As I continue to write my critical analysis on KIMA (Gingrich et al, 2013), I am feeling restricted by the consecutive two page limitation on this section of the assignment and the inevitable unease of my monkey-mind. Having wrote almost 1000 words on a chosen two page section, which determines some aspects of the conceptual and technical approach to KIMA, it has been suggested by my tutor that this section is perhaps not the wisest choice. However, I have also been informed that the work I have written is good. So where do I go from here?

It is Sunday afternoon, the weather is beautiful and I have been sat inside the Learning Resource Centre (LRC) for almost an hour, attempting to decide which direction to take. So naturally I decided to express my reflective thoughts with a blog post in a bid to find clarity to proceed. I can understand and almost agree with my tutor’s comments suggesting that pages focusing on the specific technical components of KIMA would be ideal for critical analysis. However, I am also confident my initial choice has a good degree of relevance towards the concepts and technical perspective I wish to implement in my future works.

The added difficulty is the format of this paper is with information spilling over beyond two pages, whichever section I were to choose. Being the only paper I have discovered which specifically utilises cymatic frequencies as visualisations, I feel I had to choose KIMA purely out of relevance. However it is by no means the best written source I have found but one of the most confusing.

Its journey into the art of telepresence and mix of author vision, combined with scientific perspective often makes the paper a minefield to understand. So why did I choose and retain this text? Perhaps it is a good thing to challenge my understanding constantly until I finally grasp their concept and technical setup. However, I would argue that Ginrich et al could have presented the technical setup nearer the beginning to avoid confusing readers by an overly artistic, descriptive tone which dips in and out of scientific discussion.

Perhaps it is fair to say that confusion and a lack of clarity for me is abundant in this module, but maybe that is part of gaining an expert understanding in one’s disciplinary field? Having spent some time reflecting with this blog post, I have momentarily decided to run with my plan of analysing the initial pages I chose. Maybe this will change in due course, but for now I will continue as I started out.

References:
Gingrich, O., Renaud, A., Emets, E., 2013. ‘KIMA — A Holographic Telepresence Environment Based on Cymatic Principles’. Leonardo 46, 332–343. [Online]. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/512222. [Accessed: 26 November 2017]

#Reflection