Q1: What are the difference and similarities between what you expected to notice and what you recorded?

A1: It was fairly different from what I was expecting to see, probably because of the lack of lecture during the visit, the lack of someone constantly giving out information about certain subjects and the lack of constant focus on one subject at a time. It became more of a park rather than a outdoor museum of plants, like the garden wasn’t even there, people walking past people just like any average parks. There were also some private properties inside an open public garden which was a slight bit of surprise to my tiny mind of mine. On my way to home, I also discovered that some of the tram stops in that area all leads to Melbourne University as their final destination, and no, they’re not the same tram line.

Q2: How do you think your partner’s way of collecting media differs from yours?

A2: I think her way of collecting pieces was more generalised as I might have mentioned in my last post, which is pretty much the opposite to my tunnel vision way of collecting. The end result of hers is a few of big information chunks or to put it in Mason-reading’s term, a huge list of items/events, meanwhile mine was a number of scattered fragments which is similar to the Patrick Pound’s exhibition way of collecting, probably due to my photography background (During year 10 to year 12, I was a full-time photography focused student).

Q3: How has making this work lead you to understand key ideas of noticing in relation to reading, exhibition, discussion?

A3: Throughout the activities such as reading, exhibition and discussion, everything follows a similar line of logic, scattered fragments of informations (In any shape of form) that might or might not be related, and from these information, people generates ideas of what the event might be from their own perspective. Regarding reading and exhibition, lets take novels in general as an example, the reader reads a line of texts, and imagine an image of the event, sample action like “Person A punched Person B” the word “punched” can possibly implies many ways punching, was it a low-blow? Was it a direct hit? Was it…etc, this is typically bends to the reader’s perspective of how most people punch people. Regarding discussion, this is a multiplied version of “reading” and “exhibition” where multiple perspective combine their common ground into one, however, in doing so, this will hides some of specific portions which tides to one’s mind but not the others, let’s take movies as an example, “You know nothing, John Snow” what does this line implies? Does John Snow really knows nothing about the event? Is he an idiot? Or…is he pretending to not know the event? While I’m no Game of Throne fan, follower, or cultist…etc, I’ll say this should be enough to get an idea of what I’m trying to say here.