Reflection

At this midpoint of my PhD, I am able to reflect more clearly on the direction my research through practice is taking. My project investigates how analog and digital techniques can coexist within selfmade apparatuses and prototypes, that adopt the principles of critical making.

Through this approach, I have explored how the act of making itself becomes a form of inquiry. A way to think through materials, technologies, and the sometimes multiple contexts they inhabit. Tacit knowledge plays a central role in this process, as it is through experimenting that I navigate the intuitive and often unpredictable aspects of making. These unspoken understandings guide creative decision-making and problem-solving beyond what can be articulated in theory or instructions.

A large part of my research is situated withing self organised events and activities within communities of practice with a strong DIT (do it together) ethos, where usual divisions among designer, maker, composer and performer become blurred.

Through my practice based research so far, I have begun developing an ongoing media archaeology timeline: a living document that traces historical and conceptual connections between the history of game design, and interaction, and cinematic apparatus.

This timeline will continue to evolve over the next two years, serving as both a knowledge base and a reflective tool to situate my practical experiments within broader media-historical frameworks.

I have realised that this timeline can only be constructed over time, in parallel with my research project. Through creating prototypes, and expanding my own knowlegdebase, this timeline will build, change, adapt and expand, as part of the research.

The process has not been without challenges. One of the most significant lessons has been learning to break down complex processes into manageable parts, allowing multiple techniques and concepts to exist in parallel rather than in sequence. Balancing the practical, historical, and theoretical dimensions of the research has required constant adjustment and a willingness to “zoom out” to see the broader picture.

In the first half of my PhD, much of my time was devoted to developing prototypes, teaching, and organising events. While this teaching commitment limited the time available for studio work, it also grounded my research within the DIY/DIT community context that is central to my work, and that I have used in my teaching.

In my teaching weeks with students, we regularly worked collaboratively towards public presentations to create works that centralised experiment, working with unconventional materials and concepts, and using low-cost materials and techniques to push creativity.

Working within certain boundaries proved to be a productive constraint, as these limitations often sparked inventive solutions and encouraged us to explore creativity in more resourceful ways.

Last December, I organised an exhibition at KMD where I showed my own work alongside peers,

The aim here was to show works by creators who's output spans a spectrum of forms that finds its origin in repurposed hard- and software, where new technology and concepts were applied to existing or discarded technologies, often extending beyond the computer screen and grounded in hands-on experimentation and interaction.

Over time, and through conversations with my supervisor, it became apparent that this approach represents an important aspect of my methodology

As I move into the second half of my PhD, I aim to dedicate more time to developing and refining the prototypes and deepening the activities that have emerged from this process.

The direction of my research has developed in combines practice-based research in the form of developing works informed by media archaeology. For the remaining part of my PHD I aim to further develop the critical and material insights gained so far through continued making, reflection, and collaboration. And to see how more knowledge can be both added to and distilled from this timeline as a base for experimentation. Positioning media archaeology not as a standalone history but as a living and dynamic field that actively intertwines with the creation of new works, allowing historical processes and current practices to inform and transform one another.