By the time it came around for us to design our Korsakow project, I was thoroughly stumped regarding how I would organize my videos. One particular thing I had considered involved the tagging system and the number of possible videos each video should be able to link to. Out of the fifteen videos I had, if a video linked to very few options, the narrative would be restricted and linear, but if the video linked to a little too many options, it wouldn’t be much of a narrative. It would be closer to a database mode of information communication (4) and more like a dice roll or Gashapon (5). I generally found that with the preset three options, by designing each video to have at least one way of linking to other videos in the week and have the other one or two (depending on the number of videos made that week, whether the videos have been previously seen by a user, and computer randomization) use very generic keywords that could connect to a majority of the videos, there was a pleasant ability for the linked options to be suitably random, though I personally didn’t find much of a narrative formed. Thus, I could have possibly improved on this by having more types of keywords, so that single keywords wouldn’t link to ten, out of of fifteen, other videos.
Regarding my use of accompanying text, I was rather unconcerned over what was said, so just wrote what immediately came to mind. However, I noticed that I generally talked about my opinions regarding conceptualizing or making the film, or about trying out something new. Thus, I feel that my K-film might have an unintended purpose as a documentation of my experimentation with style. I suppose I should be hardly surprised, considering I had a rather ambitious goal for this K-film that by the time I sat down to link it all up, I had already gone through the videos all over again to consider how I was going to link them. Watching each video, made me think about my production processes throughout the past six weeks, so when forced to write something, I wrote about the production of the videos.
In conclusion, I feel that I failed to make what I originally intended. I failed the moment I could not continue my thematic style from Week One and Two. I was wrong to think that making each video a good standalone video with a thematic or stylistic link to the other videos would be enough. I think that for a good K-film to have a narrative, yet have one that is dynamic, the film must be seen as a whole from the get go. Thematic and stylistic links are not enough for meaning to be derived because users are naturally inclined to assume that if a text follows another, there must be actual meaning (6) and information to be read in the presence of one after another.
1)Communitychannel on Youtube, a popular Youtube comedian from Australia
2)’I hate grocery stores’, 2008, Communitychannel, a comic made using stick figure drawings
3)Walfas story maker, a flash program that is used to create scenes using preset visual options
4)Yellowlees, Douglas J. The end of books or books without end? : reading interactive narratives, (p. 27-36, 67-73, 83-88). Ann Arbor, Mich. : University of Michigan Press ; Wantage : University Presses Marketing, 1999
5)Coin operated vending machines that dispense ‘capsule toys’ randomly from a large container of similar looking capsules, each containing a different toy
6)Packer, Randall and Jordan, Ken. (eds.). Multimedia: from Wagner to virtual reality, (p. 275-278). New York: Norton, 2001.