Category: Uncategorised

  • Positions through Contextualising: Written Response

    Bibliographical entry with a short statements:

    1. Blauvelt, A., Maurer, L., Paulus, E., Puckey, J. and Wouters, R. (2013) Conditional Design Workbook. Amsterdam: Valiz.

    Initially, I deeply explored an analogy based on DNA transcription and translation to redefine my understanding of a “system.” I mapped my great-great-grandfather to DNA (the inaccessible origin), the archives to mRNA (extracted fragments), and my role as a designer to the Ribosome, synthesising these elements into a protein (the living narrative). I was fascinated by how DNA remains inactive unless it is read, translated, and physically folded through interaction. However, I recognised that the highly technical, biological complexities of DNA computing and origami were becoming too overwhelming and rigid, distracting from the human stories at the core of my practice. Consequently, I shifted away from the literal scientific framework and turned to the Conditional Design Workbook. Blauvelt’s manifesto—“The designer no longer designs the final form, but designs the conditions in which forms can emerge”—perfectly rescued the emotional and participatory core of my DNA experiment without its technical baggage. It allowed me to transform what initially felt like a cold, rigid system into an open, reactive environment. Through this shift, my accordion book ceased to be a static display; it became a set of formal conditions where the narrative is only activated, de-flattened, and felt when the audience physically engages in the act of unfolding.


    2. Taylor, R. E. (2020) Heritage As Process: Constructing The Historical Child’s Voice Through Art Practice.

    Taylor’s concept of “curating as looking after” provides the methodological foundation for my practice. By identifying how institutional captions at the Foundling Museum erase the individual voices of children to construct a sanitised history of “childhood,” Taylor demonstrates that heritage is not a fixed monument but an ongoing process. In my project, I translate her framework from an institutional workshop format into a physical editorial mechanism. While Taylor works within the museum space, I operate outside it, searching for what the state deliberately chose not to keep. Her focus on reconstructing lost voices through creative practice validates my use of folding as a tangible strategy to uncover the personal narratives crushed by administrative classification,


    3. Kim, Y. (2023) Badangbat (Sea Field): Manifesting Intangible Cultural Heritage through Illustration.

    Kim’s practice-based research expands my understanding of illustration not merely as decoration, but as a “cultural generator” and an interpretive bridge between generations. Her work with the fading Jeju language and Haenyeo culture utilises drawing during interviews and workshops to capture lived experiences that formal archives overlook. This directly enhances my studio work by repositioning my drawing style as a critical tool. Kim proves that visual representation can synthesise verbal fragments and emotional nuances into a tangible form. In my project, I adapt this approach to move beyond a cold, scientific presentation of historical victims. Instead, I use drawing to bridge the gap between historical alienation and modern empathy, turning illustration into an innovative method for sustaining memory as a living, breathing entity.


    4. Suh, D. H. (2019) The Bridge Project.

    Suh’s ongoing exploration of the “perfect home” through migration and memory challenges the rigid boundaries of national and political archives. By unfolding deeply individual yet universally relatable spaces, Suh demonstrates that private architectural or domestic memories can serve as arenas to interrogate geopolitical displacements. This directly informs the physical and emotional architecture of my accordion book. Suh’s work validates my decision to map out the “stolen futures” and private spaces of my subjects, such as a quiet room filled with family photographs. It stretches my practice by showing that the meticulous reconstruction of private, micro-historical spaces can become an experimental, engaging method that invites the audience to recall their own domestic warmth, thereby confronting macro-historical absences.


    5. Tan, S. (2006) The Arrival. Arthur A. Levine Books.

    Tan’s wordless graphic novel profoundly altered my approach to information management by introducing the power of “sensory compression.” His opening sequence of silent immigrant portraits establishes an immediate, deeply human connection before any narrative context is given, proving that emotion can bypass historical alienation. Confronted with the overflow of traumatic data in my research on ‘Comfort Women,’ I learned from Tan that listing every bureaucratic violence only dilutes the impact. Instead, Tan’s method pushed me to isolate a single, sensory “stab”—such as the cold imposition of a state-mandated Buddhist funeral over a private Catholic faith. By adapting Tan’s logic, my Layer 1 portraits establish an empathetic, wordless entry point, leaving gaps that invite the audience to perform their own critical fabulation.


    6. Hartman, S. (2008) ‘Venus in Two Acts’, Small Axe, 12(2), pp. 1-14.

    Hartman’s theory of “Critical Fabulation” acts as the conceptual anchor for Layer 3 of my structure. Her practice of writing into the blank spaces of the transatlantic slave archive, playing with white space, imagining what could have been said, without ever concealing the lack of an actual record, directly guides my illustrative restorations. Hartman challenges the graphic designer to resist the urge to neatly “fix” history or falsify a happy ending. Instead, she teaches me to use soft, distinct pencil lines to signify that Layer 3 is a restorative, speculative space. Her text deepens my practice by framing imagination not as a fabrication of historical untruths, but as an ethical, creative intervention designed to return human dignity to those whom the official state archive left entirely unrecorded.


    7. Warburg, A. (1924–1929) Mnemosyne Atlas.

    Warburg’s unfinished iconographic constellation challenges the linear, institutional categorisation of historical timelines. By pinning disparate images together across different eras, geographies, and themes, the Mnemosyne Atlas creates a visual laboratory where memory behaves as a dynamic, shifting energy rather than a static record. This expands my line of enquiry by justifying my role as a “visual facilitator” who assembles fragmented archives. Warburg’s associative layout directly informs my use of the accordion structure, allowing the five historical figures in my book to coexist within a giant, virtual family photo. It strips away the state’s clinical chronological divisions, enabling the audience to map out cross-temporal relationships between separate instances of institutional control and personal resistance.


    8. Tillmans, W. (2009) Kepler Venice Tables.

    Tillmans’ Venice Tables project uses large, flat display surfaces to assemble newspaper clippings, personal photographs, and found texts, subverting the traditional authoritative voice of the museum vitrine. While institutions use display cases to classify objects into permanent categories, Tillmans uses the table format to create a democratic, unstable grid where high politics and everyday ephemera carry equal weight. This heavily expands my critique of the natural history display case (“FORE LIMB OR WING”). Tillmans’ practice provides a visual counter-strategy: by mimicking the flat, authoritative arrangement of official documents on my book’s surface, I create a visual alibi of state control, only to destabilise it completely once the physical folds are pulled open by the viewer.


    9. Tenen, D. (2017) Plain Text: The Poetics of Computation. Stanford University Press.

    Tenen’s media-theoretical exploration of “literature down to a pixel” introduces a profound connection between physical surfaces and hidden administrative layers. He argues that plain text is never neutral; it is always bound to a hidden material, computational, or political infrastructure that formats and flattens human expression. This stretches my critical enquiry by allowing me to equate computational flattening with bureaucratic flattening. Tenen’s insights justify my focus on the physical forms of modern state applications, grades, and certificates. It reframes my book design not merely as a container for text, but as a material critique of “formatting” itself, showing how state institutions use standard paperwork to compress raw, chaotic patriotism into flat, manageable archival data.


    10. Hugh, S. (Created by) (2022) Pachinko. Apple TV+.

    The television adaptation of Pachinko provides a masterful reference for navigating the “divided audience” and the multilingual burdens of Zainichi/Korean history. The series utilises colour-coded, trilingual subtitles (Korean, Japanese, English) to visualise the invisible borders of language, identity, and displacement. This directly inspired the structural orientation and linguistic roles of my book. Pachinko demonstrates that historical trauma cannot be consumed equally by all viewers. By observing how the show uses cinematic language to navigate cultural proximity, I resolved to use the physical orientation of my folding book to segregate my audiences, keeping the internal pockets of “untranslatable”모국어 (mother tongue) whispers exclusively open to the Korean accomplice, while offering poetic sensations to the international viewer.


    11. Metahaven (2015) Sunshine Unfinished, in Black Transparency: The Right to Know in the Age of Mass Surveillance.

    Sunshine Unfinished is an infographic designed along the logic of the game ‘Snakes and Ladders,’ tracing the concept of transparency across politics, philosophy, and architecture from 109 AD to the present. The title alludes to Justice Louis Brandeis’s famous quote that “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants,” a metaphor for how visibility can “cure” social diseases. This reference challenges my practice to think about the visual rhetoric of illumination. In my project,the “Official Surface” (Layer 1) functions like Metahaven’s sunlight, a curated visibility that claims to be “complete.” However, Metahaven’s use of the game logic reveals that transparency is often a power play of visibility and concealment.This deepens my understanding of how a diagrammatic timeline can be used not just to show information, but to critique the conditions of how that information is made visible or hidden by institutional power.


    12. Kwami, A. (2015) Grace Kwami Sculpture [Leporello/Concertina Artist Book].

    Atta Kwami’s Grace Kwami Sculpture is a tribute to his mother, Ghanaian sculptor Grace Salome Kwami. The work is a leporello (concertina) bound book designed to unfold and stand on its edge, resembling the eight legs of the spider Ananse from West African folktales. This reference was the pivotal physical “solve” for my studio outcome. It shifted my thinking from a flat digital layout to a three-dimensional “reactive object.” Kwami’s work demonstrates that a book can function as a sculpture that occupies space and requires a specific physical engagement. I adapted this logic into my “Pocket-Accordion” structure, where the folding is no longer just a way to save space, but a physical manifestation of the gaps and creases within the historical record.


    Extended critical analyses of two of the references: one text and one project (500 words)

    Analysis 1: The Practical Project

    Taylor, R. E. (2020) Heritage As Process: Constructing The Historical Child’s Voice Through Art Practice. [Practice-Based Research / Curation Project at the Foundling Museum, London]

    In her practice-based doctoral research at the Foundling Museum, Rachel Emily Taylor conceptualises “Heritage as Process,” interrogating how institutional museum captions overwrite the historical voices of marginalised orphan children with a sanitised narrative constructed by adult administrators. Rather than treating heritage as a static monument, Taylor positions it as an active, continuous performance. By facilitating workshops where contemporary children engage in role-play and making, she dynamically reconstructs historical voices through multiple contemporary interpretations. This methodology shifts across formats: from archival investigation to social engagement documented via “Field Notes,” and finally to a radical spatial subversion, curating the children’s fragile artefacts back into the museum’s physical display cases. This creates “ensemble voices” that challenge monolithic historical curation, mobilising the Scottish definition of curating: “to look after.” Formally, this commitment is made visible through tension between institutional register and the personal, the children’s uneven, unfinished outputs sit inside the same vitrines as polished historical artefacts. The form enacts the critique.

    Engaging with Taylor’s work completely reoriented my project. I had mistakenly believed my work was a cold, genealogical reconstruction of my great-great-grandfather’s journey, leaving me conflicted between emotional storytelling and rigid system-thinking. Taylor’s framework made me realise I was actively engaging with the politics of heritage. Examining my family’s materials, I noticed my great-great-grandfather’s “true voice” was entirely absent, only eighty fragmented slips of paper in classical Chinese and Japanese, records generated by colonial administrations, governments, and descendants. His identity was already flattened by visual communication formats, languages, and political filtering, confirming that flattening is inherently embedded in the historical process, produced by the tension between state protection and institutional control.

    Moving beyond my family narrative, I recognised this structural flattening across modern Korean history, where recording itself acts as institutional power. This erasure spans three overlapping groups excluded from the state’s official vocabulary: unrecognised activists whose covert or gendered resistance lacked documentary proof; figures whose recognition was distorted or weaponised, such as Park Cha-jeong, defined on her gravestone merely as a general’s wife, or Yu Gwan-sun, flattened into a textbook trope while three thousand fellow protestors were reduced to an anonymous crowd.

    I translate Taylor’s methodology into a new medium through folding. While Taylor operates within institutional boundaries, curating missing fragments back into the museum space, my translation critiques the museum system itself. Through a pocket-accordion structure, folding becomes a resistive gesture, the audience must physically open the surface to navigate three layers: the authoritative Layer 1, the distorted Layer 2 archive, and the Layer 3 space of Critical Fabulation. Taylor’s multiplicity of voices guided the structural dualism of my book: inner pockets unfold in opposite directions by language, keeping untranslatable Korean emotional truths inaccessible to the English-facing side. For me, Taylor’s definition reframes curating not as preservation but as excavation, actively uncovering what the institution chose not to keep. What is not recorded is not absent. Its absence is the record.


    Analysis 2: The Text

    Blauvelt, A., Maurer, L., Paulus, E., Puckey, J. and Wouters, R. (2013) Conditional Design Workbook. Amsterdam: Valiz.

    Andrew Blauvelt and colleagues define the core proposition of Conditional Design as follows: “The designer no longer designs the final form, but designs the conditions in which forms can emerge.” This shift repositions the graphic designer from author to architect, from someone who delivers a fixed outcome to someone who constructs a set of rules, constraints, and relationships within which meaning can be actively produced by others. The Conditional Design Workbook formalises this as a practice, presenting a series of process-based exercises that foreground the system over the result. The formal qualities of the book itself reinforce this position: its diagrammatic instructions, process-oriented language, and deliberately open-ended outcomes resist the idea of a singular, authoritative reading. The workbook does not show you what to make. It shows you how to make conditions for making.

    This framework directly challenged and clarified my own practice. At the beginning of this project, I was building a rigid system and positioning it as the core of my work, a fixed structure that would organise fragmented historical narratives into coherent form. This felt cold and reductive. Engaging with Conditional Design helped me understand why: I had conflated the system with the outcome, when the system should function only as a set of conditions. The pocket-accordion structure I developed, a physical object that unfolds in opposite directions depending on the reader’s language, revealing three conceptual layers, is not the work itself. It is the condition through which the work becomes possible. The audience must physically open the surface. They must choose a direction. They must decide how far to go. The narrative does not exist until they produce it.

    However, my work also complicates and partially inverts the Conditional Design proposition in a way I find more honest to my practice.

    In Conditional Design, the system is the fixed element and the outcomes are open. In my project, this relationship is reversed in one significant respect. My illustration style, which had always functioned as a flexible, intuitive tool across my practice, became, in this project, a fixed rule. I drew all four portraits using the same materials, the same tonal register, the same formal language. This was not a spontaneous decision but a structural one: the visual consistency of the portraits functions as a system in itself, preventing information overflow, creating coherence across five separate historical narratives, and allowing the audience to immediately understand that these are not unrelated stories but variations of the same condition. Like Louis Agassiz’s fish catalogue, where visual uniformity across species created the illusion of objective classification, my portraits use stylistic consistency to create the illusion of an official, authoritative exhibition, before the folding breaks that surface apart.

    What Conditional Design gave me was permission to trust the conditions over the content. What my practice added back was the understanding that sometimes the most powerful system is not the structure you build, but the visual language you choose to hold constant. The flexible became fixed. The fixed became a tool. The system did not produce the work. It produced the conditions for the audience to produce it themselves.

  • 1. My Snippet: Flattening

    To begin this project, I started by evaluating my previous projects from unit 1, using the provided van diagram and examine my practice into three big categories: Topics, Methods, and Media. 

    Through this process, I noticed interestings overlaps in my practices.


    I am not an image maker, but a structural translator
    → My work does not represent visible subjects,
    → It reveals hidden systems of power and structure

    • Gorilla Kingdom → Not about animal rights but spectatorship structure.
    • ‘Fish’ → Not about living matters but about taxonoical power structure.
    • My great great grandfather → Not about personal story but about historical record power structure.
    • Cake coding → Not about the outcome but about the production system structure.
    • Movement pack → Not about the action but about the institutional mobility structure. 

    → Not visualising what is visible, but revealing what is hidden behind how it is framed.


    Empathy as a tool

    My tool, graphic design, is not a detached instrument of observation, but a mediator that comforts and preserves the memories of family histories and marginalised beings. I defined translation as both a deeply personal and inherently political act.


    Reconfiguring responsibility
    → My work does not deliver information
    → It repositions responsibility

    • Animal is not trapped → we built the system
    • Fish is not real → we named it
    • Carbon is not personal → system demands it
    • Archive is not truth → someone authored it

    → Core question: Who is responsible?
    → Outcome: Responsibility is redistributed


    OVERLALL:

    Up until now, my practice has been about moving beyond the surface of a subject from a two-dimensional understanding into a three-dimensional one. I analyse a topic, uncover its underlying structures, and use visual and empathetic tools to translate that complexity. Through this, I aim to reposition meaning and redistribute responsibility. But I began to notice a consistent problem.


    Then, I started to spot some habits in my practice that are problematic. 

    → Across all projects, I:

    • Analyse surface → uncover structure (2D → 3D)
    • Translate structure through visual tools
    • Produce outcomes that reposition meaning and responsibility

    BUT

    → The final outcomes become flattened representations

    • Complex research → simplified visuals
    • Layered experience → single output
    • Process → reduced to result

    This became especially clear in my Methods of Translating project. I worked with over 80 archival materials,
    and used critical fabulation to reconstruct missing histories. However, I realised that I was pre-determining the emotional experience for the audience. Instead of allowing them to feel the process, I was suggesting what they should feel— which meant I skipped the experience itself. At the same time, the fictional granddaughter as curator remained a surface-level device, rather than a critically grounded position. So in the end, I was flattening the very experience I was trying to preserve.

    This led me to a shift in focus. I became interested in flattening as a condition of representation itself.

    What gets removed when we represent something? What becomes readable, but less felt? And more importantly, can flattening be resisted, delayed, or even undone?

    So instead of simply producing outcomes, I began to investigate this question:

    Critical enquiry

    How complex histories are flattened through representation, and how this flattening can be resisted or undone.

    Iteration Zero (Starting Point)

    To begin this investigation, I return to one of my previous outcomes the auditory map from Methods of Translating.

    I chose this because it already contains time, voice, and emotion. But even here, these elements are still partially flattened. So this becomes my testing ground. A site where I can examine my own act of translating, observe how flattening occurs, and experiment with how it might be undone.

    Therefore, My practice shifts from translating structures to examining how representation itself flattens complexity—and how this flattening can be resisted through iteration.

    Iteration Unflattening:

    Started to expand all the records, stories and photos needed to create the auditory map.

    Iteration flattening:

    Then, I deliberately push the process of flattening to its extreme.

    • Starting from the original materials, I selectively extract certain pieces of information and through this act of selection, the story begins to become a map. As the process continues, the narrative is progressively compressed.
    • I layer everything on top of each other, erasing emotional tone so that only cold, factual information remains.
    • Events are reduced into icons, where the richness of the story disappears into symbolic form.
    • Time is converted into numbers, removing the lived experience of duration and transforming it into data.
    • Finally, the entire narrative is condensed into a single sentence— an extreme form of flattening.

    This led me to an important realisation: Flattening is not just the result it is already embedded in the process.

    As mapping suggests, “mapping begins with selection, and selection is already flattening.” The moment I choose what to include, what to edit, and how to represent something I am already flattening its complexity.

    Iteration Unflattening:

    Restore time and narrative to what has been flattened.

    Through this process, I investigated how experience, emotion, and structure contribute to the formation of a multidimensional story. What begins as a simple experiment evolves into a mode of investigation.

    By re-expanding the meanings altered through flattening—examining what was removed, shifted, or newly produced—the work tests whether a flattened narrative can be reconstituted into a layered, spatial, and relational form once again.

    While I was experimenting with unflattening, I started to do some research on non-flat story. A non-flat story is not linear, not singular, and not resolved. It accumulates, overlaps, and resists closure. 

    So I decided to test the further with iterations on Non-linear time and Accumulation.

  • Positions through Iterating: Written Response

    2 references drawn from the course reading list that situate your project in a broader discourse or conceptual domain.

    • Tenen, D. (2017) ‘Literature down to a pixel’, in Plain Text: The Poetics of Computation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    This text reframes my understanding of perception as an active process of reconstruction rather than passive reception. Drawing on Henri Bergson’s idea of the universe as an indivisible continuity, it suggests that what we perceive as discrete units are in fact partial views imposed onto a continuous whole.

    In my Methods of Translating project, I fragmented my great-great-grandfather’s story—pausing and dividing a continuous narrative into temporal and spatial segments to make it legible for an audience. However, these fragments were never isolated; they remained deeply entangled with the larger whole. This reference helps me understand that such fragmentation is not simply a representational strategy, but a fundamental condition of perception itself.

    Bergson’s rejection of the “flashlight model” of perception, where attention selectively illuminates reality, resonates strongly with my practice. Instead, perception operates through repetition, comparison, and accumulation. Building on this, my current Position through Iterating explores the structures of transformation itself, designing systems where narratives are not fixed but continuously formed through processes of breaking, layering, and recombining.


    • Blauvelt, A., Maurer, L., Paulus, E., Puckey, J. and Wouters, R. (2013) Conditional Design Workbook. Amsterdam: Valiz.

    “The designer no longer designs the final form, but designs the conditions in which forms can emerge.” (Blauvelt et al., 2013)

    This text shifts my understanding of design from producing fixed outcomes to constructing open systems. It proposes a transition in authorship: from designer as tool user to designer as tool-maker, or even as a designer of conditions that enable others to act. Rather than determining form or meaning, design operates through relationships, feedback, and distributed agency.

    This directly informs my current Positions through Iterating project, where I move away from producing singular narratives toward building systems that allow multiple stories to coexist. By introducing a “music theory tree” structure, I translate musical logic into a narrative system: major notes become central figures, modes act as perspectives, and chords represent the collision of viewpoints. This framework resists the flattening of complex histories into a single, linear account.

    Instead of presenting a resolved interpretation, I construct a platform in which narratives are continuously generated, layered, and recombined. In this sense, my role shifts from authoring meaning to designing the conditions through which meaning can emerge.

    1 reference that is specifically related to your project in its topic (theme or subject matter)

    • Pachinko (2022) Created by Soo Hugh. Available at: Apple TV+.

    “History has failed us, but no matter.” (Pachinko, 2022)

    Pachinko situates my project within a broader discourse of diasporic identity, generational memory, and survival under historical violence. The series traces the lives of Koreans living under and after Japanese colonial rule, foregrounding how displacement, family ties, and historical conditions shape personal identity across generations. Its narrative resonates closely with my own exploration of my great-great-grandfather’s story, particularly in its attention to inherited trauma, resilience, and the emotional complexity of belonging and estrangement.

    However, what distinguishes my practice from Pachinko is its narrative structure. While the series powerfully delivers emotional depth through a cohesive, linear storyline centred on Sunja and her family, it ultimately consolidates multiple experiences into a singular narrative arc. This produces immersion, but also limits the coexistence of conflicting perspectives.

    In contrast, my work seeks to resist this narrative convergence by constructing systems in which multiple voices, contradictions, and temporalities can exist simultaneously. Rather than telling one story, I design conditions where stories remain open, fragmented, and relational.

    1 reference that is specifically related to your project in its medium or method

    • The Library of Babel (1941) by Jorge Luis Borges.

    “The universe (which others call the Library) is composed of an indefinite, perhaps infinite number of hexagonal galleries.” (Borges, 1941)

    In The Library of Babel, Jorge Luis Borges constructs a universe not from matter, but from books, endless hexagonal rooms filled with every possible combination of letters. Meaning does not reside in any single text, but emerges through wandering, misreading, and accidental encounters. Truth is not given; it is assembled.

    This logic closely informs my Positions through Iterating. If Borges builds his universe from books, mine is built from perspectives. Each voice, across nations, generations, and positions, functions like a volume on a shelf, partial and situated. Together, they construct an unstable but expansive understanding of a single figure: the independence activist.

    Unlike linear narratives that guide the viewer toward one interpretation, my system invites navigation. Meanings shift depending on where you stand, how far you move, and which voices you encounter. Like Borges’ library, it contains both truth and fabrication—archives and imagined reconstructions, intentionally entangled. I am not telling a story; I am building a space in which stories collide, echo, and continuously reconfigure.

    1 reference that demonstrates a critical position in context of your specific topic, medium, or method

    • Templo (c. 2021) Interconnected Disaster Risks Visual Identity. Collaboration with United Nations.

    The collaboration between Templo and the United Nations offers a critical model for visualising complexity without reducing it. Rather than presenting disaster events as isolated incidents, the project maps them as interconnected systems, revealing shared underlying causes through spatial “collisions” of 3D forms. This approach resists the simplification of global crises into singular narratives and instead foregrounds relational structures and systemic responsibility.

    This is directly relevant to my practice, where I question how narratives become flattened through selection and representation. While traditional storytelling often isolates events into linear, digestible forms, Templo’s work demonstrates how meaning can emerge through accumulation, overlap, and interaction. Their use of topology as a visual language aligns with my interest in designing systems where multiple stories coexist and inform one another.

    In my Positions through Iterating, I similarly construct frameworks, such as the music theory tree, where perspectives intersect and reshape each other. Rather than guiding the viewer toward a single conclusion, I aim to expose the underlying structures that connect seemingly separate narratives.

    1 wild card reference (identify another type of relationship, or re-use any of the above prompts)

    • Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics (1929) by Mikhail Bakhtin.

    “A plurality of independent and unmerged voices and consciousnesses.” (Bakhtin, 1929)

    Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of polyphony provides a critical lens through which I understand my shift away from singular authorship. In a polyphonic structure, multiple voices coexist without being subordinated to a central, authoritative perspective. Each voice retains its autonomy, creating a space where meaning emerges through dialogue, tension, and coexistence rather than resolution.

    This directly informs my Positions through Iterating, where I resist constructing a unified narrative and instead design systems that allow perspectives to remain distinct yet interconnected. Drawing from musical polyphony, I think of narratives not as linear progressions but as simultaneous layers, voices that overlap, diverge, and occasionally collide. In this structure, no single viewpoint is privileged or resolved into a final truth.

    Rather than acting as an omniscient author, I position myself as a facilitator of relations, enabling interactions between voices across time, geography, and identity. My work, therefore, becomes less about telling a story and more about sustaining a condition in which multiple stories can speak, coexist, and continuously reshape one another.


    A short statement (100–200 words) that articulates your line of enquiry. What questions are you exploring in this project, and how are you exploring them? Be as focused and specific as possible. (Tip: Don’t try to write this during the first week. Wait until your iterations have developed meaningfully.)

    My project begins with a critical reflection on my practice as a structural translator rather than an image-maker. While I analyse topics to uncover underlying systems and translate them through visual and empathetic tools, I noticed a recurring contradiction: although my process engages complexity, the final outcomes inevitably flatten it into readable representations.

    This led me to question flattening not as a byproduct, but as a condition of representation itself. What is lost when we make something legible? What becomes visible but less felt? And crucially, can flattening be resisted, delayed, or exposed rather than avoided?

    Using the auditory map from Methods of Translating as a testing ground, I examine my own acts of translation to observe how flattening occurs and how it might be undone. Through iteration, I discovered that non-flat narratives are not linear or singular, but accumulate, overlap, and remain unresolved.

    This shifted my enquiry toward system-building. Drawing on musical structures, rhythm, repetition, layering, and polyphony, I ask: how can multiple voices be experienced simultaneously without collapsing into one? My aim is not to eliminate flattening, but to design a navigable system in which it is delayed, revealed, and actively resisted.

  • Unit 2

    Positions through Iterating

    Flattening and Unflattening

    1. My Snippet: Flattening

    17/04/2026

    2. The Musical Library of Jin

    24/04/2026

    3. Positions through Iterating: Written Response

    27/04/2026


    4. Position through Iterating summarised click!


    Positions through Contextualising

    The continuous process of looking after

    5. To curate, means to look after

    04/05/2026

    6. The unfolding exhibition!

    11/05/2026

    7. Positions through Contextualising: Written Response

    18/05/2026


    Position through Essaying

    Re…rerouting.

    8. Navigation

    23/05/2026

    9. Re..rerouting…

    30/05/2026

    10. Position through Essaying: Video Essay & Written Response

    01/06/2026


    Position through Dialoguing

    I am a conductor rather than a violinist


    Position through Triangulating △

    Orchestrating Contingency: Framing Conditions for Multiplicity

    12. Cue Sheet as an Illustration system △1

    10/10/2026

    15…

    01/11/2026

  • 15. Authorised Movement Pack

    We decided to focus on student’s air travelling data and started to bridge our positionalities as international students and designers. 

    We all individually approached the dataset playfully, and tried to make complex student travel statistics more accessible using board games, speculative play, and UI/UX-style interfaces.

    Our intention was to translate quantitative information into approachable forms. However, during our exploration, we realised that climate data is rarely read as neutral information. Even when describing a massive system, visual formats often frame it as individual responsibility. 

    After the feedback session, we clarified our core shift: the shift from “individual guilt” to “institutional responsibility.”

    Starting from the airplane ticket, the project expanded to show that students do not freely choose to move, but the education system requires movement. The ticket reveals the condition of travel but not the process through which responsibility is produced.

    From this, we planned to develop an Authorised Movement Pack. Students are categorised into three movement bands — Domestic, Short-haul, and Long-haul — and each document represents a stage of processing. A block of barcodes tracks the progression, embedding a geological-sediment pattern so that every administrative step accumulates into a visible record of institutional movement and its emissions.

    The airport is not only a place of transport but a system that verifies, filters, and records people, and university entry follows the same logic. We therefore reframed air travel as authorised movement: flying is not a single event but a sequence of procedures — permission, verification, passage, recording, and approval. This shifts the project from “ticket design” to an institutional protocol, where offer letter, CAS, visa, immigration, and registration function as stages of access. We started to plan a Processing System Pack that the viewer moves through step by step.

    1. CAS Letter

      The journey begins with the CAS Letter.

      In our project, it is reframed as an authorisation record rather than an immigration document. It presents movement as a requirement for enrolment, not a personal choice. Personal identity fields are removed and replaced with system-based data, emphasising that the student is processed as part of an administrative structure. From the moment the institution issues this call, movement and emissions become structurally inevitable. The colour of the document follows a thermal intensity scale based on carbon output: long-haul students are marked in purple, while domestic students appear in yellow. Also, the 131 nation-states form a subtle boundary around the CAS letter. This visualises the geopolitical framework that authorises cross-border movement.

      2. Plane Ticket

      Then, we developed a ticket that no longer documents a trip but the condition under which travel becomes necessary. Students are assigned to Domestic, Short-haul, or Long-haul mobility bands, with emission and distance values calculated from the average CO₂ output of each category. Seats are automatically allocated, positioning the viewer within a ranked emission system while revealing that this position is structurally determined. The ticket therefore operates as a requirement for access to education rather than a personal travel choice, reflecting the repeated movement embedded in international study.

      3. Baggage Tag

      Inspired by the tax-free shop in the airport, we designed tax free recipets. Students can have it after finishing the process of movement. On the receipt, we can see each step and the total emissions. But at the bottom of recipet t reads “TAX FREE” and “SYSTEM PAID.” This argues that these emissions, caused by the global education framework, are not the individual’s debt to settle. 

      4. Passport Stamps

      The Authorised Movement Passport tracks both personal and planetary movement. Instead of just “destination” stamps, we include the calculated CO2​e emissions. It shows that movement is “Authorised,” not “Free.”

      5. Check-in Barcodes

      The hinge of the project is the barcode. A barcode does not recognise a person but it recognises a record. Before arriving physically, the student already exists administratively as data. Each scan logs an event. In geology, repeated events create sediment layers. Here, repeated administrative actions accumulate into emissions. The barcode is a machine-read record, and the sediment is an Earth-read record. When the airport scans the passenger, the Earth records the movement.

      6. The Accumulated Sediment

      Finally, All stage’s blocks or barcodes are accumulated into a geological drawing representing 131 countries and their carbon footprint. The university invites movement, the system records it, and the environment archives it. We are not proposing a behavioural solution. Instead, the project asks how graphic communication shapes where responsibility appears to sit. The footprint is not simply left by individuals. It is structurally required.

      Final Outcome

      Reflection

      One of the main pieces of feedback we received during the final crit was that our positionality was not clearly defined. In response to this, we clarified the intention of the project.

      This project does not aim to simply inform students about carbon emissions. Instead, it reframes how mobility is understood within the context of higher education. By embedding environmental data within institutional paperwork, the work demonstrates that emissions are not produced only through individual behaviour, but through organised systems that require movement.

      Our primary audience is international students who may perceive their travel as a personal choice or responsibility. The project intervenes in that perception by repositioning the student from a responsible individual to a participant within a structured institutional process.

      In this sense, visual communication functions not as a tool for delivering information, but as a method of contextualisation — shifting how a situation is understood and where responsibility is located.

    1. 14. Aviation, Emission, Accumulation.

      In the beginning of the project Methods of Contextualising: Publishing and Literacy, our group (Marilyn, Yini, Moye and myself) individually explored how graphic communication design can function as a flexible tool to make complex student travel statistics more accessible.

      I began my exploration by examining how people understand climate change and how graphic communication design shapes that understanding. 

      Average Travelling emission caculation 2015-2024

      While reviewing the dataset, I encountered transport emission records from 2015–2020. Looking at these records, I started to think about carbon emissions not as isolated events but as accumulations over time. The travel spreadsheet began to resemble the gradual build-up of CO₂ within geological sediments.

      According to Parsons D.’s public lecture “The Plastocene – Plastic in the Sedimentary Record,” human-made materials can become preserved within sedimentary layers and even function as markers for dating historical periods, ranging from glass bottles to debris from World War II. This perspective encouraged me to rethink data visualisation. Emissions no longer appeared as abstract statistics but as material traces with temporal duration.

      To visualise this accumulation, I decided to gather transport emission data representing how students move within the UK. My aim was to help the audience understand not only the emissions themselves, but also how they gradually accumulate over time.

      My illustration of 2015-2016 carbon emission accumulation sediments.

      Using this data, I began to translate the information into geological sediments. Inspired by metamorphic charts, I visualised the 2015–2016 transport emissions using different rock particle structures. Transport modes with higher emissions were represented with larger rock particles and darker tonal values, while lower-emission transport was illustrated with smaller particles.

      I deliberately worked in black and white using pencil and charcoal. This material choice allows the drawings to be read as references to fossil fuel histories.

      For example, flights, the heaviest and most emission-intensive layer, are represented as anthracite with large rock particles. Ferries appear as medium-sized particles inspired by gneiss, whose pattern also subtly resembles water waves. Meanwhile, coach and rail transport are visualised using much finer particle textures to reflect their comparatively lower emissions.

      My illustration of 2015-2020 carbon emission accumulation sediments.

      I continued this process for each year of data. Initially, I arranged the layers in a landscape format, but the sense of accumulation was not very visible. To emphasise the build-up over time, I began stacking the layers vertically in a long portrait format.

      I then applied this method to analyse the flight data of UAL students from 2024–2025. I recalculated the dataset to focus only on air travel records based on students’ countries of departure.

      This time, I decided to introduce colour. While the earlier drawings used charcoal to evoke fossil fuel histories, the addition of colour allows the sediments to be read as a cross-section of an ongoing energy system, something still active in the present.

      The colour scale follows a simple rule:

      • Lowest emission layers are represented in pale yellow, suggesting low-energy deposition.
      • Medium emission layers shift into orange and red, indicating increasing energy intensity.
      • The highest emission layers appear in purple, marking high-energy depositional events.

      In this work, I treat carbon emissions as energetic depositional events. The colour scale is derived from geophysical seismic amplitude mapping and thermal heatmaps, where colour represents energy intensity rather than material type.

      Traditionally, geological strata record the accumulation of physical materials. However, within the context of the Anthropocene, these layers can also be understood as records of human actions. In this sense, the work does not simply depict soil or rock; it visualises how the repeated act of choosing to fly may accumulate into a future geological record.

      However, while developing these visualisations, I began to question the implications of representing student mobility through carbon emission data.

      Studying abroad is not inherently wrong, and students should not be blamed for travelling to pursue education. This led me to ask: if I visualise this data, who is the audience, and who is being held responsible?

      International student mobility is not simply an individual ethical choice, but rather a structural condition produced by the global education system. In this sense, the dataset does not represent individual behavioural data, but something closer to institutional dependency data. The internationalisation of universities relies on physical mobility. This raises an important question: does the responsibility for carbon emissions lie with the individual, or with the system that requires this movement?

      I began to worry that visualising travel emissions could unintentionally frame the issue as a matter of personal guilt. Instead, I wanted to shift the focus towards the institutional structures that make this mobility necessary.

      To explore this idea, I started working with the visual language of an airplane ticket. Traditionally, a flight ticket functions as a record of movement. In this project, however, the ticket is reframed as an access permit. The student has not simply chosen to travel; mobility becomes a requirement for accessing education.

      Using UAL student travel data, I organised countries based on their flight distance to London and calculated the associated carbon emissions. Countries were ranked from 1 to 131 according to their emission levels. The ticket structure assigns mobility bands: Row A for long-haul flights, Row B for short-haul flights, and Row C for domestic flights.

      The ticket is issued by UAL, and the distance and travel time are translated into calculated CO₂ emissions. Even the seat number becomes a ranking of carbon emission, transforming the familiar format of a boarding pass into a record of authorised movement within the global education system.

      I also tried stacking the 131 tickets to show how these carbon emission accumulates on to the geological sediments.

    2. Written Response

      As a research-based illustrator, I use drawing to translate difficult sociopolitical and environmental knowledge. I previously viewed my role as a solitary “gleaner”, an independent observer searching for alternative perspectives. However, this project transformed my practice into a collaborative production of knowledge. Much like Agnès Varda’s films, our work was shaped through continuous dialogue, moving beyond solitary observation toward a collective narrative.

      Working together on the UAL Net Zero dataset shifted how I understood climate communication. Previously, my illustrations visualised individual human actions using simplified information to make the topic approachable. Through collective discussion and engagement with raw data, I recognised that climate change cannot always be understood as a single event or a sum of personal behaviours. Quantified data can unintentionally assign blame to individuals, even when emissions are structurally produced.

      This experience reframed my practice. I now see illustration not only as a tool for accessibility, but as a form of critical translation that can expose systems behind environmental impact. In the context of climate justice and the UAL Net Zero plan, my role as a practitioner is to design visual narratives that reveal institutional responsibility alongside personal action.

      Bibliography

      • From Reading list:

      Conditional Design (Lust & De Decker, 2008–ongoing) Conditional Design Manifesto.

      The Conditional Design manifesto proposes that designers create conditions rather than predetermined images: process produces formations rather than forms. I understood this through the analogy of a football formation, the overall pattern does not exist in a single player but emerges from many individual actions occurring simultaneously. This idea shifted my focus from representing carbon emission totals to visualising the process of student mobility that produces them. When emissions are presented only as numerical outcomes, they tend to generate individual guilt. However, mapping how emissions are distributed across routes, distances, and institutional structures revealed shared responsibility. The question therefore changed from “how much carbon do students produce?” to “what systems allow these movements to occur?” In our ticket and movement pack system, the visual outcome is not a fixed composition but an accumulation produced by multiple journeys. Conditional Design helped me frame climate communication not as a moral statement but as a relational pattern. Within the context of the UAL Net Zero plan, the work attempts to show that sustainability is less about correcting individual behaviour and more about understanding the infrastructures and educational conditions that organise mobility in the first place.


      Varda, A. (2000) The Gleaners and I [Film]. France: Ciné Tamaris.

      My working process often follows a sequence of questions → investigation → structural analysis → translation → image, which I came to recognise through Varda’s approach in The Gleaners and I. Rather than treating her subjects as objects to be represented, Varda continuously speaks with people, traces contexts, and examines the conditions that allow certain practices to exist. This perspective influenced how I reconsidered my own visualisation of student air-travel data. Initial stage of the project, our group found ourselves only representing emissions as outcomes. Returning to the data, we began asking how the data itself was produced: why students move, what institutional structures require mobility, and how these journeys accumulate. Through this process, we recognised a parallel between the movement of students and the formation of geological sediments, both are gradual deposits created by repeated actions rather than singular events. Varda’s method shifted our practice from illustrating information to investigating conditions. The sediment drawings therefore do not simply depict carbon emission; they attempt to make visible the processes and contexts that generate it, aligning the work with a climate justice perspective focused on systems rather than individual behaviour.

      • Outside the Reading list:

      Haraway, D. (2016) Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.

      Haraway’s writing shifted my perception of climate change from a singular global crisis to a network of entangled relations. Her insistence on “staying with the trouble” suggests that environmental issues cannot be resolved through clean narratives of responsibility or technological optimism. This directly informed how I interpreted the UAL Net Zero plan. When carbon emissions are presented as individual behavioural choices, institutional structures become invisible. Through collaborative discussion, I began to understand student air movement not simply as personal travel but as a condition produced by international education systems, visa policies, and academic networks. Rather than illustrating catastrophe, the work attempts to situate viewers within a shared yet uneven system. Haraway encouraged me to avoid moralising imagery and instead design for situated awareness. The project therefore operates less as environmental persuasion and more as an invitation to recognise how environmental responsibility is distributed across institutions, infrastructures, and individuals.


      Parsons, D. (2022) ‘The Plastocene – Plastic in the Sedimentary Record’. (Public lecture and research publications).

      Parsons’ discussion of anthropogenic sediments provided the conceptual foundation for translating carbon emissions into geological strata. Learning that human-made materials are preserved in sedimentary layers, and can be used for dating, from glass bottles to World War II debris, reframed data visualisation for me. Emissions no longer appeared as abstract statistics but as material traces with temporal duration. This allowed me to position flights not as isolated journeys but as deposits within a planetary archive. I therefore chose black-and-white sediment drawings, using pencil (coal) as both medium and reference, so the images function simultaneously as data representation and landscape. The work shifts attention from immediacy to accumulation: climate impact is read as consequence over time rather than a single moment of action. This also complicates accountability. No single layer belongs to one individual, yet layers are unevenly produced. Parsons’ research helped me understand how Net Zero frameworks risk framing emissions as individual behaviour, while the sedimentary model instead reveals climate change as a systemic condition distributed across infrastructures, institutions, and mobility patterns.

      • Design Practices/Project

      Templo (2021) United Nations Climate Communication Collaborations.

      Templo’s collaboration with the United Nations influenced how I approached entry points into complex climate data. In their project, the designers intentionally “flipped the data on its head” to create an immediate visual access point for a broad audience. Rather than presenting separate disasters as isolated incidents, they produced monochromatic 3D renderings that were collided and layered to reveal shared topologies, underlying structural causes such as infrastructure neglect or profit prioritisation. The images did not simply illustrate findings; they reorganised how relationships between events could be read. This approach directly informed our movement pack and ticket system. Instead of explaining emissions through a single infographic, we as a team designed multiple documents that must be compared and handled. Meaning only emerges through relational reading. Like Templo’s visual collisions, the tickets do not identify one responsible figure but expose connections between institutional movement, education structures, and carbon production. This shifted my understanding of accessibility as a visual facilitator: clarity does not necessarily come from simplification but from providing a legible entry point that enables audiences to recognise systemic patterns rather than individual blame.


      Tapper, T. (2022) ‘Creativity isn’t carbon neutral: How complicit are agencies in the climate crisis?’, It’s Nice That, 8 November.

      Tapper’s concept of the creative industry’s “brainprint” challenged my initial approach to visualising carbon emissions. He argues that design should not be evaluated only through its material carbon footprint, but through its capacity to influence behaviour. Advertising and visual communication shape desire, and therefore indirectly produce environmental impact by encouraging high-carbon activities such as travel and consumption. This shifted my understanding of responsibility within the UAL Net Zero context. Our project initially risked presenting student flights as individual behavioural choices. However, Tapper’s argument suggests that mobility is not purely infrastructural but culturally constructed through institutional messaging, aspiration, and educational systems. As a result, our work avoids assigning blame to individual students and instead reveals the system that organises movement. The ticket and movement pack function as administrative documents that expose student air travel as a designed condition rather than a personal decision. This reframed our practice: discussing carbon emissions is not neutral, and depending on how data is interpreted and communicated, design itself can participate in either reinforcing or questioning environmentally damaging behaviours.

    3. 12. Three Recipes, Three Cakes

      While considering different ways to visualise p5.js as an emergent system (for example, a football match or a kitchen), I started to think about recipes.

      Coding environments are built on accumulated patterns—reusable solutions that make certain actions easier, faster, and more “proper.” p5.js sits on top of these inherited conventions.

      My practice moves between:

      • following these patterns,
      • breaking them,
      • and sometimes using them backwards.

      This is an adhocist approach: I don’t invent new systems from scratch, but reconfigure existing ones through situated use.

      A recipe felt like the perfect metaphor, because a recipe is not an image of the outcome, but a set of conditions under which an outcome may appear.

      At this point, I realised something important was missing.

      I had already explored the two extremes of the spectrum: the most human-centric method, through manual ASCII typing, and the most automated method, through machine-led processing. But I hadn’t yet tried what could be considered the “proper” or canonical way of coding.

      So I deliberately shifted my approach. I began working through p5.js in a more conventional way: using functions, parameters, structure, and modular logic.

      To do this, I went through many tutorials, documentation, and other people’s code, adapting and modifying them rather than copying them directly, in order to build my own set of instructions.

      Through repeated modification and refinement, this process resulted in my first canonical coded cake. I decided to develop cake as it had quite clear stacking and decorating procedure.

      Once this middle position became clear, I realised I was no longer working with isolated experiments, but with a spectrum of instruction.

      And it was at this moment that I decided to make that spectrum visible— So I decided to present the same cake as three different recipes, each corresponding to a different distribution of instruction and authorship.


      The first recipe is a manual ASCII version, presented as a handwritten notebook, similar to a grandmother’s recipe journal.

      I grabbed an old paper from the recycle exchange downstairs and started to translate my cake image into hand written ascii art.

      Here, every character is placed through human judgement, time, and attention.

      All the computational thinking happens in my head. p5.js is treated merely as a digital canvas.

      The process is:

      • linear,
      • labour-intensive,
      • and deeply personal.

      This is authorship through human persistence—designing a form through sheer manual control.


      The second recipe is the most “proper” coding method, presented as a palm-sized accordion book.

      I started by coding the recipe and made the prototype.

      When the accordion book is expanded, it reveals the full p5.js recipe: code, functions, comments, and logic working together. Here, p5.js operates as a living organism, very much in line with the Conditional Design Manifesto.

      When the book is unfolded, we see the long process. When folded, we see the finished cake. This physically demonstrates the idea that “process produces formations rather than forms.”

      Even ASCII art becomes drawing material inside the code editor itself, and error behaviour becomes an ingredient: when “#” turns red, it becomes a strawberry.

      I also include failed recipes not as mistakes, but as moments where the system reveals its limits and assumptions. Functions and transforms act as kitchen equipment, shaping how the recipe runs.


      The final recipe is a single, minimalist recipe card.

      This represents the most automated method.

      Here, I upload the cake image back into p5.js and translate its pixel data into a set of rules. The instructions are extremely short, but they trigger a complex automated process.

      In this version, authorship is at its most detached.

      My role becomes that of a system architect: I provide a seed and step back, allowing the machine to execute the translation. Meaning shifts from argument to instruction, and authorship moves from decision-making to delegation.


      Ultimately, this project demonstrates that p5.js is not just an image generator, but a translation system where time, logic, and the surrender of control converge.

      If traditional design is sculpture, directly carving an outcome,
      then my role is closer to gardening.

      I design soil, light, water, and seeds, and allow forms to emerge beyond my control.

      The value of this work lies not in the final cake or image, but in the rigorous exploration of how meaning, authorship, and instruction shift across different systems of making.

    4. 11. What is Coding?

      Up to this point, I had used two distinct methods:

      1. Manual ASCII input:
      2. Automated image-to-ASCII processing

      Last week’s feedback suggested that 1. Manual ASCII does not count as “coding,” which led me to examine the definition of coding more closely.

      Coding can be understood as instructing a computer what to do through a formalised language that it can interpret. From this perspective, coding is not defined by efficiency or automation, but by the act of instruction itself.

      I realised that within what we call “coding,” there exists a wide spectrum:

      From the most human-centric method, where everything is typed manually, to the most machine-driven method, where uploaded images are automatically translated through code.

      From this perspective, coding is not defined by efficiency or automation, but by the act of instruction itself.

      Both manual input and automated processes are forms of coding, but they exist at different positions on the same spectrum of instruction: In manual ASCII input, the computational thinking happens primarily in my head, and the code functions as a recording of those decisions. In automated processes, the same thinking is delegated to p5.js, where the system executes those decisions algorithmically.

      This led me to reconsider p5.js not simply as an image-making tool, but as a system in which instructions can be distributed in different ways.

      I began to ask:

      What happens if I deliberately explore different distributions of instruction within p5.js while producing the same image?

      So I made a fixed condition for my Method (Fixed Parameters), generating the same cow ascii images using P5.js and the output will be the code, console and the final preview image.

      As I moved between these methods, a question started to emerge:

      Is authorship located in the final image, or in the way instructions are distributed?

      I noticed that I could arrive at the same visual outcome again and again, but through very different paths and processes.

      Each method implied a different way of thinking, a different epistemology, and a different relationship between me and the machine.

      This is where I began to treat coding not simply as a way to produce images, but as a way to think about authorship itself.

      Through iteration, I started to deliberately subvert the original purpose of p5.js. Instead of using it purely as an image-making tool, I shifted the focus toward how images come into being.

      I no longer positioned myself as a “user” of the software, but as someone who designs the conditions under which things appear.

        In this sense, my role shifted from illustrator to system architect.