Week 2 - Tapping in
Re-evaluating our approach to the brief again, Izzy and I considered how we might subdivide aesthetic experience into categories. Instead of outright choosing an aesthetic, such as “the light filtering through leaves of a tree”, we thought to explore a subgroup of experience, such as “the first time you realised you like something you used to dislike”, etc.
We again conducted 5 interviews with individuals, asking them 3 questions about such memories, observing which senses they bring up. We also asked them to rank their mood between each section.
Several issues arose from this method. Firstly, prompting participants to rate their mood was leading, and most participants reported mood improvement, possibly due to participant bias. Secondly, although the memories often engaged the senses, they didn’t offer a clear common thread to guide our design moving forward.
Lost again, Izzy had a casual conversation with our coursemates Emilia and Aslı. The topic of “Tube Crush” came up - noticing an attractive person whilst on the London Underground. Seeing how enthusiastically people discussed crushes, we realised this could be a rich aesthetic experience that is worth exploring, and connected to brain activity. Neurochemicals such as oxytocin, dopamine, endorphin and serotonin are often released when you’re happy or in love (Breuning, 2015).
↑ Summary and notes from our first round of Directed Storytelling asking people about a type of aesthetic experience.
We conducted another round of Directed Storytelling, this time asking participants who experienced a “Tube Crush” to recount their experience with as much detail as possible. Their rich responses revealed clear insights:
The unexpected moment was stark against the monotone commute experience.
It was fleeting yet memorable.
Recounting those memories brought back the emotions (participants smiled, blushed and giggled)
Izzy and I were joined by Sarthak, Sakshi and Dylan moving forward. Their original direction revolved around music, so we included questions about this during the interview, which again was slightly leading. Having said that, two of the four participants brought up the topic unprompted, suggesting this is a topic possible to explore.
💡 Reflection: The memories and feelings discussed in both topics this week are personal and subjective. One participant was emotive and illustrative in their depiction of the events where another was more reserved and stoic. D’Ignazio and Klein (2020) argued that data is never devoid of feelings. Rather than attempting to achieve objectivity and neutrality, we can embrace emotional knowledge and lean into data visceralisation, turning the various expressions of emotions into the story itself. Le Guin’s Carrier Bag Theory (1986) also came to mind, as she encourages us to recentre stories away from heroes and allow for the subtle, non-linear arcs to take centre stage.
↑ Conducting four Directed Storytelling interviews (due to convenience sampling, three of the interviewees were our coursemates, but all were chosen because they mentioned experiencing a “Tube Crush” prior).
References:
Breuning, L. G. (2015). Habits of a happy brain: retrain your brain to boost your serotonin, dopamine, oxytocin, & endorphin levels. Simon and Schuster.
D’Ignazio, C. and Klein, L. (2020) '3. On Rational, Scientific, Objective Viewpoints from Mythical, Imaginary, Impossible Standpoints', in Data Feminism. Available at: https://data-feminism.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/5evfe9yd (accessed: June 10, 2025).
Le Guin, U. (1986). The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction. Available at: https://otherfutures.nl/uploads/documents/le-guin-the-carrier-bag-theory-of-fiction.pdf