writing with a camera

Looking Outward Assignment

Overview

On one occasions this semester, you will be asked to “look outwards.” This involves attending a live event, screening (with Q&A), artist talk, exhibition opening, or a guided tour through an exhibition. The event must be related to media art or experimental video work in order to deepen your knowledge of the field and familiarize yourself with the current state of media art. You will then report on your experience, as described below, with a critical perspective. The emphasis is on “discoveries” of projects you haven’t seen before or events you might not have thought of attending prior to taking this class.

Guidelines

Start your research for this assignment as early as possible and keep in mind the deadline in Canvas (and on the Syllabus).

The event you attend and write about must involve “live interaction.” The event should offer you an opportunity to ask a question, and even better, talk with one of the participants after the event. Events that qualify include:

  • A media art screening followed by live media maker or artist Q&A;
  • An exhibition opening in which you interact with one or more of the participating artists;
  • A lecture/panel discussion with audience Q&A;
  • A guided tour through an exhibition led by museum staff, or
  • A book talk or artist talk by a media artist.

If you are visiting a media art installation, you’re expected to stay in the room until you find yourself back in the place where the video loop was when you entered the installation.

If you attend screening with Q&A, you’re expected to stay through to the end of the Q&A, and ask a question, which will offer you something unique to write about in your response.

Write down your impressions immediately after the event, take notes during the event. Don’t depend on your memory, this will make it easier to write your review/response. It’s a good idea to keep a small notebook with you to take down notes using pen and paper. Do not take notes using a tablet or smartphone.1

You will describe the work/event, explain what inspires you, and share a brief critique of the work or event using the outline discussed in the Notes on Critique handout.

Don’t hesitate to describe how the work could have been more effective. It’s good to discuss the possibilities that it suggests, or opportunities it missed; explain your honest impression of the work or event.

Use concepts and terminology from the assigned readings and classroom discussions. You must integrate a minimum of two significant concepts covered in the homework assignments in this course.

Write with your peers as your intended audience, we will share these with each other and you are encouraged to read what your peers have written and comment on their work.

Structure

Your review/response analysis should take the form of an essay, not question and answer format. Do not reproduce phrases from this prompt in your response.

The work must consist of a minimum of four paragraphs, covering:

  1. Title with your name and the date and location of the event and the name of the work.

  2. Description. Begin by describing the work without value judgments, analysis, or interpretation, simply answer the question, “What do you see, hear, feel?” In addition, include the context in which you saw the work or experienced the event.

  3. Analysis. Identify the applied media aesthetics evident in the work and describes why the media maker used specific conventions and techniques to convey specific ideas. This section answers the question, “How did the media maker create the work?” This is a good section to include comparison to other works if it makes sense.

  4. Interpretation. This section establishes the broader context for the work based on the clues you discuss in the previous two sections and answers the question, “Why do you think the media maker create it, and what does it mean?”

  5. Evaluation. Express your personal response to the work, evaluating it from your personal perspective, including what you think of the work in terms of artistic merit. This section answers the question, “What is your response to the work and do you consider it successful however you define success?” This is another good section to include comparison to other works if it makes sense.

Deliverable specifications

  1. You will add your review to our Shared Google Notebook, which can be accessed from the “Collaboration” tab in Canvas.
  2. The title will use a “Heading 1” (style) header.
  3. The title will be followed by your name, the date, and the specifics of the event (name, location, date, etc.) using “Normal” (style) text.
  4. The document responds to the guidelines above using bold “Header 2” (style) headings as section headings followed by “Normal” style text as body text.
  5. The contribution to the Shared Google Doc is completed before the deadline.
  6. The work makes consistent use of the pre-defined “Heading 1,” and “Heading 2” and “Normal,” text styles for Title, Headings, and Text, respectively.
  7. The work includes at least one full width image with a minimum resolution of 1920 x 1080 px that captures the essence of the event or is a frame from the work or a view of the installation. Credit the image source.
  8. The response is written in your personal voice and does not come across as if it was generated using generative AI technology.
  9. The writing has been carefully proofread: proper grammar and spelling without sentence fragments or misplaced or incorrect punctuation. The document fol- lows the deliverable specifications outlined above.

Assessment

This assignment contributes towards your final grade (the point value is listed in Canvas) and will be evaluated on a Complete/Incomplete basis.

To be considered complete, the document must be submitted before the deadline and represent a thoughtful and wholehearted response to the questions outlined above.

If your work on this assignment is assessed as “Incomplete” for not meeting the deliverable specifications, you may request an opportunity to rework the assignment per the policy outlined in the syllabus.

Footnotes

  1. A survey of students across ten countries suggests handwriting and printed books have advantages over digital materials, this is discussed in the book Smartphone Cultures by Jane Vincent and Leslie Haddon (Routledge, 2017). Studies continue to show pluses to writing by hand, see “Why Writing by Hand Is Better for Memory and Learning” by By Charlotte Hu, Scientific American, February 21, 2024, web. ↩

Backlinks