(made in late February, revisited and updated 25 June)
— there are some new items that arose in the meantime and which aren’t included here (but then will be referenced in the assignment submission)
A2 Gather and Manifest: end of April; now: end of July.
- including Performative Talk at SAR, end of March
:: I decided not to: it felt too forced, too academic (all the while the talk wasn’t: it was on the performative end of the contributions there; and yet it was quite conceptually rich). I didn’t want that format to strongly inform this Body of Work but keep it separate. That was a good choice as it removed drawing/contact further from the institution (and I think allowed for the near space and mobility to be articulated more strongly)
That the line and the writing for it became then part of L3 was interesting >> it is a different audience, a different working practice to develop it into a text.
- Conclusion/ realisation of further experiments around the gap, but also: utopian
:: I concluded this: there is a drawing out of practice from the space into a presentation. It is also about the presence of that gap in contact. I almost feel like I created a foil of this to transfer onwards.
Is there a rubbing/ tracing I can do?
What did I actually do after the presentation and with the gap? I went to my parents and set up these events and recorded them. And the slow, searching circling around the gap (and the question as to what constitutes a conclusion) allowed for the focus to drop right down into those four events. I doubt I would have otherwise noticed them or been able to consider them as part of BoW.
Whenever I have since been in L’s office, the gap there is no longer a question, a focus point. I think the piece I wrote back in February did present the conclusion (along with the instruction for the performance score).
- space/ practice as it relates to the gap along with ‘opening’
:: this has nicely developed on from this towards the ’near space’ idea. the gap indeed was the route into ideas of opening, rupture, the discussion around Le Guin also moved it towards utopia. This is in turn also allowed for the turn around the corridor, the focus on the opening there and the fantasy of stepping into elsewhere. It will be really interesting to see how this gets developed in near space. The 1:1 performance for the gap as well as expectation/will are both forms in which this is active as an interdisciplinary concept.
- Concept maps as hybrid form >> book/ set of cards/ map formats
:: this, the production/material investigations I feel I haven’t done yet. I did a few sketches, a little experiment with clay, and then a series of body gestures and tracings, but this feels really insubstantial (part of that is because my investigation is in part INsubstantial, so that shouldn’t necessarily concern me, but there are material routes through this which aren’t body/gesture/performance.
AP: collect all that you have done and how this relates to the earlier sketchbook work.
What is the role of time-based media in this?
:: the video works were really important towards the end of D2: of holding together and articulating the range of media and registers that I wanted to engage with and wanted the audience to engage with. This seems to have receded a little right now. I am not e.g. contemplating using moving image as a recording device for the performances (this is too static, too limited an understanding of what I would like these performances to be); but I think the time-based work will return as part of the realisation, as collage, as book format. I also wonder if time-based is going to be a stronger concern for some of the material investigations of drawing/contact. E.g., the drawings on the plane and the bus are strongly time-based. I have no idea if they are purposeful for this right now, but I know that the marks and the rubbing through plays a role in its simplicity of a drawing/contact.
What is the role of the sensorial/ the corporeal in this? Performance? Experiments?
:: I clarified this too: it circles around gesture/contact in different forms.
There are ways to establish this further: e.g. how Kapil works with the sensorial and how I understand the moving-with for the walking/arts conference to be sensorial
[Gesture is of course extensive and cuts right across the entire arts—that became clear in the conversation with AB, and I am not sure how far I want to venture into this… again: I possibly just want to define one thing and make it work, put it to use in this project…. it will be a glossary item]
<< there is a question here as to the site of the investigation: this could be (a)
(a) actually existing continuous institutional site
(b) the actual site imagined/ transferred
as utopian/ conceived
(c) a new actual institutional site
(d) a number of different sites (some mobile, some fixed, some imagined)
:: I clarified the site: it is mobile, constituted there and then in the encounter/ performance.
Site is then possibly really something like contact zone (at different scale).
(This came out of the conversation with AB)
There may be a point to seek out an institutional site that is not meaningful to any participants.