Week four – reflections on work so far

More here soon. Ha! Well, OK not ‘soon’ as it has taken me till now, 5th October, to sit down and write something.

It’s is not that I haven’t been doing and thinking and reflecting but ver..ry slowly in a turgid sort of way.

I have not felt activated by anything I am doing, obstacles are not challenges but obstacles!

So finally after two weeks of fever, fatigue and residual lethargy I have been able to be active, sociable and now feel able to write some of my reflections.

Obviously many of the fleeting thoughts have been left behind but I can inly trust in the process that the essential will rise to the surface of the settling pool and be available for contemplation.

So,

Binary and Printing (and Drawing): Reflection

The binary clay seals I made finally dried out and I had a go at printing with them.

Not really successful as they were not fashioned smooth enough to use on paper and the ink was absorbed by the clay so even printing on fabric was not really successful.

I will try using the relief on some clay but suspect as they were not fired it will crumble and break as this already started to happen when the ink was applied.

So the question is:

Do I source a kiln ( Helen S?) , make some better ones, fire and try again or do I shelve the idea?

They were interesting objects and visitors generally saw some references I had hoped for.

Several comments about the ‘things used in the da Vinci code’! ( is this a good reason to watch it again?!)

I had a notion of making some in glass which would be really enjoyable but very time consuming if not really relevant.

I still do like glass as a material for all the tranformed, not really one thing or another  ( solid/liquid), constantly moving, reflective, transparent reasons.

And I love working with Helen in the studio!

I love the place and, as you will come to understand, ‘place’ means a lot to me – sparks off all sorts of ‘stuff’.

SO I think I enjoyed making them and the binary text thing is still lurking, as you will see later, but I am not sure yet where it ‘fits’.

I have been continuing with printing images made from documentation of actions and will upload images in my next post .

I am not sure what it is I am doing but I think I am Processing  the memory.

Working over and over again on the same image.

When I am tracing over the image, the result  become less accurate and so the image underneath is a more distant  represention of what went before.

Often when I am doing it I become bored with the repetition and am just doing it for the sake of doing it.

Not fully present in the action.

Similar to the way our bodies adapt to some sensations and so can distance our selves from, for instance , the feeling of our clothing and ambient sounds, in order to stay sane.

This then makes me think of maybe paying attention to all the forgotten experiences of our day to day lives…

and also to change my emphasis  more to ‘forgetting’.

I’ve written  before  ( BA dissertation )  Link??? about  fact and fiction in documentation and the fluidity of this but I feel my emphasis  this time is different.

My main concern is that I have been bored by this and by the results.

If I am then why would anyone else be interested! and I ‘m at the beginning of the MA!! Not a good time to be bored!

Also feeling very frustrated at not being able to go on the Liverpool trip or visit galleries etc the way I would like to.

Feeling devoid of inspiration and the things that make us perceive things differently.

But being aware that if my analysis is to be of the human memory vs. digital memory, what I am doing is engaging in the Processing part of the PROCESSING, STORAGE, RETRIEVAL procedure.

I felt comforted by this and have tried not to think too far ahead.

Experiments with analogue materials: Reflection

I really enjoyed playing with the materials and after finally getting my old Mac to read the files and uploading them into an ancient  version of iMovie I enjoyed messing around with editing.

The only problem is that I find the software ‘clunky’ and am a novice so the edit is rubbish.

Again it’s fine for playing around with but it would be good to make something that wasn’t scruffy.

Making the piece with Claire was interesting as it made me think of ‘what is collaboration?’

Her thoughts were interesting as we discussed the nature of archive and the possibility of filming in my loft ( where all my personal family memory-keeper’ stuff is mostly ( apart from the bits I am trying to edit and file)

Of course as this MA proceeds I realise that in ‘clearing crap’ during the summer I have thrown away things that would now be useful.

The less relevant life documentation with un-recognisable places and people that now I am interested in.

Anyway, back to the videos.

I liked the two short edits but the orientation of all three videos makes the reading completely different.

I took them to my Monday leisure Bodicote House Art Group for their critique as an objective audience and  their  interpretations were interesting, orientation featuring in their understanding of what was happening.

Peter commented that the music on the third edit was somewhat overwhelming and I agree but I really like the visuals and the sound of the tape clattering which of course can’t be separated from the rest of the soundtrack as they were recorded together.

I am tempted to re-make but I dislike the idea of repeating and rehearsal and more than the minimum of direction as it takes away the chance, spontaneity  and resulting raw affect which may arise.

When filming on my iPhone there were several other videos which I have discarded, the other with me filming and Claire W ‘playing’ with the tape.

I’ve since tried to project the video so I can ‘draw into it’ but much faffing about with the projector and it still won’t read the file.

I am increasingly frustrated by my ineptitude with the tech. esp as this is a MA Fine Art Digital and I feel as if I haven’t a clue.

Spent a lot of yesterday afternoon trying to download various converters and use them to convert M4V file into something readable but to no avail.

I have passed to my son and his pc but fear that it may be protected, not ‘something to do with my ancient Mac OS’ .

What I have done is to draw/trace  from stills on my laptop which has been useful in the continuing ‘processing’ of the documentation.

More of this in my next post.

 

 

 

Advertisements

Week 1- Binary and printing


My thoughts for some time have been regarding units of memory, digital or embodied.
I am interested in the concept of prints used as a means of fixing memory.
What is fixed and how fixed is it rather than a drawing which is more fluid, inchoate, temporary?
The impact of our ‘digital age’ is likened that of the invention of printing press in the 15th Century and so to Enlightenment and Reformation in Europe.
As I am moving back, re-examining and re-presenting work it felt appropriate to investigate the some of the earliest examples of prints.
Rather than those made directly with hand and mouth,40,000 years ago I wanted to explore those mediated through another material, an interface, between hand and the print made.
I used Sumerian cylinder seals 

I wanted to reduce ‘something’ to composite units: Text to binary.
At night, a fragment of remembered speech/verse/text came to me as I fell asleep.
I cannot remember if I heard it/ spoke it/read it.
I typed the few words into Safari on my phone and found the full quotation:

‘There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.’
William Shakespeare – Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, 159–167

and converted it into binary notation:

01010100 01101000 01100101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100111 01110011 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01101000 01100101 01100001 01110110 01100101 01101110 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01100101 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101000 00101100 00100000 01001000 01101111 01110010 01100001 01110100 01101001 01101111 00101100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100100 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101101 01110100 00100000 01101111 01100110 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01110000 01101000 01101001 01101100 01101111 01110011 01101111 01110000 01101000 01111001 00101110

The initial small positive and negative cylinders have a small amount of the binary notation inscribed.

Below is a monoprint of part of the text and also the residual imprint on the glass plate after the print has been removed.
This latter is, of course, not reversed whereas the print is.

Using prints of the documentation images from Unscheduled (2010) seen in my first post, I made monoprints and photographed the prints and the residue as below.
This time the digital ink prints I used to draw from were in black and white and of rather poor quality.
It was hard to determine the lines I wanted to follow.
The lines I made did not follow the original as exactly as before.
Some lines were made which I realised afterwards did not follow the original thread but were joined as I saw them as I was making this drawing.
The print became more of a construction based on an original than a representation.
It was not even made from my memory of the drawing or of the original performance, but an act of piecing together the fragments of visual information I could retrieve from the paper copy to make an image on the paper and the glass plate below it.