. The example they used was what it is for a bat to be a bat. I really like this idea and have decided to incorporate it quite in depth throughout the supporting essay of our file. It is time to really start distancing the human elements (although I am writing the essay which is human) and seeing it from the object- I feel like this can be done effectively through the use of listing once again.

Telephoto, zoom, Versatile, quality, macro, results, focal point, usm, convex, stabilzation, macro, ultra wide, vibration, attractive, fast, range, sharp, disorientation, fisheye, digital, hsm, sigma, aperture, diffraction, modification, illuminated, normal, angle, kit lens, concave, rays, shutter, memory, action, view point, purpose, image formation, sensor, objective, colour, electricity, science, exposure, sensitivity, editing, light, microphone, battery

discuss and describe what it is, and what it does.

CHOOSE EXACTLY: What it specifically is and what it does. THEN compose a detailed analysis of this, can have reference to Bogost chapter 3, e.g. “Bogost says this and the file shows this by…”

Express what you are going to do and why you are going to do it

Discuss the file as a whole…: soundscape from offenburg with the overlapping footage and the extra 1 minute soundscape from us

how will i break this down? Needs to be discussed as a whole in what it is and what it does: maybe relate to fluidity/ and or different components.

Links between location footage and soundscape, avoid what it means

BE SPECIFIC

OR

a extremely detailed list of what it is and what it does…? feels could go so wrong

Today in class we recieved feedback on our first essay that went along side our first soundscape. I was quite pleased with my results as I felt very confused by the essay and how broad it was, but with this feedback I feel I understand more about how I need it to be focussed rather that ‘avoiding depth’.

What Adrian said about my essay is that I fall into the error of using craft to avoid biting into the problem. I understand what he means as I do re call feeling anxious to focus and elaborate on something so defined INCASE I am doing it wrong, so felt the safer option was to have a vast approach. Now I know sort of what he wants from the essay I feel I will be able to focus more in-depth on the group essay to each individual operation/ the location recordings.

I am going to get started on a plan for my group essay so we don’t write/ elaborate on the same areas of focus and it covers each individual part of the formed file (audio and video).

I think it is safe to say, I have reached an all time low for the semester… I have been so slack with blogging/ been struggling to know what to blog about whilst being in New Zealand and not able to attend class. Over the easter break this is a serious time to get back on track with readings, in depth thinking about noticings and focussing more on being a better participant in my group.

I feel embarrassed at my participation and hope to not let this get the better of me again!