Post-Symposium Thoughts

Below is my evaluation following our research symposium on Friday. (My work leading up to this can be found under the 'Photography in Context' label.)

Delivering the talk - Photo by Craig Leaper

I feel that my presentation went well, and equally I think the symposium was an overall success – I certainly enjoyed both. Although the idea of delivering a presentation was immensely nerve-wracking and the relief felt afterwards was substantial, it does feel something of a shame now that it’s over. I am looking forward to having a digital version, which can be dispersed online to a potentially larger audience. I feel I have a reasonably strong ability at public speaking and providing an engaging talk, so when coupled with the slides, this online presentation could hopefully prove appealing.

I based several elements of my presentation on the lectures of Dr Sally Miller, of the University of Brighton. Aesthetically, I kept the slides clean and simple using a white background, black text, a comfortable font, and straightforward arrangement of content, so that the audience would not be distracted. I also took inspiration from her lectures regarding the structure of the talk: firstly a theoretical introduction highlighting the wider points of the topic and bringing them together to construct an argument; secondly a progression evidencing practitioners’ work to demonstrate that argument; and finally – concluding on a specific thematic point, which related back to the exampled work, and therefore provided an argument in a manner which could be readily absorbed by the audience. It was this aspect of Sally Miller’s lectures – being in depth but also easily understood – which I wished to emulate. Asking some of the listeners afterwards, it seems that this was achieved.

For me, there is a lot of importance placed on the verbal delivery of a presentation because it has a significant effect on keeping the attention of the audience. When producing the final text, I found it easiest to write as I would speak, so quite often not in proper or formal sentences and frequently using colloquialisms. Under the advice of Ed Dimsdale, I practised the talk about four times – not too much (so as to keep it sounding fresh) but enough to become familiar with it and remember parts so that I could break from my script and look at the audience. I very much believe that a talk should be spoken and not read.  

If any area of the symposium could have been improved, then I think it would have been the question sessions. This was something that I think everyone suffered from, and was probably due to an audience that was small, possibly nervous, and likely fatigued after an hour of listening. I had prepared and hoped for questions regarding the gender of self-mocking practitioners, or possibly on the ranging variations between performance and autobiography within self-portraiture. Having said that, I was quite pleased that a dialogue began around the elements of my practice which were related to this research, and furthermore how I could develop and present my own work. On reflection, this connection between my research and what I’m hoping to produce, has probably been one of the most beneficial outcomes of the module. I now have a solid contextual grounding which informs my own progressing work, and I also have a presentable piece of supporting research (and further background knowledge) which can assist the manner in which I convey my practice.

It is now clear in light of the above, that I have achieved that which I set out to: an investigation which informs and is informed by my practical work. I have learnt that to conduct such a study is hugely valuable to an emerging practitioner. Looking back to the proposal, the investigation became more specific with the theme of self-mockery taking precedent. This I think made the enquiry a more original piece. I have gained confidence in both undertaking and presenting research, a task which I would be happy to tackle again.