Designing this artifact took a lot of hard work and planning. I wanted the whole thing to be cohesive and make sense in the order that it is opened. It took a lot of research and changing my information for my to be happy with the outcome. I enjoyed working with the larger scale because I like finding connections in information, and having ample space to convey those connections was a good change.
Working with the appeals expanded my approach because it forced me to look at the problem three different ways. Pathos was the hardest for me to grasp because we don’t have much practice in making our audiences feel something. It forced me to find information I wouldn’t have normally looked for otherwise. Use of imagery became more important as well, and finding the right imagery was difficult at times.
The use of tropes actually helped me a lot in my search for images. I was stressed at first in finding images to show everything that I was talking about, but the tropes allowed me to narrow my search. There were so many possibilities that it was overwhelming, and the tropes let me narrow my search in a more productive way.
Cover Panel: Metonymy with the smoke
Panel 1: Amplification by showing the many examples of materials used and different variations of hookah made throughout the centuries. Also synecdoche because I only showed one example per material, when I could have easily used five to show every variation.
Panel 2: Amplification by showing multiple examples of games, smells and tastes found at a hookah bar. Also synecdoche by showing only three people in a hookah bar setting instead of revealing the entire picture and setting. I did the same with the two smaller pictures on the side. The hoses coming from the upper corner could also be an example of synecdoche because they’re implying hookah, not just the hose.
Panel 3: This panel has no photographs but it does have the giant map. There’s amplification present here because I show multiple examples to illustrate the spread of hookah and also to show how the name has changed and adapted over time as well.
Thinking about an audience helped me in the beginning and then became confusing towards the end. At first I wanted it to be for people who smoked hookah regularly but didn’t know much about where it comes from or the culture behind it. This is why I was originally thinking of naming my map “The Savvy Smoker”, because those who read it would be hookah smokers just learning more about their practice. As my content developed, I realized my information didn’t have to be for just smokers. So I changed my audience to people who are aware of hookah, whether having tried it or not, who just want to know what the big deal is about. The atmosphere and attitude surrounding the hookah has created quite a “buzz” lately as it grows in popularity in Western cultures as well as Japan and South America. My booklet was therefore made to inform any audience interested in the backstory behind all this “buzz”.
I liked the idea that this artifact could be held at a personal level. When making posters, things have to be relatively big and capture attention immediately. The knowledge map had to attract attention, but once it was captured, the reader was sure to look through all three panels. There could be very detailed information and delicate work, where as on a poster it could go unnoticed or under appreciated. On this artifact, everything had an equal chance of being read or looked at.
I didn’t use any assets from my video project except for my main idea and the concept behind my pathos page (2nd panel). I tried to use stills from my video, but everything was pretty smoky and blurry from my constant camera movement.
What frustrated me the most was the pathos panel. It probably didn’t help that it was on the second panel either. Working with the weird folds and split down the middle was a challenge. But trying to convey a feeling to my audience was difficult for me.
I knew how to do everything that I needed to do. I’m not very good with Illustrator but I’m not sure that I exactly needed it for this project.
Next time I would have actually done a little less planning and just jump into working. Sketching out all the proposed layouts might have been useful to others but it didn’t help me at all because my content ultimately decided what the layout was going to be. I would probably do a little bit more planing content-wise though, because I kept changing what I was going to do. Overall though, I think that’s just part of the process and my content would have changed anyways no matter how much I thought about it previously. I also should have done more test prints on the plotter to make sure my oranges came out in the proper colors.
The process crits were very helpful to me because it allowed me to be totally honest with people and vise versa. This was a very productive way to talk about our work. The only downside of it would be the inability to bounce ideas back and forth other people during a discussion. There are some ideas you think of only while someone else is talking about your work. While I did enjoy being able to look at the other class’s pieces and write what I thought, I would have preferred an out-loud crit with our class. I enjoy hearing the whole class talk about a piece and hearing what the professors/TA’s have to say about something. It would have allowed us to speak up for our pieces if there was any confusion or maybe to further explain our ideas to the class.