Random String, Coventry 10.06.16

This event Random String Symposium , a Symposium on post-digital creativity, organised by Ludic Rooms based in Coventry felt without doubt one of the most relevant and moving events I have been to. I really feel part of this network and way of working.

That’s quite a statement, but for a symposium about digital technology in the arts the discussions and presentations were always centred around people and relationships.

Random String were started in 2014 as an attempt to challenge the otherness of ‘digital art’.

Three key themes were examined across the programme;

Relationships
How can introducing interactive and networked technologies throughout the creative process enable a more meaningful relationship with audiences? How can technology foster interaction between people, rather than just interaction with the artwork itself?

Ownership
What do networked and interactive technologies mean for the ownership of artworks and performances? Who is the author when co-creating, sharing and making work interactively? Do technologies enable new kinds of audience agency? How does the use of creative technologies redefine the notion of participatory arts practice?

Power
Can technologies be a democratising force in the arts world? Can technology redefine the arts establishment, challenge our models of power and distribution, build new audience and enable new ways of working?

The whole day really explored the concept of Nicolas Bourriaud’s relational aesthetics  but incorporating the digital as a rational and interactive medium and tool, rather than standing outside of , opposite to or next to’ it’.

This is a quick post, so no detail except to mention the amazing Dom Breadmore @predacomdom, Knowle West Media Arts and Melissa Mean @MelissaMean, Juneau Projects @juneauprojects and Pete Ashton @peteashton who really ‘spoke to me ‘.

A quote ” the focus for the event is interactive/networked tech and that any discussions of power need to be framed within the context audience and artistic agency”

Dom Breadmore 23rd April 2016 11.17am

and a video should say most of what I felt… this made me and other cry….am my original Proposal question concerned how digital technology could generate affect… or something like that…Here’s the answer….

 

Advertisements

Gerard Byrne @ The Mead Gallery

This is a short review of  the event  Conversation with Gerard Byrne and the preview of 1/125 of a second his exhibition at Warwick Arts Centre.

This image below was taken from his exhibition at the Charles H Scott Gallery in Vancouver, Canada

200705_gerardbyrne_03

but the layout was similar at the Mead, here.

IMG_2604.JPG

The talk was useful but as I wasn’t really familiar with his work it was strange taking about pieces before seeing them.

He bases his work on place and the architectural features with their relationship to the culture at the time of building/ design.

He collages images and also spreads the resulting works over several monitors in the gallery adding a new layer of collage.

He states that he is looking for  complex encounter with the work and that it is not possible to see all the works in full on any one visit.

There was a ‘timetable’ of sequence of showings on the gallery wall…almost invisible and possibly written in pencil but it would be hard to plan a visit to watch a particular piece of work from that.

He described how our consumption of visual imagery is so effortless now through tv, video, Instagram…etc that he wanted the encounters to be ‘not effortless and not for consumption’

He explained how people’s relationships with images has changed since the growth of the internet and how we have reached ‘environmental saturation’.

He uses monitors to physically inhabit the space and bring in an awareness of the here and now.

Hie aims to create  a dialogical relationship with the work with almost theatrical timing. The configurations are created by collaboration with a software engineer who creates software specifically for the exhibitions.

This made name think back to our MA Group Skype chat the day before regarding the way that available Software affected creativity!

These ideas are very important for me in thinking about methods for display at the Final Show

There were several things that I felt applicable to my early efforts at film- making

  • He likes to keep some elements of the making of the work visible such as microphones and actors reading scripts. He describes this as ‘breaking the suspension of disbelief’ and playing with it. I’ll remember that phrase for constructing a lack of immediacy…I have used this previously in what I have made and like to do this for different reasons…bring into play a feeling of a witness’ being there’ and watching the event , so an external  presence within the location.
  • He also uses historical textual sources, which is something I’ve been doing recently... though not posted anything about yet.
  • He even includes stills or long takes of pages of books and magazines in the videos.
  • He messes around with the timing and perception within work. In particular this is seen in He searches for the contrary of saved ( 2014) which uses footage of  Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. Here he runs clips backwards at high speed and includes the audio.This something I’d like to mess with.It has a strange dislocating but hypnotic effect.He talked also about ‘Confronting the Present  with the recent Past, to challenge the Present.’ He constantly works in a way contrary to the idea of an image “on line” at least I think that’s what he said…I can’t read my notes. Anyway he also uses no linear narrative.
  • One of the  pieces uses a slide projector with text and images on separate slides. Some of the slides are of pages from books, as I might already have mentioned.I timed the slides to see how long eachh was shown for to allow the text to be read. I reasoned that he’d already thought this through…. 5 seconds. Something to remember.

He spend a long time talking about a specially commissioned work for the Mead Film inside an Image which was created in and about the Biologist Museet in Stockholm which was the first natural history museum to use a diorama and taxidermies specimens of animals.I found this work was hypnotic and strangely, poignantly beautiful.

It seems to be filled on a continuous loop with no edits and he described that as being ‘interested in the idea of suspension, no rest, no point or counterpoint – breathless continuum ‘.

He used a suspended camera ( * Idea!!!)  to shoot the footage inside the Museum which is lit by natural light from skylights at the top. He saw this as like a film (from a camera) inside an image.

There is an audio track of live animal noises over the video over the taxidermy so the sound provides a dynamic active in conjunction with the inert and inactive visual.

From the point of view of analysis w.r.t. my own work He searches for the contrary of saved  ( a quote from Waiting for Godot) was the most useful and something I will reference.

I did catch some references in his work to the work of Niamh O’Malley who I saw at the Bluecoat in Liverpool. She is also based in Dublin so I’m sure there’s a link…

EDIT Yes They Have exhibited together!!! His Kodak Written Colour Filter System references her layered works…or vice versa….

It made me think of here double sided glass piece and possibly projecting on to this.. Something I have thought of before...(* Idea) but never done anything about..

Here is a still from the Lisson Gallery WebsiteBYRN140004-1