Author: oliverclark

The Project Brief 4 deadline is drawing closer and closer, so naturally Rose and I continued to work on the project during the workshop – specifically, on the reference list and adding the information from the references into the “about” page on our website. The Project brief 4 is submitted via each of our own blogs and onto our shared google drive folder. Although this was technically “class-time”, we still recorded it in the minutes of the group.

The class itself was instructed on how to submit our reflective posts. We are to write one last entry in our blog to reflect on our experience in the course (up to 500 words). We have to focus on “light-bulb moments”. We include links to 5 posts within this summary submission post (these 5 posts are supposed to be our “best” posts of either assignments and/or weekly reflections) and a scanned image of a “learning graph”. We put all of this onto our blog and a copy onto our google drive folder.

For the lectorial, we looked at a fairly new media theory; media materialism. We operate on a level of being directly engaged with technology, working with/on the cloud. However, everything we do is still grounded where we are.

There are 3 main areas of media materialism; technology, technique, and culture. Technology contains computer code, microwave rays, and hammers – as well as the skills to use these tools. Technique incorporates those skills that are uniquely human, such as using our hand to turn a screw or using or brain to read languages and algebra – essentially, the role of the human body. Finally, culture, is identifying subgroups within the population, the world as culture, humankind, and art, theater, cinema:creative expression.

One fear of technology is that it would spiral out of control (often seen in many sci-fi films/books/shows), first thought of in “Dr. Frankenstein”. Its been almost 200 years since it was published, but the fears of our technology going too far is still around us, either by politics, and still in films/games/books/shows etc. We were then shown a clip of a short online film called “KARA” which continues with the theme of robots thinking for themselves and possibly removing the “status quo” of humans being the only sentient creatures in existence.

We were then shown a trailer for the video game “The Last of Us”, which looks at how different people find scarce resources and interact with others. We were then told to pick a question presented before us for our blog in about 300 words.

I chose “innovation and progress is hindered by scientific regulation” –  The human race has advanced its technology more over the last 500 years than in the millions of years before it combined, and even more in just the last century. Clearly, it isn’t too hindered, but we could be farther along, perhaps. Some government policies have pushed back research into stem cells, despite their ability to potentially cure Alzheimers – the same is done to marijuana despite clinically proven cancer-representativeness in it. However, sometimes things can go a little too far – the Nazis experimented with prisoners and “undesirables” in hypothermia – information that we use and has saved countless lives, but still the experiments were horrible. In “The Island of Dr. Moreau”, he experiments with animals and combines them with human beings to create hybrids. While it is certainly a scientific jump, it doesn’t really have any practical uses and doesn’t really help progress humanity.

That being said, the reason people didn’t really progress or show much innovation until the last 500 years was because of government policies across much of the known world – with witch trials and executions and accusations of blasphemy being a main staple that kept humanity grounded in fear and superstition, so that the common man is just there to serve – for if they were allowed to think new ideas they might think that the feudal system wasn’t all that fair. When the Renaissance hit Europe, new ideas of society, culture, politics, and science arose without nearly as much fear of social or government persecution. That era gave us Shakespeare, Da Vinci, and . Clearly, innovation and progress is hindered by scientific regulation.

We were then reminded again of the reflective portfolio – nothing new compared to the workshop was said except our attention was drawn to the link at the bottom for an assessment declaration that we are to sign and send via google drive.

We didn’t have a workshop this week, but that didn’t stop some of us of continuing to work on the project. Rose and I completed our website late last week with the video as well.

In the lecotrial, we looked at the topic of “The Remix and the Glitch”. Our lecturer was Dan Binns. I found the music to be a bit loud – it also went on for at least 15 minutes. After the music, our lecturer told us that “there is no such thing as an original idea”, and remixes are a perfect example of that. There were remixes of art, literature, film, and of course, music.

The “golden age of hollywood” in the 30s and 40s was filled with remakes and reboots and adaptations, thanks to the addition of sound in cinema. Films like “Cleopatra”, “The Wizard of Oz”, and “Gone with the Wind” were made because of sound, and the cuts and mise-en-scene of a film is a type of remix.  Even the printing press allowed for mass popularization and reproduction of work. Anyone can make a series of copies, but the original work is something else (like a work of art).

The lecturer went on to say that social media is also a way of “remixing” photos, videos, and even people and personalities. However, moments captured in a photo will never be the same as the moment that the picture is capturing. It isn’t about the “artifact” (e.g. the digital photo) but rather the event itself.

He then talked about the “remix theory”, which is the best way to understand mash-ups and popular music in the world. We went from a calm man on the radio saying what was just played, what will play, and perhaps an update on the weather. We then went to jute-boxes in establishments and then eventually DJs playing and remixing records and songs, starting the nightclub scene in the 1970s, the theme of which more or less continues today (despite changes in how the DJ plays music, the music itself, fashion, and dancing styles). The lecturer then played a series of song bits with footage of “Saturday Night Fever”, cut and remixed together to show how easy it is. Some songs are even produced specifically for nightclubs.

Eventually, the home computer allowed two or more pieces of music to be mixed together without the input of either artist or producing studio (although sometimes they would collaborate to promote each others music) and create something new – called the “Mash-up”. However, lots of corporations do what they can to not have these productions mashed-up or remixed without purchase of the rights.

We then listened to a mash-up by a re-mixer called “GirlTalk”, where we were supposed to write down as many samples as we recognize. I recognized a “Jackson 5” song called “I want you back”. I also heard several drum and guitar beats as well as some rap and goth/heavy metal music that I didn’t recognize that contained the lyrics “Do u want to die?”. I think a tribal-type song was there, as well as something that might have been done by “Atomic Blonde” or by something from the late 70s. I found these groupings fairly strange. Other people heard Justin Timberlake, Simon and Garfunkle, Farside, Slat and pepper, NWA, the Beastie Boys, U2, BRB, and many others.

We then looked at Popart, and how it associates us with various aspects of society. Its played up with colors and shapes and politics and sexuality etc. Advertisers showed us what our life “could be” and would be fulfilled by thier product and their product alone. Pop artists took popular culture and ads and dressed them up and mixed them together as a form a criticism of the status-quo, the political structure, etc. Glitch artists mess with footage with bugs to affect aesthetic. They don’t change the content or form, but rather just the digital code that it uses to alter it -“predicated on wrongness to catch the sublime”. Glitch art is sometimes compared to expressionism and cubism.

Dan Binns concluded the lecture by reminding us that we still had readings and that the ones for week 11 would be helpful for the subject of remixes.

In the workshop, Rose and I talked about photos she took on Friday of close-ups on human skin. We talked about how we were going to present them in a video by placing the photos in groups of three between white flashes. The video will be placed on a website along with all of the photos. We discussed with Mr. Rowlands the potential issues of people’s different perceptions i.e. porn vs art. We elected to ignore these worries and let people who see the video think what they think.

In the lectorial, we were given a lecture on “institutions”. We also got a talk by Paul Ritchard on work attachments for the next few semesters.

Institutions

• term from sociology
• concern with organizing structures of society
• social, cultural, political, and economics relations
• principles, values, and rules that underlay these

e.g. “Marriage” as a social institution. It is governed by a set of rules and expectations – certain values, legalities, religion, culture, and of it being widespread and communally recognized.

Media Institutions:

• are enduring
• regulate and structure activities
• are “collectivist”
• develop working practices
• employees and people associated are expected to share values
• public is aware of the status

We were then told to, as a group, to brainstorm the institutional characteristics of Facebook, Newscorp, Google, and Community Media. My area focused on Google.

After this activity, Raul Ritchard talked to us about work attachments. We were encouraged to do multiple attachments so we have more to write about for our 1500 word report (not on this blog, better to do it on a private word document or google drive) and to quickly fill up the 80 hours. He hopes it will be somewhere that we will actually learn something and not just filing papers. When we do an attachment, the admin people send in a form to the employer for the supervisor to fill out and return (if the attachment happened recently, and not months beforehand). We are, thankfully, completely covered by the RMIT insurance policies so we don’t have to worry about injuries or mistakes but we are still encouraged not to make mistakes).

I decided to book an appointment with Mr. Ritchard for 8:15 on Wednesday the 13th of May to see if he can help me find an appropriate attachment (preferably near where I live). To get him to approve an attachment (before contacting an employer and before he sends forms to the employer) we just e-mail him the general details of what we want to do and he says “yes” or “no”. Hopefully I can find something good and soon to get the 80 hours over and done with.

Nothing of particular note occurred during the workshop. All that was decided that Rose and I would find pictures over the weekend to experiment with. We intend to have our project focus on close-ups of human skin, but our first few photos will be getting the idea of square-shots of close-ups.

In the lectorial, we looked at the topic of “audiences”.

“What about the audience?”- Simple men (1991, DIR. Hal Hartley)

We were shown a clip from “simple men” to discuss the idea of music and sound techniques affecting audiences, while also looking at feminist ideals of the time this film was made (specifically Madonna and exploitation “who exploits who” etc?). A lot of people studying media began having similar discussions about sexuality, feminism, exploitation, and the empowering of women within media. It came to the point of audiences and “who cares about audiences?” Those that do include advertisers, commercial broadcasters and cable networks, production houses and individual program makers, government policy makers, social scientist/psychologists, and cultural theorists.media scholars.

Characteristics of a post-broadcast era: Changes in:

• television institutions/major players
• technologies of production, distribution and consumption
• audience practices
• aesthetic sensibilities

We were told that TV has become such a central part of our culture. How it addresses the audience through its video and audio is exceptional. When the Australian PM addressed the Australian public on its first day of having a network (16th Sept 1956), he made it about policy because he now had a way to communicate to people’s homes with ease. Australian TV was originally like British TV, i.e. mostly educational and news. American was purely entertainment. TV services can be tailored to specific demographics, which advertisers find difficult as they now have to look at a variety of fractured audiences (as opposed to everybody at once). This puts forward the idea of “mass culture” and “mass audience”. There are no real “masses”, but there ways of seeing people as “masses” – > a way of seeing people which has become characteristic of our kind of society.

We were shown a clip from a film “Network” (1976) that was meant to show us that the audience is no longer “passive”, mindlessly taking in messages and content. Media is affecting audiences as much as audiences affect media.

“The individual is prompted by a text to recognize him or herself as being a subject that belongs in a role” – Louis Althusser (1918-1990).

The audience is not just a commodity, and has to be acknowledged as “the public”. The class was then shown a video-survey of the video-habits of average Australians, the number 1 entertainment is TV, but the Internet is quickly overtaking that.

The TV ratings are incredible drivers in the media industry. They are based around exposure, and must appeal to the inherent “correctness” of the measurement. Its a statistical sample that is delivered as a single number, and meant to accurately represent a public audience. Studios and advertisers then react to that to produce what they think the audience demographics will want, to single out the desirable and undesirable forms of media culture.

We then looked at fans and fandoms. They have been stereotyped as obsessive, freakish, hysterical, and infantile. Pop-culture has looked at fandoms with distaste and critique, with fan’s emotional attachments to media texts and celebrities being viewed as “irrational”. Henry Jenkins, however, claims that they are in a way “active producers and manipulators of meaning” (Textual Poachers, 1992). Fans are a crucial part of “people formally known as the audience”.

I consider myself an avid consumer of tv-via-laptop, and a fan of a variety of shows, films, genres, etc.

Earlier this week Rose and I met at the Library to discuss the assignment and see how many of the 24 steps we could get through. As it turned out, we became even more confused leaving than when we entered. While we were able to find am area to focus on (social media and its influence on younger generations) that coincides with our topic of “audience”, we were still unclear on a lot of aspects that we supposed to complete within the first few weeks, like the annotative bibliography.

In the workshop, we were, thankfully, given further explanation as to some of the aspects. For the annotative bibliography, we were given an exercise due next week that required us find 5 separate sources relating to our topic and focus and effectively evaluate them. We needed to evaluate those 5 sources with an overall word count of 1200 words (approx. 240 words per source). This seems to me to be pointless and overwhelming to the students (like myself) who have already found the assignment itself confusing and also have other assignments to complete as well.

In the lectorial we watched the first scene from the “Princess Bride”. The reason for this was to showcase “narrative”. Narrative and stories surrounds us, and puts us through infancy all the way to being old. Stories are everything, and everything is a story. “Narrative is any kind of re-telling of events”. The cause and effect in everything is needed for all story-telling, in character development, plot, and resolution.

Character development takes time – having them just suddenly show up won’t get the audience to know or appreciate them. Frank Underwood in “House of Cards”, gets snubbed for Secretary of State, which is what motivates him for his quest to power. Television is an amazing and interesting way to see how characters develop over an entire season or series. Causality helps a character emerge from the blank canvas and become fully formed.

The Plot is a chronological sequence of an event in the narrative – it is the skeleton of the story, usually relates around action. A person carries out actions and those actions force a character or characters to do things, and eventually we get a….Resolution. This is the natural ending to the plot and narrative. In “Hamlet”, the resolution is made by plot and character reactions (greed, ambition, revenge, etc).

“The stuff of story is alive but intangible” – Robert McKee, “Story”, p. 135. Aristotle’s poetics was the first known attempt at critiquing and analyzing plays, breaking them down into themes and plots. Eventually, we all discovered that all tales and narratives and stories all come from the same root 7 stories.

We then split into pairs to discuss a story we both knew and to map the story according to emotional highs/lows, and another map according to character prominence. We chose “Star Wars”. We noticed how many films seemed to follow a general format and we often expect basic things from most movies e.g. war film if someone pulls out a picture of a loved one(s) then they will die. Some films like to play directly with these expectations by doing something different, but still, no story is truly original.

A non-narrative (no story at all) is debated as to even its existence. One film is just 45 minutes of zooms, and another film is just 8 hours of slow-motion footage of the empire state building. The character “Don Quixote” within his own book doesn’t like the narrative he was given by the author and tries to make his own. We were then shown a short film called “We have decided not to die”, which is several clips of people dying, then reversing their deaths, and then avoiding them. We were then split into pairs to talk about parts that would make us think its a narrative and parts that make us think its a non-narrative.

Narrative:

• Broken up into different parts and they were clearly labled
• It seemed that they were different stories of preventing/avoiding death
• Has a sequential process

Non-Narrative:

• Repetition
• Fast-forwardness
• Lack of cohesion
• Slow motion

This lectorial was interesting, yet I am still worried that they are still not explaining the complicated assignment.

In the Workshop, we watched the videos that we handed in for project brief 3. This was the first video that I uploaded via vimeo, which takes a good 45 minutes to do. Thankfully, it was viewable. People seemed to like it, judging by the clapping, but there were no Q&A sessions between videos like last time, so everyone clapped for everyone.

Much like with the last project brief, the significant majority of people had very deep and depressing pieces focusing on friends and relatives with serious issues. They were very well done, but after so many depressing videos I felt incredibly numbed by the end. A few funny (or at least non-depressing) videos were there, but I was still completely numbed.

We then split into groups of 4 to discuss each others videos. Alana said that she liked the found footage of cartoon animals to represent her work in the RSPCA. Georgia really liked the footage of the maps and Sonika’s journey, and enjoyed the ambiguity of not seeing her face in close-ups. Samantha liked how the voice-overs were incorporated with the found footage and the original footage because it made it seem more natural, its her, creating a nice ambiance. Mr. Rowlands would have preferred more footage of Sonika, and he didn’t like the found footage of an older India. Other than that, he liked it.

We were then randomly sent into other groups of two (I was placed with Rose Ng) so that we can work on our final project of the semester. project Brief 4 is a collaborative video project. Each group is focusing on specific “media idea”, which for us is audiences. Our objective in this assignment is to creatively engage with the debates and theories that have informed Media as an academic discipline. We are not to provide a summary of our “media idea”, but instead we have to communicated a researched, informed, and creative response. A provocative “intervention” in to those debates and ways of thinking about media. This assignment sounds especially challenging as it also requires a lot of information and minutes of meetings with Rose and drafts and annotated bibliographies.

In the lectorial, we were given a lecture about what a “text” is by Brian Morris.He said that text isn’t just in writing, but also in terms of film and radio, communications, images, policy documents, social practices, and even institutions. Textual Analysis tradition comes from two concerns; “effects” tradition in communication studies, and post WW2/mid 20th century turn against a particular idea of culture.

Media can influence what people do (ie the Bobo dolls experiment, where children were shown videos of people hitting dolls with a bat, then put into a room with a bobo doll and a bat, to which most hit the dolls with the bat). There are different audiences, so media can be interpreted/influence different people in different ways.

Morris went on to say that texts are the material traces that are left of the practice of the sense-making – the only empirical evidence we have of how other people make sense of the world. Textual analysis is an educated guess at some of the most likely interpretations that might be made of a text.

A “sign” can be visual, linguistic, aural, combination, etc. They have two parts, the signifier (e.g. the word and sound of “Dog”), and the signified (e.g. the mental perceptions of the dog, the mental concept, an image of a dog, the sounds we think of, etc.).

A lot of what Morris said was based on this weeks reading by Alan McKee, cited in Branston and Stafford.

We were then handed a worksheet for a class exercise. We looked at photographs and answered media-related questions. It got very deep and very confusing as Brian Morris seemed to see things that we didn’t see in the “signs”.

We were then spoken to by a different person, and she talked about media having different capabilities and the affordances of them from people reading the texts. Different modes allow to you to do different things. She also said that sound has a lot of influence, as it is pretty much everywhere and is difficult to self-regulate (at least with sight we can just close our eyes). Sound is pervasive, multi-directional, complexly layered, and prioritized by the ear. Some early 20th-century artists loved working with lots of different sounds.

Sound is also very intimate. A film can use sound to surround us and immerse us and feel close to us as our own thoughts.

Aural semiotics

• semiotic codes of sound place the listener in a mediated/imagined relationship with the subject of representation
• two crucial codes – perspective and social perspective

“The only difference between perspective and social distance is the that social distance applies to single sounds while perspective applies to simultaneous sounds” – Theo Van Leeuwen’s “Perspective”

Sound scape – it is a representation of a place or environment that can be heard rather than what can be seen.

She then showed us a picture of a village in Vietnam being destroyed by agent orange and napalm and people running away from it. We were to jot down what we thought we might hear, such as screams, soldiers, explosions, footsteps, wind, and piano music (if it were in a documentary).

Afterwards we were given an audio file of a girls music audition, to which we were to think about the focus of the story (the girl, Sophie, who talks the most, and her instructor), and the sound itself can provide a lot of intimacy to the audiences. We could hear the distance them, as well as the music.

Video:

Reflection:

Perhaps the most successful parts of the video were the original shots that I took. I believe that I chose the best areas and angles for them, and although I didn’t use some of them in the final cut, I think the ones I did use helped the video a lot. I also believe I chose a person of great interest for this project. Sonika Lakhani is a 25-year-old international student from India studying laboratory medicine at RMIT while also volunteering at the RSPCA.

Unfortunately, the parts of the video that worked against me was the editing. I think it was fine, but perhaps the cuts I used could have been better placed, as sometimes the transition between shots became either repetitive or awkward (sometimes both). The ripple shot transitions may make it look as if we are diving into the subconscious of Sonika’s mid, but they still look rather silly.

I am also unsure of my choices in found footage. While the cartoon animals feel appropriate for when she talks about her work in the RSPCA, the old footage of a poison-education video to match Sonika’s studies in laboratory medicine seemed a bit insensitive. I also should have re-thought the old India documentary footage that matches her Indian origins.

When I used garage band to produce the voiceovers, I found that the natural echo that occurred gave the clip a grander feeling than if I just used the voiceover function. The echoes in the voice made the clip seem more contained within the segment and thus more of a presentation of Sonika’s identity (i.e. a portrait). This technique I hope to use in any future portraits.

One major thing I learnt when making this that will definitely be relevant in the future is the fact that my cast may not be free while I am free. Sonika was only free to film at certain times during the week (as was I), so we had very few points in time where our schedules matched. While I was able to get the film I needed, it was still an effort to actually get everything ready for filming.

For the workshop we first looked at the project briefs of people that hadn’t been watched yet. We also said who we were doing for the project brief 2 and sent stills and basic summaries of what we’ll be talking about to Mr. Rowlands. I received from him his feedback of my project, quoted here:

“Well done Oliver with the self portrait. I felt you had an idea for this work set pretty early on that you stuck ridged to. It’s clear and defined with a great sense of your humour but I don’t feel it reaches over and above. I don’t feel you entered into unknown murky territory, testing the boundaries of your capabilities. I feel you achieved primarily what you set out to achieve and no more surprises. This is not a bad quality as for many they set out with no real aim. Possibly if you know the direction you want to go, keep an awareness of what’s at the peripheral to this.

70% Distinction”

This is a good mark, but despite this it is clear that I need to work a bit harder on my project brief 2. Hopefully my use of the found footage will be the kick that my project needs.

In the lectorial, we had a guest speaker called Amy Saunder, from the Library. She took us through an introduction about research strategies. One way is to use the “ask a librarian” section of the Library/myRMIT website, or to find the library guide part to target what sort of book we may want (not a specific book, but perhaps a book in the media/communication area).

Online sources for Media and Communication through RMIT include:

• Kanopy
• Lynda.com
• TVnews
• EduTV

We were also shown the way to search for specific books within the RMIT Library’s possession, and how to borrow a book from a library.

We were told what a scholarly source (essentially something that’s from an article or book or even certain websites, and that has been peer reviewed by experts in the field). We can limit our Library searches to peer reviewed works only (which are usually scholarly).

In media and communication (both in-class and in the job market) we will have to collaborate with people and groups. We should also assume that not everyone knows how to collaborate (although I do because I have worked in many groups in the past).

Some of the good experiences I have had working in groups include:

• Some people have great ideas and can contribute greatly
• Many hands often make light work
• I have bonded with group members in the past and made friends

Bad experiences include:

• Sometimes there are people who don’t do any work at all and I am forced to do everything
• Sometimes people don’t say anything then once the project is almost completed they voice lots of concerns about every single aspect of the project
• Fights can occur that stop everything
• One person literally just left the project half-way without telling anyone that he was transferring to another school. Even the teacher had no idea he was transferring and had no intention of helping to complete the project

I have done dozens of groups in the past so at this point its pretty second-nature for me. That being said, the tips Amy Saunders gave were useful.

For the workshop, we watched all of the 1 minute videos that every member in the room produced. Most of the videos seemed to be depressing and often showed shots of trains and train tracks (metaphors for “going places”). Since mine made my mundane life into an epic (with compliments given to my amazing voice-over style of speaking), people laughed and were a little thankful that they got something funny for a change.

Afterwards, we were split into groups of three. My group consisted of Samantha and Alaine, and we were tasked with practicing with a few camera angles and shots of people shaking hands. Samantha suggested to us to turn these into a story once we edited everything together. I edited everything, and Alaine was left to process the video as a “Vimeo” file and send the link to Mr. Rowlands.

The Lectorial I had this week was the last one I would have until the 14th of April due to my schedule and Easter break. We got the handout for project brief 3; a 2-minute video that combines both original and found footage about someone I know, whether it be a family member, a friend, or a colleague, provided that they have consented to it evidenced through the completed release form that is scanned and uploaded onto the blog. This is due the 20th of April, along with a 350 word reflection, a picture of me with a borrowed piece of RMIT equipment, and an Assessment declaration.

We were told that the definition of “found footage” is not the wikipedia one (i.e. Blair witch project, Cloverfield, etc.) but instead its “per-existing film footage appropriated by a filmmaker and used in a way that was not originally intended”. We were given links on places where we can acquire found footage legally (however, the footage all seemed to be pre-1970s).

We then watched a number of videos from a website called “1-minute wonders” to emphasize the difficulty of making a portrait about someone else, as well as to show combinations of found and original footage.

Brian Morris then gave a talk to encourage us to continue recording in the blog and to read the readings given to us, as well as to analyze the readings because “it isn’t a novel or a feature article so don’t read it the same way….look for argument and structure”. He said that we must look for the key argument and purpose of any piece of writing, even for ones that are 5,000 words long.

Project Brief Written Analysis

Oliver Clark s3471969

I have a complicated life and its very full and huge. Thus, it is difficult to put that much history and hobbies and personality into a one-minute film, which forced me to condense a few things about me in a quick, humorous manner. I like humour and making people laugh, and I believe that I achieved this goal.

The beginning section, showing the star wars-themed text giving a brief introduction was written to sound like part of an epic fable, but sadly it was too fast to read (given my time constraints) so I did a voice-over it and that also sounded too fast. All the voice-overs, for that matter, sounded too fast.

In terms of hobbies, I decided to mostly focus on my enjoyment of LARP (Live Action Role Play) and cooking. For LARP I showed with the clip of me dissolving into an old picture of me in the center of a group photo, all of us dressed as Romans. In the voiceover, I made it seem like I was a war veteran, drinking my troubles away. This satire of PTSD films made for some comedic effect in terms of surrealism.

For cooking, I transitioned between a picture of some macaroni and cheese I made to me “thinking of new recipes” on the toilet while reading a book and smoking a pipe. Again, this surrealism created some comedy. This wasn’t helped by the fact that the footage itself was of poor quality and this was especially noticeable (if at least hilarious) during the zoom-ins and zoom-outs of my face.

I really wish that we were allowed to provide more time so I could add more text, more voice-overs, more footage, more images, and thus, more about me. The LARP, cooking, and theatrics were there, but not anything about my extensive cultural heritage, my international upbringing, or my love for film and TV. However, with what time I had, I think I included enough to express a bit about who I am.