fromCONCENTRATE

Later this month I will be submitting my final project proposal and, having identified my research area – “Law as Art” I need to outline the territory I am going to explore and suggest a path through.  What are my aims? What specifically am I intending to do?

It is as a citizen first that I find this area of research immediately arresting – in the U.K., we are all subject to the rule of law, but what do we actually know about how laws are made?

Gulf between Citizen and Law

Every week, central government introduces new legislation regulating all aspects of our lives and we, as citizens, are in effect the end-users: consumers of law – What understanding do we have about the process from which law emerges?
Even the most commonplace of legal documentation, such as a Tenancy Agreement, is totally impenetrable for a majority of people – littered with seemingly contradictory technical terminology.  Legal documentation actually seems like an irrelevence – ‘non-working documents’ – which are completely unneeded until exactly when it is too late – when we come into contact with the law through abuse, accident and tragedy.  In a confused ‘car crash’ scenario we employ specialists to perform an autopsy on our paperwork.

2694 Humorists tell us there is no act of our lives which can be performed without breaking through some one of the many meshes of the law by which our rights are so carefully guarded; and those learned in the law, when they give advice without the usual fee, and in the confidence of friendship, generally say, ‘Pay, pay anything rather than go to law;’

Chapter on Legal Memoranda: Mrs Beeton’s Household Management, first published 1861.

There seems to be an insurmountable gulf between citizens and the specialised processes of law making and our legal architecture – the framework of rules which fences and underpins our culture.

I would like to investigate and suggest new ways for citizens to become engaged with law and ultimately to be involved in the formulation and enactment of law, in a real and creative sense.

A core requirement of my Research Masters Programme here at Culture Lab is that I undertake and complete a ‘Final Project‘ which goes through Proposal, Development and Documentation/Presentation stages.

The Final Project Proposal will be due in January.

My attempts to put together this proposal have brought to light many apparent weaknesses, shortcomings and inefficiencies in my approach to STRATEGICALLY initiating this project, as an artist (as opposed to an academic, a biological scientist or an industrial designer.)

Pictured above are 9 Post-it notes with 9 headings: Digital; Law; Philosophy; Code; Democracy; Creativity; Art; Community & Ethics and beneath are corresponding points of reference: links, authors, artists, concepts etc.

This matrix was the result of an early attempt to try and list and categorise the priorities and points of reference in my mind, my practice and my sphere of research at that moment (some time in early September).

———————————

Question: If I wrote down a list of my current thoughts, right now, would I arrive at the same reference points?

Answer: No.

Question: And, would I list the same categories?

Answer. No, they would be different.

Question: Why?

———————————

‘references’ - the stuff that I am swimming in and breathing in – changing every day – I move through them – and they move through me

‘categories’ – imposed from outside – tags

———————————

My experience of making art is analogous to EATING, DIGESTING and SHITTING rather than PLANNING, DESIGNING and BUILDING.  (‘DISTILLATION’ might be a more pleasant comparison.)  Both are organic ‘breaking down’ processes.

———————————

All of this brings to mind Wim Delvoye’s remarkable Cloaca (shitting) machines:

http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2007/09/yesterday-was-t-1.php

http://artfulgreendot.com/2009/04/10/manufactured-feces/

———————————

Question: How can I isolate my IDEAS and INSPIRATIONS and describe them for others to follow?

Question: And, HOW can I SITUATE these ideas and processes within HISTORIC and STATE OF THE ART points of reference, in order to PLAN, DESIGN and BUILD?

———————————

According to the brief this Research Project will be in response to: “…a specific problem chosen by the student”

Perhaps, I’d do best to approach this as a scientist: What do I want to know? …Or as a designer: What do I want to solve?

What is my problem?

(Maybe the artist is the best approach after all!)

Prototype intuitive interface / proof of concept / instrument – successful?

Original drawing identified basic principle:

1. Twist pencil in tape reel
2. This action twists potentiometer
3. potentiometer relays DATA
4. Arduino board receives ANALOG data in 0 –> 5V
5. Arduino script translates ANALOG voltage to DIGITAL serial data
6. Serial data transfered via USB lead into MAXmsp patch
7. MAXmsp patch interprets data allowing user to triggers samples

Although I considered different configurations (eg. geering) the simplest approach for this test was to directly engage the modified ‘continuous’ potentiometer with the pen lid through the cassette reel.

AND this just felt really ‘RIGHT’!

When building the MAX patch I attempted to identify 3 ‘triggers’ that I wanted to isolate from the user input data:

• twisting
• not twisting
• twisting fast

I basically attempted to identify these 3 triggers using the METRO object to periodically (every 1 sec and every 200 milliseconds) read data coming into MAXmsp and then, using conditional statements eg. pictured, compare the previous two values to identify the rate of change.

I am aware that this is in no way the most sophisticated way of using MAX to interpret this rate-of-change / acceleration data but, this was the fastest way for me to prototype this and get a result with my fledgling knowledge of MAX.

Working on this piece has totally re-affirmed this statement:

simpler interface = more complex interaction

It is fascinating how much data is contained within such a simple single twisting action and there are really huge ramifications for my future ‘user interface’ work if I can develop my skills at using code and software to interpret and translate this data.

Download my ‘Echoes’ MAX patch here.

- PLEASE COMMENT! -

…absence of a higher level interfacing tool creates a barrier to participation… (previous post)

The basic corkscrew twists into a cork and (with a bit of umph!) the cork is pulled out of the bottle, releasing wine.  The Wing Corkscrew (above) does exactly the same thing, but assisted by two levers either side, (mechanical advantage) our cork is removed with a little less umph!

Does my glass of wine taste different – better or worse – as a result of the bottle being opened with mechanical assistance?

Tools:

• Humans are animals that use tools.
• Tools extend capability.
• Extension is technology is (digital) media. McLuhan.

Interfaces:

• Between-ness.
• Physical Interface / Software Interface / Human Computer Interface
• HANDS-ON?

Instruments:

• Precision
• Potentially CREATIVE tools…
• Arduino (electronics, code, physics, physicality)
• MAXmsp (graphical, GUI, programming)
• OpenFrameworks (C++, more lower level code)

BUT, let’s remain focused on the wine (and how to get at it) not the corkscrew, crowbar, cannon or wateva…

(This is my FIRST blog post at Culture Lab, on my new research blog.)
(And, this is the ONLY blog post I’ll be writing in the FIRST-PERSON.) (I HOPE.)

(This is a very important question.)
(This is the question I need to be asking every day.)

In terms of my exploration of (digital) culture I WANT to start from HOPE.
Deep down, I am an OPTIMIST / ROMANTIC / IDEALIST.
I am excited by (the emergence of) incredible, technologically facilitated, opportunities for NEW social / cultural / democratic models presented by:
-    myriad, normalised, de-centralised, social network platforms
-    oft-cited ’second-life’ virtual environments
-    democratiZation ov knowledge: wikis, blogs, information-revolution FREECULTURE and tha open-source
-    digital RE-PRODUC-ABILITY, de-author(IZ)ed cultural production, unprecedented free sharing ov IDEAS

AND, specifically, I am interested in the manifestation of these new modes in the realm of ART making.

(BUT)

(I am also prone to FEAR.)
(Everyone is prone to FEAR)
(I’m a former luddite and my favourite film is ‘The Terminator’)
(Sometimes, I get out ov bed the wrong-side, and I start from FEAR.)

Plenty of reasons to FEAR:
-    new social spheres will replicate and accelerate old (visible and invisible) power-structure-hierarchies, cliques and violence – RESULT – increased GLOBAL SCALE social / cultural /political /economic ISOLATION, EXPLOITATION and ‘CYBER-BULLYING’
-    ALSO, inhuman horrors will be made easier by perceptual DETACHMENT from source through technological EXTENSION.
-    Challenge to existing 20th Century Copyright methods, PATENTS and INDUSTRY triggers an unprecedented backlash against SHARING (peer-to-peer prosecutions, chilling effect etc.)
-    access to technologies and cultural production remains SPECIALIZED whilst elites chat at conferences about ACCESSIBILITY…
-    open transparent culture = ZERO PRIVACY (Discuss.)  Potential for OSTRACISM, BLACKMAIL, MUD-THROWIN’ and CENSURE is immense and FACEBOOK is just the beginning.

(At the suggestion of my tutor – Jamie Allen – I simply wanted to put these out there.)
(In my next post I will discuss my own strategies for balancing HOPE against FEAR)
(comments / suggestions / responses welcome :-)

(And YES, I am aware of the ‘FEAR—>LOVE’ blackboard scene from Donnie Darko (below) – thanks!)