Paper Prototyping:
Figure 3 -4 represents result of the paper prototyping we did in the class. I had very difficulty with this aspect of the project. First, as I am not crafty with using stationery and has no experience of using the method. Second, my data was a bit hard to represent. I was having issues with the representation politics of the participant’s stories. Even I organized them in my usual way, I had difficulty in seeing the simplified categories of each participant’s narrative. However, by design my project depended on the spatiality- the walking routes of each participant could be plotted without thinking about the representation issues. Then I had my participants as possible layers on my map. I tried to focus on these two aspects initially. Even in this basic set-up there were some problems: 1- there were two people using the same location –how can I differentiate between them? 2- there was only one Brooklyn entry, which is far from the rest in some scale- as I wanted outer visual layer of the map to convey some ideas. My initial solution was color-codingfor different people. After the route-person plotting, I think about the complexity of my map as formed of narratives. I thought about what could be my analysis method and I come up with the idea of using “discourse analysis” which had a different reflection at the actual map. As you can see, in figure 3, I envisioned little squares of discourses with color codes. When you click on “senses” in one person’s page it will link to other relative material and create a visual connection on the map. So the viewer would have different ways of navigating the map. This was before knowing the limitations and possibilities of the “urt”.