why must i?

my poster for the upcoming Graduate Research Weekend.

no, i am not getting cold feet at the thought of having to defend my ideas whilst being shot at by a panel of strangers. they claim to be masters in their field, but they have not been following my progress/process. they don't even know me! like how we (me and fellow coursemates) like to put it, it's like monsters taking ruthless stabs at the beginning-to-emerge concepts we have been nursing during the months of development/gestation.

of late, thoughts of postgrad research being an over-hyped activity have been loitering in the voids of my mind - void because i can't think of anything else when i think of presenting my work to a panel in order for it to be shot down, in front of a public audience. why is design/architecture one of the few non-examinable areas where the accepted way of assessing the work is to 'test' it through performance? what is it in the practical aspects of design that makes me keep going back to the torture that is a 'critique session'? i thought i'd had enough of such abuse when i brought home my 1:100 model of a train station at the end of the honours programme...

i do not articulate myself clearly on paper, neither do i think well on my feet. i rue the day a decision was made to return to an academic, over-theorizing, justified-by-precedents way of life. and it seemed like such a good idea at that time, too.