Tuesday’s chat with Ed Kelly was especially interesting.
To start with I was engaged and excited by the content of video links Ed gave us and their reference to the concepts and nature of digital information and how this is relevant to art.
The first video showed how written text is unilinear but digital text is not. The Machine is Us/ing Us.
This felt quite relevant as I had been thinking more about written and printed text in my past work and artists I see as inspirational.
We chatted about code and machines a little, text as sculpture and corridors and also about fragmentation.
A quote from Ed
‘So, the nature of that message is that we are all conduits of public information, but that the data is a medium of sculpture, of graphic representation (or audible representation – harking back to my work as a sound artist)’
The Khan Academy of Free education, bit like MOOCS I guess and other systems of e- learning. The idea of a non- hierarchical system of education.
Then the chat started to become fragmented itself with every chipping in about all sorts of interesting things including dreaming machines ( algorithms sorting images), the flexibility and interactive nature of media and flash and allsorts.
I started to feel really frustrated as there were several conversations running at the same time.
Talk of glitches and music (Pierre Schaeffer) and Stockhausen and Eno and sound- art and an on going concern from Peter about not being able to access work as hardware changes.
This became a discussion about old analogue and digital materials and keeping old stuff or throwing it away and the first web page http://info.cern/ch and sound work and sound artists and live music and Marshal McLuhan ( ‘the medium is the message’ —- the process is the product ) and who will be in London in February and ephemerality of digital media and………
I enjoyed it but felt we were just following random things thrown in and not discussing anything in depth and not sure what we should have been discussing.
Then we started to discuss ephemerality in digital and other art ;experience; process; commodity, consumption and it got HOT.
I realised how strongly I felt about process over product and what is most important to me.
How I am focussed on experience ( or like to think so).
We discussed Stonehenge and Lascaux briefly.
I see them as architectural spaces for communal use rather than ‘pieces of art’, whatever that means.
I then realised how much of my work has been about place and action within the place.
How I felt animated by the discussion because it was about topics that really enliven me.
How I mustn’t lose that in my practice or my proposal.
Interesting that I felt able to say these things in a web-chat.
I feel sure I would have said less in a face to face discussion!!!
I felt that, in the end, we had all walked down different corridors of ideas with doors opened by each other as we meandered through the conversation.
All of us finding different rooms of interest, in the same way we might research on-line… following our noses.
Hopefully each of us finding something relevant but without a didactic instruction…process led and an example of what Ed was aiming to demonstrate…am I correct?and does it matter?