While finalizing my research and creating the art piece for the festival, I had a significant realization: my main critique is about how things are designed for the few, yet the engaging aspect of my project is only accessible to people who can see. Once again, I find myself unintentionally excluding others through my design decisions, contradicting my own critique.

For example, my use of ableist language, such as referencing “visibility” and “invisibility” in a project centered on sight, revealed another layer of my biases. While this aligns with my theme of “making the invisible visible,” it also underscores the need to consider inclusivity, something I now wish I had addressed earlier.

This is not only for my own project but for art in general.

When I shared this with Zuleika, she suggested exploring ways to improve accessibility, such as adding audio descriptions or image captions. However, given my limited time and budget, I understand these solutions may only be partial. Still, it’s important to acknowledge this in both my final reflective report and here on the blog.

This realization has reminded me that research—and life in general—is full of contradictions. Recognizing them is part of the process, and all we can do is strive to learn and do better.