Holographic Reconstruction of Objects in a Mixed-Reality, Post-Truth Era: A Personal Essay
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
These interesting and engaging works of art presented by the author are not fully supported by this essay in its current form. The premise and essay question needs to be reconsidered to strengthen the narrative. This essay needs a structural edit in order to allow the ideas to transition more meaningfully from one paragraph to the next. Some of the ideas and quotes are awkwardly introduced, and concepts need to be fleshed out a bit more for clarity.
The overall premise of the essay as described in the abstract (1-5) is that, 'Sculptural objects and their holographic counterparts, when placed together in a constructed mixed-reality environment, exhibit a sense of ambiguity as neither the material nor the virtual objects maintain a clear integrity of form and identity.' I am not satisfied that this essay addresses nor answers this premise in any meaningful way.
Instead, I think this essay needs to be re-written to plainly focus on the author's own practice, so as to enable them to contextualise their work and their use of holography. I like the author’s personal journey to consider the use of holography, and the political underpinning of the work. However it requires further critical visual analysis of each works to enable the reader to understand how the works of art were resolved with the use of holography.
This essay also requires a more in-depth examination of artists who use holography so the author can position their work in this field. The mention of Paula Dawson is far too brief and does not give a visual analysis of her work, and assumes that the readers have prior knowledge. There is not an accurate reference to Louise Bourgeois hologram work is that the author is referring to (133-145) and does not even describe what the subject matter is in the work. A missed opportunity to analyse and compare Dawson and Bourgeois's use of domestic symbolism and psychological imagery. How does the author/artist’s work resonate with or build upon these examples?
The artist/author should avoid justifying themselves with the use of self-reflective criticism as it comes across as a negative, rejected voice of an outsider. eg (205-207) "Because I work as an independent artist, I have found it necessary to be my own critic, and after years of making art I can usually recognise deficiencies in my technique or acknowledge when an attempt is derivative, or content forced, two of the criteria I use for evaluating any work as art." Instead the author needs to use persuasive and positive language to engage the reader and support the reason why their work should be considered interesting.
I don't agree with the author's statement (196-197) that art-holography is not accepted or lacks content, and in any case this statement has not been substantiated by the author with direct research. This statement further undermines the very premise of the essay.
I hope that the author will re-structure and re-write this essay so that their work can be better understood as important contributions to this interesting field.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
An enjoyable paper on an under-used artistic technique. It is interesting and valuable to see somebody engaging with the ephemeral nature of holograms on a symbolic level, and there is clear understanding displayed in the work of the tensions between real and holographic. The range of historical inspirations for the works is eclectic and in some ways at odds with the 'futuristic' medium, which helps to free the works from the unhelpful 'sci-fi' associations often associated with holography.
In terms of improvements, I would suggest a short history of the practice to set the scene and a few more examples of artists working in this medium for those that are interested in exploring further (perhaps Mitamura Shunsuke who has recently been awarded a special achievement prize at the 22nd Japan media arts festival). I would like to know more about the process of how the hologram is made. There are a few simple typos that should be fixed (e.g. in the abstract, "examples from own works" is missing the "my").
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
This reads so much better! Great effort.
