December 17, 2007
The last post that I made was a link to my final project which i posted on youtube. I was thinking about the idea the enclosure of disintegration in technology. I have taken a video of an old family photograph, put a piece of tissue over it subsequently drawn on the tissue so that the more the video progresses the more obscured the image becomes. I have then looped the footage and then obscured each loop more than the last. the music is a song that a friend wrote played backwards and at half the speed so in a sense the music as well as the video is disintegrating the more it is filtered through technology.
December 11, 2007
I have been thinking a lot about different enclosures and how that relates to technology. The body acts as an enclosure. The skin acts as a physical enclosure where the mind acts as a mental or theoretical enclosure. How do we then enclose our own bodies and how does technology facilitate that enclosure. Just like the skin and the mind there are technologies that act as physical enclosures and technologies that act as theoretical enclosures. The internet and the possibilities of information so readily available acts as its own enclosure. Physical technologies that enclose our bodies: vehicles, houses, stores, things not possible with out technology. Because it is so unavoidable i want to think about how our bodies are implicated in technology, how we come in contact with technology in both a physical and intellectual way. And if we know this and are conscious of it how can we then either participate within that process, or upset the process or even reject it (if that is at all possible). How do our bodies touch technology and when can we decide whether or not they do and in what way and when can we not?
I am working on a collaborative drawing installation that is centered around the issue of mass media. as a counter point to mass media we are thinking about conversation. What is mass media and how do we interact with it in a way that is so disconnected from another person. how do we deal with the noise of mass media and what does that mean for us as conversationalists. this is just one way that we can think about ourselves touching technology.
So in thinking about how i personally touch technology i think that it would be interesting to do something that had equal amounts of control on the part of my body and the physical technology that i am using. for example what if I could make something that only went forward by the fact that i am touching a button and making it go but every time i make stop and start the piece of technology what is being made is being destroyed. So this sounds confusing, but it would be like in order to make the project, in order for the project to progress further i would need technology (both technology in terms of a machine and technology in terms of my own physical body), but the more the technology touched the subject or the more it got involved the more I would destroy or confuse what I was looking at.
I guess i am not really sure what this could be but i am curious to explore this idea and how i could convey it.
November 27, 2007
I also like that the technology of video is really the only thing that holds the objects together and gives them life
I am thinking about technology and objects and how I can play with the idea of giving the inanimate object "technology." There is virtually no American that is not directly connected to or affected by technology. So is there anything that is void of technology? I began to think about things that werent actully living that we interact with in our everyday lives such as household appliances, clothing, toothbrush etc. These things all act as technology for us and we act as a certain technology for them. I began thinking about what it means to take away the human hand and give the objects that we use everyday a life. What does it mean to give objects movement, a new context, qualities that they wouldnt otherwise have. I would like to make a stop motion of objects and how they interact with various environments. To stay in keeping with the class I would like to make some sort of enclosure for objects that facilitate our looking at them in a new and intresting way. I also feel inspired by the amount of stuff that we have and the book that we looked at that showed everything that the american family owns. I think that collecting obejcts into animation is a nice was of organizing the chaos that the objecs take on in their everyday lives. The nature of animation however is somewhat chaotic in itself in that once the objects have been made animate they in a way control themselves or at least give the allusion that they do.
November 20, 2007
ten properties of the fork
it has pointed tips
it is curved so that it can better become an extention of your body for eating
it has four tines
it is textured on the handle
there are slits of space between the tines
it is smooth on the part that one eats off
it can break
it is plastic
when you look at something through the clear plastic of the fork it distorts that object
all of these things help us realize what the fork is used for as well as what it is in the world or what it could represent. As professor moss expressed in class she doesnt like the spoon because it decieves us. There is the illustion that the spoon can be filled up that it has no holes or gaps, that the potential for lost substance does not exist with the spoon. The fork on the other hand has no illusion, it is honest with what it can and cannot do. When you use a fork you know that you can only scoop some things up and there is always the possibility of those things falling through the cracks between the tines.
To illuminate the fork means to see it in a new way or to add to what we know about that object or person. To illuminate something means to approach it with new knowledge. To illuminate something means to see it without expectation and if it is at all possibly to see it objectively with out its cultural conotations. How can we strip an object or more specifically a fork from its common use or cultural history?
THINK ABOUT LIGHT. HOW DOES IT CHANGE SPACE?
light makes space visible. it defines space, it creates barriers and includes and excludes certian areas that are either touched by light or not. Light changes space in that it creates deapth, it makes positive and negative space. Where light makes one thing bright it can make another thing dark. light can create conflict. Light can sometimes mean heat in a space. Light can sometimes imply darkness where it might not have been noticed in the complete absence of light in a space.
I think that the heidelberg project in detroit is a way of not only illuminating a city through art but illuminating what was was considered junk and reimagining it into trash.
bert hickman is a genius.
the idea of illumination seems like a good metephor for art and technology, perhaps are that involoves technology. to illuminate art means to possibly constantly be affected either negatively or positively by art. To illuminate something means to see it a new or to see it in a new light. For example to really see the plastic fork or to illuminate it we must put it in an environment, we must give it a context in which it can be seen. I think that this idea harkens back to the idea of art in general that we have been talking about for the past couple classes. Art is a way of thinking, it is an approach to the world, a way of realizing objects, events, environments and people, and the way that all of these things may or may not interact with one another. it is the way that we crystalize these things in our mind or realize them in a new way or some combination of the two, that they become art. So to illuminate something either physcially or with your mind is to somehow give it new context or possibly make it an art form or piece of an art form.
One nice use of the light metephor that i am reminded of is four stanzas of Seamus Heaney's poem electric light. They read
If I stood on teh bow-backed chair, I could reach
The light switch. They let me and they watched me.
A touch of the little pip would work the magic.
A turn of their wireless knob and light came on
In the dial. They let me and they watched me
As I roamed at will the stations of the world.
Then they were gone and Big Ben and the news
Were over. The set had been switched off,
All quiet behind the blackout except for
Knitting needles ticking, wind in the flue.
She sat with her fur-lined flet slippers unzipped,
Electric light shone over us, I feared.
I really enjoy the mulitple ways in which Heaney uses light here. There is the play of light physically and emotionally lighting a situation but we are also aware of the technology and the time period of the poem by the fact that the light is electric and can be switched on and off. i dont know it just seemed relevant.