Anonymous
General Note:
[…] Ellipses Journal for Creative Research endeavours to make bare the process of research and development in creative and artistic research. This is for readers / viewers an opportunity and mechanism to see the types of academic critique engaged with creative research and to make visible the responses and development.
The following peer review was produced blind and in process, the artist / author has subsequently been given the opportunity to respond and develop both the theoretical and interactive parts of the article before publication. What you see published has been edited post this review.
Peer Review 1: DigiCleanse (2020)
Reviewer: Anonymous
Which aspects of the submission are of interest / relevance and why?
I really like the concept of the shop digital cleanse expresses here, and it is really fitting of the time where a lot of wellness and wellbeing as been turn into products under a capitalist framework. The project offers and interesting critique of the wellness industry, as well as a reflection on our mode of digital consumption and what it means to live in a world to is constantly connected.
How are the artistic and research outcomes represented?
Since the website in itself is a “spoof” of a shop, there is little in terms of explainer of research methods. I think the submission offers an interesting critique of our current digital environment and the wellness discourse, however I do not find in the submission a explainer of the artistic approach. I could be interestingto read, though not entirely necessary. The submission is not something that is original in itself, plenty of digital creators have used the form of a “fake” website before to contribute to discourse and/or research. This project however contributes to expanding the discourse and critique on the subjects mentioned above. The approach and the methodology is relatively effective, though I think I would have like to see the medium pushed further, a bit like it would make fun of “goop” (http://goop.com) . Although the website is simple and effective, it could benefit from taking a form that is more in line with actual “wellness shops” in its visual construction.
How well does the design support the submission?
Although the website is simple and effective, it could benefit from taking a form that is more in line with actual “wellness shops” in its visual construction.
Are there any ethical or legal concerns?
I have no ethical concern. Event though there is a “checkout” option when you add items to the cart, it does not ask you to provide payment. The “terms and conditions” are well defined, but who reads the terms and conditions, except this reviewer?
Conclusions and and pre publication revision:
The website does not read well under Firefox (there is issues with the font showing properly), I had to open it in an other browser. If time permitted I would put more an accent on aligning the design with other sites (legitimate ones) who are selling wellness. The current design is a bit cold, and could be reworked. I am wondering however if this fits with the theme of the issue which is Johannesburg last. I struggle a bit in finding clear links with this project and an experience that is typically from Johannesburg. This project is really a critique of digital spaces which could be applied almost anywhere really.
