The Aftermath of the Conference

I think that these past few weeks show how unanticipated circumstances can arise. I did not anticipate being sick and I realize that research is nearly impossible when you aren’t taking care of yourself.

When I was first putting together my PowerPoint for the Student Research Conference, I was conflicted with how much information my audience really needed (so that I am using an optimal amount of time). My style typically consists of the use of image more than the use of text. I find that the audience can easily get distracted if there are too many words on a screen. I decided that I would attempt to give some foundation to Frankenstein, being the first presenter on that panel so that it would give some leeway to others. Due to our Works in Progress submissions turning into platform presentations, some of the audience members believed that our research was complete. One takeaway is that while I may not be able to control my audience, this is simply something that I will have to get used to, even if members of the audience visibly show a disinterest. By allowing it to affect my presentation, I felt distracted and started to ramble even though I had notes on hand.

As an audience member, I also saw the importance of keeping the presenter on track. It is important to try to ask questions that are relevant to the presenter, and not meant to discourage or deter the student from academic research. I appreciated the guiding questions from my colleagues and professors because it helped me better understand the focus as well as the significance of my research. While I initially did not intend on submitting to the student research conference this semester, I am glad that we were encouraged to feel that our research, particularly in the humanities, is notable. In my past experience with the conference, I always felt as though the sciences were more celebrated by students and professors. However, I felt that the organizers or board members were more thoughtful in putting together a conference of mixed fields and areas of studies.

After presenting, I realized that I didn’t need to include Clerval in my analysis. In fact, it served me no purpose in the direction I am headed in my analysis of Victor Frankenstein and the creature. Discussion of the texts that both characters approach is necessary in my analysis and deserves more attention to fully grasp a post-colonial analysis. I feel more confident in my ability to expand on the development of the creature and how language and culture is tied to his power over Victor (445).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *