Readability and miscommunication
Doing research in a dangerous place?
The second period of the course Sources & Creatorship. We were commissioned to visit the Temporary Museum in the Bijlmerbajes in Amsterdam. Just like the first period we were asked to pick up sources from the visited place & surroundings.
How is the process going?
After my visit to the Temporary Museum I made a selection of the photographs and further subdivided them into subjects. I came to the subjects: miscommunication & privacy violation. In the end I opted for the subject of miscommunication because this subject appeals to me more and the first ideas surfaced. Miscommunication is a common problem and I think this is more appropriate for this project. In my research I used different media to look up my sources. In my process I didn’t look at the philosophical aspect why someone doesn’t understand something but more the visual.
Evaluation & Assessment
For my thesis I did not really make a thesis but experimented even further with the sources I looked up.
But for this I came up with the following research question: What determines whether a text makes it readable?
And the sub-questions are: What are the factors? And does typography influence our reading behaviour?
I personally think this project went well. During the research I used & applied many different sources. Better than the previous period and that can be seen in the work. I used a combination of found texts, found images, written texts & created images. Because of this my research has broadened and there is more insight in my research. The feedback I got back was that it had been applied too practically. This is because the subject was still too general which made it less personal. This makes it a little less interesting to look at. But in the end the research is better than the previous period & wants to keep this momentum now.