We began class by making origami completely unplugged from technology. This forced us to talk to each other and gave us a common goal. I struggled to follow paper instructions—I prefer to watch tutorials—so I was particularly proud of my finished frog although it was imperfect. Acknowledging the Ingold reading I found the most fulfilling part of making origami was the discussions and help we gave each other.

We were told to film 20 second clips outside. I was drawn to specific vignettes like the sky, rooftops and nature because they could be small pieces of a larger narrative. I didn’t overthink what I filmed because I thought that would impede the creative process. I decided it was okay to make something bad because the making was more important than the result (at this point in the semester)

The Ingold reading reminded me of my studio last semester where we explored ‘making through doing’. Allowing materials to influence creating makes sense to me, but I am unsure of how to translate this to making media. I feel encouraged to explore my creativity wholly but wonder where it will take me when working in a group. The idea that making something meaningful happens between a person and object seems obvious but isn’t something articulated in schools or universities. It seems that the way we are taught to create is at odds with how we naturally create.

Ingold, T (2009) “The textility of making,” in Cambridge journal of economics. Oxford University Press, pp91–102.