FINAL: Project Development Body Storming

Notes from Charm

Italics – Actions

Bold – What is said by the tester

  • – Tie hair up — instructions said to have the collar touch the neck
  • – Wear jacket
  • – Picks up phone
  • – Scrolling
  • – Click new tweet
  • – Typing: Hello, I am in class
  • – A tweet appears, oh, its a tweet she didn’t type – unsure if that’s her tweet
  • – Sends tweet 
  • – Brr.. it’s getting colder
  • – Click new tweet
  • – Still cold 
  • – Very distracting – cold while tweeting
  • – Types I am getting colder, takes a selfie
  • – Send tweet – again a tweet that she didn’t type
  • – Getting colder
  • – Weird to have sensations on neck
  • – Existing tweet confused Gwen 
  • – Clear what the feedback is
  • – ‘Colder’ associated with tweeting –> social commentary is clear
  • – Instructions to tweet more than once –> but actual, might not tweet more than once / might not WANT to tweet more than once 
  • – From observers:
  • – Cold – Use something else to present the coldness – e.g mini fan etc
  • – Can the participants tweet anything? Any forms of tweet?
  • – When using Twitter to Arduino – use MOCK account tweet and ONLY tweets from that account will work

Our project

We wanted to stimulate the feeling of loneliness offline when someone is connected online through a physical manifestation of loneliness. Hence, when the participant tweets, the cooling pad on his/her neck will turn cold.

Plan for Body-Storming in class

We drew out the things we needed to prepare for the body-storming session and cut out and prepared the materials for the body-storming based on this plan.

We cut out cardboard “cooling pads” and cardboard phone screens to simulate the tweeting process and the process of the temperature drop.

We cut out small pieces of cardboard and stuck on the collar of a jacket to simulate where the cooling pad will be.

We also prepared a cardboard phone and different phone screens to simulate the participant’s tweeting during the body-storming process.

During the body storming process, we then changed the cardboard according to the situation.

Video of Body-Storming Session


1. What did you learn from the process?


The body storming process allowed us to observe the possible interactions others will have with our project and the interaction helped to point out possible challenges and possible unclear points in terms of the presentation of our installation. When we were doing the body storming, we used pre cut cardboard to signify the phone screen and wrote pre made tweets on the cardboard. Hence, the tester of our installation was confused when using the cardboard phone to tweet as tweets that “she did not type” appeared, but this would be solved when the actual twitter interface is used.

Also, we wanted to try out which part would be the best to have to place the cooling pads (Peltier Module), and tried to put the cardboard mock ups at the neck area of the jacket. The feedback given was that she felt “weird to have sensations on her neck” and hence we decided to fix the location of the cooling pad on the neck area.

For our installation, the more the user tweet, the colder he/she will get. The feedback given was that there were no specific instructions and hence the user may not continue tweeting or may not want to continue tweeting due to the cold. Hence, this is a problem that we have to try to solve for our final project presentation.


I learnt that having the installation out of context (if we displayed it just on the classroom table) might not have that much of an impact as compared to building a mini “set”. I also feel that we might need to have an instructing voice behind the exhibition (the voice of social media itself) to keep the participant engaged.

2. What surprised you while going through the process?


Our project was pretty straightforward and the cause and effect was clear, and hence the participant was not confused other than the tweeting part. The process was pretty smooth sailing and clear for the participant (“clear what the feedback is”), so what was surprising for me was only the part where the pre-written tweets confused the participant as we did not intent the tweets to affect anything and didn’t think that the tweets will affect the interaction.


That the participant can “hack” the project by refusing to continue tweeting.

3. How can you apply what you have discovered to the designing of you installation?


We could provide a better context (instead of just having only the phone and the jacket) and/or relay better instructions to the participant participating in our installation, for example, we can try to build a scenario where instructions can be better relayed and hence the user will then be able to be less confused and also ensure a smoother execution of our intention for this installation.

Based on some feedback on other groups too, I think our current installation is too straightforward and there is no clear reward/punishment system, i.e although there is a clear relationship between the tweet activity and the temperature on the jacket, there is no reward or punishment system or a proper ending to our installation and hence I think we can work on this area more and establish a better way to tie up our entire project/ better way to end the experience for the participant experiencing our installation.


Adding more context by placing the entire exhibition in a “situation” as well as adding instructions would be beneficial to the success of the project.

Micro Project 4: Disobedient Object


Micro-Assignment 4: Disobedient objects


Idea #1: Misbehaving spoon

Spoons are useful tools to aid us during meals, especially with liquid foods. This idea of a misbehaving spoon is to allow the spoon to do the exact opposite of what it’s supposed to do – to disallow its’ user to be able to feed themselves instead of aiding the user with the feeding process. For example, the user uses the spoon to scoop a spoon of hot soup and sends it to his/her mouth, but the spoon snaps downwards and spills the soup back into the bowl.

The idea was to create a spoon that snaps downwards when in contact with heated food such was soup. This would require the use of a thermo sensor (thermistor) that is attached to the end of the spoon and a motor at the handle that can allow the handle to snap downwards when the thermo sensor reads a value over a certain temperature.

This would be the most challenging to execute out of all 3 of our ideas.

Idea #2: Overweight chair

While chairs are made to hold people’s weights and allow users to sit comfortably on them, this idea of an overweight chair is made to annoy users and produce a sound when users sit on the chair. Based on the weight of the user, the chair will produce sounds of different frequency, the bigger the weight detected, the higher the sound frequency.

To do this, a pressure sensor must be attached to the seat of the chair and a speaker must be attached to the bottom of the chair/ an unseen part of the chair. The pressure sensor would then sense the amount of pressure on the seat (based on the user’s weight) and the speaker would make sounds of different frequencies respectively.

This is the easiest idea to execute out of all 3 of our ideas.

Idea #3: Mirror for the Narcissistic

The initial idea for this mirror was to tweak the original function of the mirror and make this disobedient mirror an annoying one. Hence, we wanted the mirror to sound when people go near it to look at themselves, making the mirror less of a functional item and more of a playful object.

We decided that a light sensor should be placed on top of the mirror so that the distance of the user to the mirror can be detected based on the amount of light near the sensor (i.e the nearer the user is to the sensor, the more the shadow there is casted on the sensor, and hence the light sensor can detect the proximity of the user based on the amount of light received. Thereafter, based on the amount of light detected, a speaker will then make sounds based on the amount of light received.

We decided to go ahead with this idea since it wasn’t too hard to execute but also was challenging for us. To add on to the challenge, we decided to add on a light at the top of the mirror to mimic a siren going off whenever someone approaches the mirror.

Video of Mirror in situ 🙂 


We are both really bad at coding, and hence we ran into many problems while trying to code. Initially, we found a code online that could allow a buzzer and light to go off when light is detected in the light sensor. Hence, we decided to use the code but tweak it a little so that we can achieve the same effect but with the opposite input – we were aiming to let the sound and light go off when light is reduced.

However, when coding and trying to tweak the code, we made many mistakes, such as forgetting to code Write/Print when we coded Read, and we also didn’t know how to configure the light settings and hence we were able to make the sound and light go off but we didn’t know how to stop the sound although we could make the speaker play different tones with different light intensities.

Hence, we requested help from a friend who had learnt arduino last semester, to help check what was wrong. He then explained the problems with our coding and what was missing, and taught us what other codes to input and how the codes work. We then re-coded with his guidance. For the blinking light, we just copied and added on the circuit to the speaker that we learnt from the first arduino lesson. Initially, we forgot to add the resistor to the circuit and busted a lightbulb haha. 🙁


  1. How does your hacked object behaves in a way you least expect it to? 


Mirrors are essential to our daily life. The moment we wake up, we find ourselves brushing our teeth in front of a mirror, putting on skin care products in front of a mirror, looking at ourselves through the mirror before we go out and so on. The mirror’s function is to allow the user to look at themselves and check how they look like.

Our hacked object aims to be “disobedient” by rejecting a user when the user wants to look at themselves. A mirror is not supposed to makes noises or have warning lights flashing in the user’s face and hence, when the mirror flashes a warning siren and produces loud sounds when a user wants to look at themselves, it is something that is least expected from a mirror.


It is a mirror that sends a sharp annoying noise when it is being looked into. The noise grows more annoying the closer you are to it.

2. What are some reactions you observed from your participants when they interacted with the object?

Reaction video 1

Reaction video 2

Reaction video 3


The participants that interacted with our object thinks that it is a very intuitive to just approach the mirror when they see one, and most of them would try to adjust the distance between themselves and the mirror where the light sensor is to see how far they can go before activating the alarm. Some of the participants also tried using their bodies and their hands to make the alarm sound.

All the participants used the object the way we wanted them to but only one managed to go close enough to realise that the amount of light received by the light sensor affects the pitch of the sound too. Most of the participants also moved away when the mirror sounded, which was something we wanted to achieve – for the disobedient object to deter the user from using the object for its origins function.

An interesting finding that we have not thought about during the process of this project was the combination of a light sensor to a mirror. A mirror reflects light and by putting the light sensor right above the mirror, the light received by the light sensor would not be accurate / same for every user. For example, during our presentation, the participants wearing white had a harder time using the shadows from their bodies to activate the alarm, whereas participants who wore black could activate the alarm from just simply approaching the object and not needing to even look into the mirror at themselves. This is due the the different amount of light the mirror reflects based on the colour of the participants’ shirts, and could be explored further.

One of our classmates posed a question to ask why we used a light sensor instead of a proximity sensor. While a proximity sensor would allow the mechanism to work the same way, but we would prefer to use a light sensor as the light sensor can be more sensitive and reactive. As observed from the interactions, the light sensor is very sensitive and would sound as soon as shadow is detected as shadow lowers the value of light detected by the sensor.


Some were very taken aback by the sudden ringing noise, and tried to look into the mirror at an angle where it will not beep. It was very entertaining to see some of the participants creep up to the mirror to try and avoid the sound. In another instance, when prof Lei came up to the mirror, it did not ring. There was a moment of confusion and jokes were passed around, the main reaction being amusement. I found it very funny as the sudden lack of response made it seem like the mirror was filtering who was passable or who failed the “mirror test”. We then realised it was because she was wearing white. We made Bai stand in front of the mirror to confirm our assumption and it was true. It then gave me an idea, if we were given a chance to further develop this idea, it would be fun to find a way to get a photocell sensor that could respond to coloured light and setting some colours to trigger the sound, and some not. It would leave participants wondering what exactly is the requirement to not get beeped.

3. What are the challenges involved and how did you overcome them? What problems still exist? How might you overcome them eventually? 


The challenges we faced were generally in terms of coding and in terms of connecting the circuit to our object. Initially, we found a code online that allows a buzzer and a light to go off with a light sensor, but what was different about the code compared to what we wanted was that the code we found allowed the light and buzzer to go off when a certain amount of light is detected. Hence, the code we found online created the opposite effect we wanted and as a result, we tried to follow the coding and reverse it so it would create the opposite effect.

However, the coding process was harder than we expected it to be, and with both of us not well versed with coding, we could make the speaker change tones with the different degree of light received but couldn’t seem to stop the speaker from making noises. We also realised that the only speaker we had, the Piezo speaker, is different from the buzzer that was used in the code online, and hence tried to tackle that problem too.

After some time, we decide to ask a friend who had learnt coding with Arduino to help us diagnose the problem with our code. While trying to inverse and modify the code online to fit our project, we have missed out important values and did not realise that we had to configure the amount light detected by the light sensor before the alarm goes off. We also coded to read the light values detected by the sensor but did not code ‘print’ below and hence, when we opened the window to view to values, all we saw was a blank screen.

Hence, with the friend’s guidance, we managed to learn how to get the values of the amount of light detected, used that to configure the value of the amount of light detected before the sound goes off, and also amend our code so that the speaker could work correctly.

For the light, we followed the circuit and codes taught in class and added it to the coding done for the speaker.

Physically, we needed to extend the light bulb and the light sensor to fix them to our mirror, but because we didn’t have the right materials for soldering, we tried to tape the wires together instead, and it took some time before we were able to properly connect the wires together.

A problem that still exists would be the problem of the light sensor. Due to its’ nature and the difference in lighting for different places, the object would require configuration every time it is shifted to a new location. A possible way to solve this would be to follow the participant’s suggestion and replace the light sensor with a proximity sensor, which does not require configuration with a change in location.

We referred to the lecture slides and coded our Arduino. However, the only set back was that it did the reverse. It made noise and only would stop when we covered the photocell pin. We then asked our friend from engineering to check what was wrong and rectified the code. In order for us to learn from our mistakes, we labeled the instructions of the code as well to help us familiarise ourselves with the instructions. The issue that we now face is the white reflecting light, resulting in the photocell pin reading to be above the limit we set. An easy way to solve this would be to place the sensor/mirror at neck level, so it captures the light being reflected above the neck. Hence, clothing colour would not be an issue.

Research Critique 3 – Critical Making

Critical Making is a term coined initially by Matt Ratto in 2008 and first used in 2009 to describe the combination of critical thinking and hands-on reading. It seeks to combine material engagements with technologies to make social statements, opening up and extending critical social reflection. It combines ‘critical thinking’ and ‘ making’, acting as a glue between the conceptual theory and physical hands-on work. Critical making also has similarities with the practice of critical design, in which both pushes users into more complex emotional and psychological territory by questioning social norms and stimulating discussion and criticism of design itself. Critical making is very focused on the process of making the art/object itself than being focused on the final product. It is process-oriented, scholarship-oriented and the final prototypes can speak for themselves.

The issues with standard methods of technological design now often produce standards and systems that lack cultural richness, emotion, and human-oriented values. Principles like efficiency and productivity are overemphasised by the industry, and this causes and contributes to a overworking, overproducing and over-consuming consumer-oriented culture.

Critical Making counters this by giving designers and the public a chance to break out of this cycle, step back and reconsider and rethink a broader spectrum of human experience. It can also help to highlight and bring attention to people, perspective and practices that are forgotten in conventional product development workflows, and consider what it means to be human. Critical making can help reintroduce criticality back into the post-2010 maker culture, so that it can un-sanitize, un-smooth and re-politise. At the same time, Critical Making can make actionable design strategies accessible to the public, interaction design community and translatable to the practices of technology designers. The public can also be more informed by perspectives in philosophy of technology as the prototypes produced materially articulate particular stances and ideas. They can operate as a type of boundary negotiating artefact or boundary object. All these helps increase public legibility. Moreover, materials speculations can mediate exchanges among scholars of different fields. Critically engaged artworks can do a detailed breakdown of a topic, but critically made objects and appeal to audience’s emotions and can get the message across clearly if through fully implemented.

Attached below is a video of a booklet made critically from a workshop led by Garnet Hertz.

79% Work Clock

Attached is my slides for the research done for Researcher of the Week. 🙂

DN1010 Researcher of the Week


Micro-project 3 – TOGETHER SPLIT


For Micro-Project 3, we experimented with the video call function on social media, in our case, instagram, to perform a piece. We crafted a storyline of 4 girls being trapped in a house after being kidnapped, and used the split screens to signify 4 different neighbouring rooms in the same house. We chose different spots in adm (in classrooms, outside along the corridor, in the toilet etc) while video calling, and even though we were in a different physical space, we played with the idea of the split screen on our phone screens to create another space (‘house’) that had many rooms and that we were in rooms only right next to one another.

Through this, we better understood the creation of a third space as well as the idea of Do-It-With-Others (DIWO). This project’s final product was only possible because our teams worked together for the final product through the use of social media tools.

Our group initially had a script we wanted to follow so that we were able to finish the narrative the way we wanted it to be. But as time passed and the number of failed attempts taken, we realised that it was faster and more efficient if we just improvised on our own, and hence we threw away the idea of following the script. Moreover, the order of the screens differ on each screen, and hence made it even harder for us to coordinate since we were at different physical space and needed to follow the order of the screens on the phone screen that was in charge of recording. The third space that we created was also easily disturbed by outside online platforms such as whatsapp, as shown below.

Out of the 3 Micro-projects,

      1. The project I felt that I had the most

creative control

     over was the second micro-project, crowd-soured art. This was because although my group’s project was based on the responses that were collected on instagram story’s poll function, the final art piece we envisioned to make was still based on us (the artists) and whether we choose to use the data as it is or tweak it to adhere to our ideas.
      2. The project with the most

unpredictable outcome

     would be the third project, the project above. We initially wanted to follow a script and had spent most of the time planning out our scenes, but yet when we were filming, nothing went out way and we ended up improvising everything.
      3. The project the best illustrates the concepts of

DIWO & Open Source 

    was the second project, which taps on the use of a public platform that the public has access to (albeit it being instagram – with the limitations being that only users with internet and an account with instagram will be able to access), and at the same time engaging with the public to influence our art.
    DIWO allows many more possibilities to art as compared to individual art/making and hence introduces many more ideas and creativeness into the art scene. Open source is inclusive given its public nature and allows active participation to the once passive audiences. Now, audiences can become co-creators, opening up new beginnings and new inspirations to the art scene.


What is the content of the work and who is creating it?

For this micro-assignment, my group has decided to use Instagram as a platform for crowd sourcing and the crowd-source community we are targeting are the followers on 2 of our members’ private Instagrams and the followers on one of our public art accounts on Instagram. We tagged on the poll function on Instagram story and drafted questions for our followers to answer and these questions start from general questions and slowly become increasingly more private and personal. At the end of the 5 questions, we prompted our followers to tell us a secret using the short answer function on Instagram story.


We wanted to test out the response level for each question, and observe to see whether the responses will differ across the different questions. The percentage bars that result from the polls can be then used to collage into an art piece. Each account’s responses are different, so each art piece generated from this questions from one Instagram account will differ from the other. This then requires our follower’s responses in order for us to rearrange the question bars and make such a collage, hence this project leverages on the Do-It-With Others (DIWO) concept.

There is, however, another ‘art’ we would like to bring out, which is the freewill to the right to their answer to such questions. Although there is a disclaimer at the start of questionnaire that the survey would be 100% anonymous, once the answer is submitted, the organise now has his/her own choice whether to keep the answers a secret or tell everybody about it. Hence, our group thinks that there is beauty in the transference of such rights and answers and also the physical manifestation of trust.

We also gave our followers choice to either answer all the questions, answer a few and skip those they do not want to answer, or not answer at all. As we have expected, the number of people who answered each progressive question got lesser and lesser. This brings out the social aspect of our artwork, where some topics are still taboo to some people in society.

Where does this work take place?

This work takes place on Instagram itself, an online social media platform. This means that this work takes place in a virtual online space, accessible only to those who has internet as well as an Instagram account. With this in consideration, we are aware that there will be certain groups not representation in this questionnaire because of certain ‘privedges’ that those who have access to the internet have.

How does this work involve social interaction?

This work involved social interaction as people react and interact with our Instagram stories to contribute to the percentage bars (Refer to pictures below) for each question.

This allows the interaction between the organiser and the participants, allowing the participants to join in and aid in creating the art piece alongside the artist.

How is your crowd-sourced project different from one that is created by a single artist/creator?

In an artwork presented and created by only one single artist/creator, the artist or creator himself/herself is the only person working on this object and hence all ideas for such piece will only be from the artist themselves. The final piece will only allow the audiences to be able to see the artist’s work.

However, crowd-sourced projects tags on the usage of public opinion and also ideas other people may have. This makes the artwork that is to be done a lot less predictable and the artist will then lose some of this control over the artwork itself.

Micro assignment 1: Creating the third space

For this project, we were told to photograph a place that held significant to us in ADM and hence I interpreted it as a place that means the most to me and my favourite places. Below are my photos for this project, posted on instagram.

Why did you choose this space or object to photograph?

I chose to photograph the sunken plaza in ADM as it held memories from orientation when I first started as a freshman, and the place that my orientation group bonded at reminds me of the apprehension, fear and excitement when I first joined the school. This place brings back nostalgia and also reminding me of why I chose to join ADM in the first place, helping me find myself in times of uncertainty.

By posting this online on our social media accounts and by tagging the hashtag in our posts, we have created another virtual space that allows like-minded people to communicate in such space.

What are some of the characteristics of this alternative virtual space you had created collectively?

By posting pictures of the places / objects that have significance to each and everyone of us on instagram, we create a virtual space online, we have created an inclusive space that allows us to share our own experiences as well as learn about others’.

This alternative virtual space is also a public space where any user, including users that do not own instagram accounts. By posting these pictures online, these pictures are released onto the internet, where access is granted to everybody who can access the internet. However, at the same time, the created space is also an exclusive space, one that is only accessible if the user knows the hashtag #1010adm. These 2 characteristics are hence somewhat paradoxical, making the space accessible to only an exclusive bunch of the public, if the public knows about the hashtag through a friend’s post or comment, or if the public accidentally stumble upon such hashtag.

Under what circumstance will this alternative virtual space change?

This alternative virtual space will change, when people change it. Since this space is created by people, the space is susceptible to change when people change the types of photos they post on this account, or change the people that know about this particular space. This virtual space is also bound to change if the system on instagram changes, such as when instagram changes its algorithm.

How does this project relate to what we discussed in the lecture regarding co-creation, the concept of Do-It-Yourself (DIY), Do-It-With-Others (DIWO)?

This project allowed us to build a virtual space on a social media platform, compiling all of our favourite and most meaningful places in our school. This virtual space is co-created by us, as this space can only exist if all of us contribute to the hashtag.

This project tags on the concept of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) in the sense that we partake in our own individual efforts to find places that hold meaning to us and to photograph these places, creating content for the hashtag. It is also DIY in the sense that we can interpret the given prompt anyway we want as individuals and create content based on our interpretations that may or may not differ from others sharing in the same virtual space.

At the same time, it also tags on the concept of Do-It-With-Others (DIWO) as the space was created on a social media platform. This allows our creations / posts to be seen by our followers and hence encourage discussion through the use of the comments section under each photo. This discussion will then generate more ideas and people with differing thoughts can interact and learn from one another.



“Don’t judge a book by its cover.” I’m sure we were all taught not to judge based on outer appearances since a young age, but yet sometimes I catch myself on the train or on the streets judging a person’s fashion sense and judging a person’s personality by their looks. This project attempts to amplify society’s views on individuals based on such appearances and acts as a social commentary towards society’s heavy emphasis and reliance on looks.

The class was told to write a one word impression for the rest of our classmates and no template or helping words were given. After collation, even without helping words or a template of words, everyone had at least 2 of the same word from the rest of the class, and the words written for each person were all similar (e.g funny, comical, goofy).

The number of times words were repeated could go from 2 times up to 6 times. This proves how strong impressions work and even though we might not really know a person fully, we still form impressions.

However, while some impressions of some people may be an accurate representation of themselves, most impressions don’t correspond to who we really are. Even if they do, these impressions don’t represent us fully. These impressions then become labels. Labels that society makes and covers up who we really are.

By compiling the most common words that appeared for each person and then compiling the words in an audio form, this project aims to let the audience experience the subtle day to day labels that’s been enforced on them, as well as to rediscover themselves and acts as a reminder that we are all more than what other people see us as.

This project will be presented in the form of an installation, where there will be booths for participants to take photos of themselves and type a description of themselves. These photographs will then be out up on the walls of the installation, and other people can enter to give an impression they have of everyone else. The most common words will then be compiled and the audio will then play.

Who – Any individual in society

What – The labels that society makes for each individual that hides the individuals true self

Where – In any social circle or space

Why – To encourage teh rediscovery of every individual and to remind the audience that they are more than just their labels

When – Whenever an individual feels jaded by society and society’s views of him/her, or when an individual is tired from society’s expectations of them

How – Through the use of audio, this projects aims to mimic society’s voices and simulate the audiences feeling against the words that they think society labelled them as.

There is the use of social interactivity, participant-centred interactivity and cognitive interactivity. The use of sounds engages the audience, as the audience is inclined to participate as they are able to relate to the subject presented. The social interactivity stems from the “grading of others by people”.


I once had a very close friend, but drifted from her because of miscommunication and many little things in between. It been around 2 to 3 years since we drifted, but yet I catch myself still thinking ‘what if….’. I then realised that, although we are not close anymore, the friendship has still changed me as a person and helped me grow a a person.

While looking back at the impacts my friends had on my life, I decided to explore how time facilitates change in people through relationships. Inspired by the ancient Egyptian paintings, I used a series of photos put into a single strip to signify the documentation of time as time progresses, a strip itself signifying a part of a person’s timeline. The 2 people starts on opposing ends, and I wanted them to start on opposing ends of the strips to portray that people ‘come from different walks of life’. In other words, I wanted to show that the people who enter our lives all had different lives from us until our timelines collided when we meet. The background of the strips are also empty, to represent our lives as blank pieces of paper, making the relationships we form the writers of our lives. The first strip represents us, and the second represents the people we meet.

By the usage of the photo strip, I wanted to manipulate time by hinting at the repetition of this particular part of our lives. I wanted the photo strip to constantly “replay”, signifying the constant repetition of us meeting new people, forming new relationships with people that impact our lives and hence resulting changes. The photo strip allowed the constantly looping of the sequence of photos, hence achieving the effect of our lives constantly on replay. The girl in the first strip enters from the left while the guy enters from the left, and when their timelines collide, they break away from repetition and start doing things that varied more in terms of movement and emotions. They start doing the same things in the same parts of their own timelines, but yet they only share a single moment together when their timelines align in the centre. This is to signify the weaving of other people’s timelines into ours when we from relationships.


Signifier – The repetition of the characters walking from opposing ends of the photostrips

Signified – The difference in starting point of every other life that enters our own


Signifier – The blank background of the photo strips

Signified – Our lives as blank pieces of paper and relationships as the writer


Signifier – The repetition of the characters at the start of the photo strips

Signified – The monotonous repetition of life before meeting others

UNTITLED 2: Road to happiness

“I want you to be happier, I want you to be happier…”

Inspired by the song ‘Happier’, a song my instructor chose to choreograph to, I started wondering what happiness really means to me. Personally, dance gives me a lot of happiness and hence I portrayed happiness through the mixing of sounds that we commonly hear in daily life into a danceable rhythm. The footsteps before the rhythm reflects the nervous footsteps before going on stage to perform (the apprehensive footsteps when we search for happiness), and the ending breaths signify the satisfaction and happiness of being able to complete a choreography on stage (the satisfaction of finding the small things that makes us happy). The roads in the photo turned and hence we are unable see where the road ends and where it leads to. This suggests that happiness is a journey and not a destination.

Another meaning I gave to the piece is our pursue for happiness in life. The footsteps at the front hints the limited time one has in life, the breath at the back hinting at a person’s last breath. The rhythmic part consists of sounds that signify the hospital’s heart rate machine (the beeping), the hospital’s operation equipment (the clinks) and sickness (the cough). The road in the photo is seemingly endless, leading to a destination we can’t see. This signifies the limited time we all have and while still on life’s journey, I want people to ponder whether they’re really happy in life or not.

Putting both layers of meaning together, I want to portray the common misconception of people trying to find happiness as a destination instead of a journey, and how people still have yet to find happiness till the end due to the misconception, as they don’t realise that the process of finding something that fills you and makes you happy can give you so much more.

I used asynchronous and diegetic sounds throughout this piece to further highlight that happiness already exists, but we cannot see it because we are so fixated at believing that happiness is a destination we can arrive at.

Signifier – Roads

Signified – Journey of life to happiness

Signifier – Footsteps

Signified – Time

Signifier – Breathing

Signified – People chasing happiness till their out of breath/ out of time

Ultimately, I want to bring out the fact that the road to happiness is actually as common as roads are, but yet we are so focused to find happiness we fail to realise that happiness is a journey and not a destination till the end, running out of time first before even we can find that happiness.