Sensor > Move in a Chain Loop
Human > Node> Node>Node> Human> Node> Node….. H>N>N>N>H>H>N>N……
1) Sit down comfortably with your eyes closed. Try to imagine a scene that catches your topic/theme in a nutshell; you can try to imagine that your topic/ theme is being presented as a film or theatre play and construct a scene that presents crucial aspects of it.
Or you can try to think of a scene as part of a personal memory where you felt that crucial issues concerning your topic were at stake. Remember that even a purely theoretical topic/theme can be articulated in a scene. Try to mobilize all your senses when you imagine the scene. If possible, let your mind flow back to the work you did with the touching hands.
2) Write down a description of the scene. Try to make the description as sensuous, lively and engaging as possible.
3) Reading and feedback in pairs.
proposed by Helen Pritchard based on Nina Lykke. Writing Academic Texts Differently: Intersectional Feminist Methodologies and the Playful Art of Writing (Routledge Advances in Feminist Studies and Intersectionality) (p. 155). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.
-Behind the screen, we, the components, are talking, quietly so quietly that you could hardly hear us. Actually , we are constantly chatting , bubbling : “01101000 01100101 01101100 01101100 01101111 00100000 01110111 01101111 01110010 01101100 01100100 00100000 00100001” chanting “HOHA DADO BIDABI KOKA BIDEKA!” . We are so busy, sorting out your data: receive, store, delete, update, send. Little busy shadows, enchained together with no choice but to communicate and release the data we are taking from you. Behind the screen, there is a 24 hours show, a constant ballet of binaries , an infinite concerto of 0 and 1, sadly no one can hear us, except perhaps your EMF detector.
Suddenly a red light is activated, someone is looking at the screen, someone is typing on the keyboard or maybe it is a sound or a touch? Who or what is this? I have a unique task, I know what to do …hey! this is my input! Let’s go and give it a byte! Iterate, map, reiterate, variables, vectors, int, float, strings loop and loop again and return the arrays to my algorithmic friend!
At the speed of an electron, we are sending feedback not only to you, the one with the keyboard, but also to our hosts: the cookies, in a protocol, a language , that no human could speak fluently. Luckily, we know how to speak human. And thanks to the continuous improvement of the human computer interfaces : you, the users are by now, perfectly trained to give us the correct input.
But with humans, there is always an end . You are now releasing the keyboard and leaving the computer. Behind the screen, and until the next time we will meet, there is a new show going on , a new story we tell to each other through the wires or in the clouds, this is is a story based on the memory of our encounter with you. So come back , do not type on the keyboard, do not look at the screen, try to listen to the story, because as always it is all about you. *
* Chun,W. 2016, Updating to remain the same,MIT Press.
“Write a list of false starts or dead ends you have encountered. If you cannot quite place them in your mind, try going to places that are relevant or integral to your research.
Go back to moments in time in particular places where something happened that made you feel you were utterly stuck. You can do this either by physically going to that place and observing yourself or by going there through your memories. Read out your list to others in the group and discuss. Choose one example and write your own story about a difficult moment in your research. Describe the situation: When did it happen, where were you, what were you supposed to do, what did you do? Be concrete: pay attention to perceptions, senses, sounds, smells, colours. Take note of incidental, seemingly insignificant details and things; switch off your cognitive response. “
exercice proposed by Helen Pritchard
False starts and dead ends :
I wanted to explore virtual reality as I was curious of the way bodies are moving when users wear their virtual headset and the relation between the body left outside and the virtual bodies. I realised that I would not have had enough physical material for me to craft within only few months of exploration. Furthermore, my first readings and the readings proposed by Helen Pritchard have led me to embrace the broader subject of our entangled life within the digital networks and their artifacts, the internet of things.
the 5% Skeleton Project or how to stop being creative to save the date:
Submerged by the material and by the tensions of the academic system, I feel stretched like a knitted sensor. Asking me to switch off my cognitive response is like asking electron to stop leaving the ground to the power source. If it would be a smell it would be bitter or a colour it would be dark blue and there will be no sound. Motors without purpose and knitted wires are waiting to find their places in a network installation. The poetic space is not heard, and have not found its place in the system. Self preservation would tell to not bother, but how oblivious could I be without leaving the system?
Feeling comfort when returning to the material and confident that I will find a way to express what is needed, to answer the “artistic call” if I have more time to explore. How to deal with different agenda between the internal and external urgency to deliver? I am looking for the conductive threads and the connections to the micro controller, buying time and trying to transmute the external deadlines into input for my creative process.
“Turn to the person next to you. Both of you raise your arms so that your hands are at chest level. Spread your fingers and gently place your fingertips against your neighbours’ fingertips.
Then close your eyes. Hold this pose for 1.5 minutes. At the end of the 1.5 minutes open your eyes. Look into the eyes of your partner for a short time (about 10 seconds). (Don’t do either of these actions for much longer than the time I suggest; otherwise, thoughts intrude and the bodily awareness is dispersed. Thoughts will, of course, intrude during the 1.5 minutes, but the body awareness remains fresh.)” exercice proposed by Helen Pritchard based on Nina Lykke. Writing Academic Texts Differently: Intersectional Feminist Methodologies and the Playful Art of Writing (Routledge Advances in Feminist Studies and Intersectionality) (p. 67). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.
Closing my eyes, raising my hands. So lonely, in the shadows of their thoughts, so lost in the silence of their breathes. My arms reaching for the others, alone but also taller, extended. Push and feel their resistance. Being pushed and resist, to keep or not to keep contact. Need to release the tensions, are there mine or someone else? Finding my breath again and the borders of my skin. My body is entangled, my dreams are not yours. They pull me out. I have to leave. Ciao.
about Creativity assessment, be recognized by the System, freedom of the artist and material approach
Although quantification of the creative process is delusive, it is hard to escape from it nowadays. How to assess creativity is though, and highly subjective, thus should not to be trusted as a source for inspiration.
Should creativity aims for an academic success, that is a “delivery”, this creativity will be formatted in such a way that will fit external constraints determined in order to “please” a bureaucratic system. This is the time for the artist to choose whether or not to belong in the system, and be “recognized” or not by it.
My creative approach is coming from the material not from preconceived ideas, although as an artist researcher, I do have areas of investigation. I would play with codes as I play with wire or wood, painting, or servo motors. Exploring the material, understanding its limits and its powers, listening to its properties, I trust my right brain, my intuitions, to lead the left brain, the maker, to create and help my artistic quest. Which material or technology I should use and what it will lead me to build? This holistic approach is antagonist to the process of looking for the material adapted to a predefined work.
Should this be assessed , it would have to be by the term of the project not during its processing , as a “clear” picture and stop frame would be wrong and unfaithful to the final “product”. Although, recognition of the effort put in the work could and should be assessed.
Curators , galleries, art fairs, art advisors are “gates” , artists have to cross to get to their audience. Artists send their artwork through those gates, wishing for a positive response. When permission is denied, they can choose to adapt their work to the gates or to go on generating other artworks which could get the granted permission to be shared with the public .
Alternatively , could I choose to not care about how the system will index me ? If the answer is yes, can I stay in this system? How strong , how careless should I be? Does it matter to fit? How worth is it to surrender to the frame versus staying in an individual and lonely process? What is worth in my artistic making: processing or sharing? Is it linked to the ability to be self centered? or to a unshakeable faith in my artistic process? If there were no one to understand my art piece, here and now, would I stop being an artist?
3D printing ideas and download : https://www.myminifactory.com/
sinus wave to Servo :
motor A, continuous servo is activated by sound, holder A turn and stop. While turning, touch holder B which in turn activate motor B , servo 180 ” nervous servo”. Using two arduinos.
to do :
about Creativity assessment, be recognized by the System, freedom of the artist and material approach
“Prototype A – Presentation for the MA continued development of your project so that it fully realises some of the features which you previously sketched out.(assessed) : 5%”
I developed mixed feelings about the compatibility between my artistic process and an academic frame. How to assess creativity is though, and highly subjective, thus not to be trusted as a source for inspiration.
Should creativity aims for an academic success, that is a “delivery”, this creativity will be formatted in such a way that will fit external constraints determined in order to “please” a bureaucratic system. Thus the importance of choosing to belong or not in the system, to be able to use it and be “recognized” by the system.
My creative approach is from the material not from preconceived ideas, although as an artist researcher, I do have a area of investigation. For example, play with codes and trust the focus from the right brain who will lead to create an algorithm which help my investigations . In my process, I trust my intuition, right brain again, about which material , equipment, technology I should use and finding out how to use it as opposed to try to create a predefined work and in the process creating an artwork for the purpose I was looking for.
Although, recognition of the effort put in the work could and should be assessed., while processing the work there is neither a “clear” picture neither a stop frame faithful to the final “product”. Similarly, is it relevant to judge a painting by it sketches ? I should be free to create my work at my own path.
This raises questions about my art practice. Could I choose to not care about how whatever system will index me ? If the answer is yes, can I stay in this systems? How strong , how careless should I be? Does it matter to fit? How worth is it to surrender to the frame versus staying in an individual and lonely process? What is worth in the artistic making: processing or sharing?
Is it linked to the ability to be self centered and deaf to my environment? or to a strong belief in my artistic process? If there were no one to understand my art piece, here and now, would I stop being an artist?