Colour Pop Cosmetics

I frequently visit the Colour Pop website but I have never truly paid attention to the lay out of the website and how the creators of the website used colors, typography, and shapes in order to capture my attention. Capture

When you first click on the website, you see the bright colors and different shapes that automatically attract you to the different areas of the page. Your eyes lead you from the top to the bottom in a matter of seconds because of the aesthetics of this webpage. You see the beautiful women who’s eyes lead you to different areas of the page. The fonts re not as bold as the colors which is good because they may throw the audience off and cause them to be unable to find a specific place to look at.


As you continue to scroll down t homepage, there is still a lot of white space but it is balanced out by the bold colors of the makeup products and models. There are many different areas that you are able to click on in order to direct you. The colors of the website also change with the seasons so if it is Christmas there is a more festive background and may cause the audience to be in a more festive mood and purchase more makeup. I do believe this is a strategic way of marketing that colour pop uses.

Capture 3

At the end of the homepage, you see more photos of models and regular people that may have tagged colour pop in their makeup inspirations. Your eyes also lead you to a search bar at the bottom of the page and ways to follow colour pop on other social media platforms. I love the website because of all the quality makeup for a cheap(er) prices. Go check it out.



Blog Post #7 Feedmusic

The website has a very interesting design that immediately grabbed me.

Screenshot (9)

You can’t tell in the background but the blue stuff in the background is constantly moving while on the website which I found very cool as the homepage for the site. There is also a cool quote to instantly drag you in and the text at the bottom left of the site gives you some necessary information about the site that can help someone if they are feeling overwhelmed by the initial graphics.

The navigation of the site is incredibly smooth, as in you can go to any of the pages on the site without having to load the website again. Each transition to another page on the site looks incredibly smooth as the next page glides on top of the current one.

One page in particular, the tech spotlight page, is the most impressive one. Screenshot (11)

As you scroll down the page, more information is added as the graphic to the right of the screen changes.

Screenshot (12)

The colors of the text and graphics also sync up in a very satisfying way.

Screenshot (13)

There is also a bar below the tech spotlight navigation button that fills up as you go further down the page which is pretty amazing.

The site is about technology, so it makes sense that the creators of the website would want the site to be as dazzling as possible and showcase the skill of the creator. It does this extremely well.

The text used in the website always fits well with the various amounts of colors that each part of the website use so willingly.

I really enjoy that the website is all there, you don’t have to load to another page and the transitions to other pages are smooth, but don’t take long either. I will try to make my own website as buttery smooth to navigate as this one if I can.


Unknowable Archiving

Derrida describes archives and the act of archiving as being a paradoxical experience. These paradoxes arise from the dichotomous nature of archives. Derrida says an archive is “at once institutive and conservative. Revolutionary and traditional.” The archive is a recording of information from the past, but this information can only become relevant to us in the future. We can only understand the meaning or the importance of the information that is being archived within the context of the future wherein the archived information will be accessed. This creates a difficulty in formulating a clear concept of what an archive is. In order to have a concept of an archive readily at our disposal the idea of the archive would have to be “archivable” itself, and even if it was, the concept would be fluid and ever changing as it would be viewed in the always different contexts of an unknowable future. Derrida summarizes this idea saying, “The archive: if we want to know what this will have meant, we will only know in the times to come.”

Advances in technology have radically altered both the amount of information that can be archived and the ease and efficiency through which this information can be accessed. Archiving is the creation of artificial memory to combat what Derrida argues is the brain’s natural tendency to be destructive towards its own memories. The advent of digital memory allowed people to begin to have access to an almost limitless amount of data at just the push of a button. This means that the practice archiving has become increasingly more frequent. Will we ever reach a point in technological advancement where all information received by the brain is immediately archived?

It seems obvious that this change in how archiving is conducted would congruently change the meaning of the archived information. Derrida argues this point saying, “Archivable meaning is also and in advance codetermined by the structure that archives. It begins with the printer.” The change in the meaning of different archived information when stored on a computer as compared to a traditional archival object like a book is distinct, but even among different digital archiving methods, there is a great disparity in the meaning of the archived content. A post that is archived identically on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, will have a different meaning on each one of these platforms because of the differing contexts.

Forgetting what we Archive

Forgetting things that we wish to remember is something that happens abundantly. At least, this sort of thing happens to me on a consistent basis, and it seems to fall in line with Derrida’s interpretation of what the archive does and is to us.

He leads us into the origins of the word “archive,” a word many of us have come to understand with to some extent various definitions. This exploration of the word’s simple predecessors, coupled with his emphasis on the fact that documenting and archiving events often allows us to forget what’s been saved. I found it striking that I never knew that, and it stuck in my mind like glue. If it wasn’t for someone wondering why we archive things, he might not have dug into his particular archive and helped prevent that bit of knowledge from becoming forgotten in it’s entirety.

On page numbered fourteen, not to be confused with the fourteenth page of the document, he states in reference to wasted archival,

“… it not only incites forgetfulness, amnesia, the annihilation of memory… but also commands the radical effacement, in truth the eradication, of that which can never be reduced to mneme [memory] or to anamnesis [recollection], that is, the archive, consignation, the documentary or monumental apparatus as hypomnema [draft], mnemotechnical [memory aid] supplement or representative, auxiliary or memorandu [written note].”

A photo I found in my personal “archive” of photos. What value does keeping an old picture of a week long ago and forgotten have?

It feels silly to relate this to myself on the most part, but it’s a concept that I’m barely able to grasp in just a few short hours, so here I am. I use a planner. I plan out my weeks in a way that tries to keep me from becoming confused and potentially falling behind. Yet, when I do something that wasn’t previously in my planner I’ll write it down, check it off, and give myself a little mental pat on the back. It’s void or true value and remembrance. It ‘incited the forgetfulness’ that Derrida brought up. I recycle or compost the sheets at the end of the week. I don’t even remembering archiving this photo of my old planner, much less taking it but it does incite a memory (it was my first planner as an adult). I only came back across it when I was prompted to hunt for an image that I knew would be appropriate for this, perhaps like Derrida and his etymology lesson.

Similarly, Misty Keasler was prompted to reconnect with an old memory and commit it to an archive outside of herself. Whether it was stored in a non-physical and non-digital mental archive or not, she at the very least plucked her story from Transylvania from the archive of her brain.

I wonder, since I know the storage of information uses resources, oftentimes sourced from non-renewable sources, what impact is our desire to archive and hoard all this information that we are unlikely to ever need again causing to the planet? How can we ensure what we do archive is for some sort of “greater good” and to not just rot and become forgotten in a landfill somewhere?

Archive Violence

Archives are a way for humans to fight the infinite threat of of forgetfulness. Without this threat, the “destructive force”, the aging of the human body and mind, there would be no archive fever.

Unfortunately, there are ways to pervert the original use of archives that humans have such a knack for doing with any new invention or idea. This perversion can lead to archival violence and is my main take away from Archive Fever. Archives have a dark side to them that Derrida states as, “It has the force of law”. An archive has the extreme power of relaying information which, given the fact that the information was included in the archive, contributors or archons expect that the archive should be respected by people looking into the archive. The contributors of the archive can create bias views of the subject that is chosen to be included in the archive, which you could call violence against true history. Archive violence also comes from the suggestions of what the archive will lead behind which, without proper context, can be greatly misunderstood and negatively affect the future. So this archival violence not only creates unfair views that distorts the past, these distorted views can then in turn affect the future.

The Keasler situation is a perfect example of how a distorted view from an archive could have an impact on the future. In the Keasler situation, showing the picture to the police would have caused even more problems for the community. Members of the community were very aware of this fact and how the authorities could ruin the lives of other families. It is this reason why Keasler, in the end, decided not to tell the authorities about the father who was beating his daughters.

In regards to technological advancements, Derrida claims that email, “is on the way to transforming the entire public and private space of humanity, and first of all the limit between the private, secret (private or public), and the public or the phenomenal”. With what groups like Wikileaks can do, it should come as no surprise that even private emails can be made available to the public if someone really wants them to be. On top of that, these technological advancements not only are able to reach a global audience in seconds, they have the potential to store essentially limitless information. While this can be good, it can also lead to something like alternative facts where someone attempting to look up information about a subject sees conflicting details that makes it hard to distinguish the lies from the truth.


Ironic Impulse: How Archiving Defeats Its Own Purpose

Archiving is a way for humans to try and cheat their own nature.  Derrida references Freud’s “destruction drive”, or the human brain’s loss of information linked to the progression of time, as justification for preservation of experiences.  In Derrida’s words, the drive incites “forgetfulness, amnesia, [and] the annihilation of memory.”  It brings to mind, for me, the Second Law of Thermodynamics: that nature is constantly working towards entropy, or chaos, much like the human mind.  A shed left abandoned in the woods will degenerate the longer it is left unattended, and will become overgrown with ivy and wild plants native to the area.  Eventually the frame will give out and the structure will crumble.  Much is the same with human memory.  The longer we spend away from a certain event or emotion or revelation, the less we can recall about it.  The archive is our gardener.  The gardener travels out to the shed in the woods and fixes it up as it ages.  He cuts back the wild plants and tears away the ivy.  He repaints the outside and replaces wooden slats when they become rotted.  He displays unfamiliar, but attractive flowers along the side.  However, by keeping the shed standing, the gardener has changed the shed itself.  It is no longer an accurate reflection of what it was in the moment that the gardener found it.

Similarly, our memories are altered by archives.  The archive keeps the imprint of whatever we are able to describe onto whatever medium is available to us, yet it is impossible to have an exact replication of the physical and mental circumstances of a particular moment.  That is the “nomological” side to archiving—the archiver acts as a god, strictly controlling what gets remembered for even years to come.  Some may believe that the action of archiving gives too much power to the archiver, that the potential altering of mementos may in turn alter what society accepts as history and as fact.  The question is which is worse—risking having mass belief in inaccurate or incomplete history, or relying on no methods of archiving at all and just letting nature run its course?  That’s not to say that the archive is 100% a bad thing; thanks to the gardener, the shed will be useful to whoever needs to use it. As Derrida states, “Perhaps the question of the archive is not […] a question of the past.” We use archives to help us determine our decisions in the future.  The risk is whether or not those decisions were based on misinformation.

Originally, formal archiving was dependent on text.  As time has gone on and technology has diversified, the opportunity for archiving has expanded, as well as more permanent methods of retaining information.  Derrida talks of what is “worth” being archived, a concept that Freud measured by the “laborious investment in the archive”—which, to him, was most likely paper and print.  However, today’s videos and pictures, restrictions on social media post lengths, and other forms of fast-paced technology only offer snapshots into reality, and less of a combination of internal and external forces that came together to have the documented event occur.

However, text allows for more opportunity to add context to an archived event rather than a single picture being expected to capture the event in it’s entirety.  For instance, if Keasler’s picture had been taken and shared without an accurate explanation of the events leading up to the picture, the message would be skewed—the father would have gotten what he wanted as people retweeted it on Twitter, calling for better living conditions in the town she was visiting.   However, with the textual archive that Keasler provided in the “Photographs Not Taken” series, a different message is construed instead.  It raises the question of the intrusiveness of the photographer, the risks that are taken in a human’s impulsive need to archive.  Having knowledge of one’s actions being archived immediately takes away the truth of the action—the father wasn’t acting out of circumstances independent of the archiver.  He was directly influenced by her presence, and thus her attempts at capturing any genuine, average experience of the environment, in which she was meant to be a sort of omnipresent observer, was lost.   Technology brings an obviousness and awareness of archiving that directly alters the way events transpire.