Tutorial 3

1 June 2018 – Tutorial with Jonathan Kearney

Jonathan (JK) and I (RW) spoke during this pleasant tutorial about how to proceed with my feedback ideas for open calls, about space as importance for my interactive installation works and about the reflections on the single screen moving images I made lately.

 

JK: The idea of the bar chart is really good, it gives us an idea what the competition is and how much effort you can put into acquiring a residency, for (paid) competitions or open calls of some sort. Take a-n (Artists Newsletters) as one of the places to find these open calls in the UK, it would be worth contacting them with your idea.

Other potential steps and more contacts concerning this matter were talked about.

 

We spoke about interactive installations, that my current question is about ‘do play and contemplation go together at the same time or do they need time space in-between somehow?’. After narrowing down my questions about the book of Professor Katja Kwastek, I would like to request an interview with her as she works at the VU Amsterdam.

Concerning social interactions, we spoke about Social-sculpture.org in Oxford and the interesting field it is. It gave me – based on the lead from work of Joseph Beuys and Fluxus – quite some fascinating input for my research paper. JK believes there are some strong ideas here too.

JK tipped me also about the work and PhD research of Brigitta Zics, as she made a taxonomy around interaction as well.

 

JK and I talked about the scale of human being for immersive bodily interactions and how that mattered for the interim MA exhibition work. We spoke about the potential of scale in all directions: small, big, body size, miniature. JK will inform me end of next week about the potential available studio space.

 

JK: Good piece of reflection about ‘I sensed two bodies’, you think clearly about it. Let’s talk about how you feel about sending the material to London and others installing it. How do engage with that process?

RW: I see it more a film than an installation, so it is easier to step by the fact that others are installing the work as an installation as they did. I liked the way they made this physical setting with the time delays between the screens. This idea plays in my mind also with these ambiguous layers in the real and the virtual, the digital domain.

RW: At the moment I am missing a site specific driver, where I can immersive myself, so I have to do and keep my video works too. Often I feel they are in-between documentation and works of art.

JK: There are two ways to look at it. Maintain the film as halfway house between documentation and art, or you say to yourself: I am confident I can communicate clearly within installations, the challenge now is how can I then bring this into a single screen piece of work?

JK: Your work ‘3600 degrees’, I could imagine it as an installation, but you can see these as one of its behaviours, like a film projection would be another behaviour. (Rethinking curating). Maybe you explore what about moving from short film to installation with film and back again, what that may bring. See it as more types of expression.

JK: I was watching ‘3600 degrees’ with headphones on as this is really important to hear your sound, it is really sophisticated sound, but in a spatial installation it is a different approach for the sound again. As moving image it is quite evocative and I didn’t feel overwhelmed by language.

RW explained about earlier filmed fungus and deconstructed house, the filming and working process and realised that doubt is good as it works for the next work as a valuable driver.

RW spoke about why he does not like the extensive use of voice-over or text-based films in visual works; it feels like I have to tell you because I could not show you.

J: Yes, but maybe there is some value in it for a period of time, because if you have this challenge and you want to make single screen works (very useful to have in some situations) that are easily distributed for open calls and so on, you may aim at using language in the beginning but during time less and less.

 

RW talked about the concept for the film of the wanderer ferry, the real space and the data space, making a virtual world by using green screen and digital projection afterwards. But it is in a public area, so I’ll have to do it in one day with some crew.

JK: it seems large scale, human body scale again, is there something you can first do on a small(ler) scale, just to test the idea’s?

RW: The physical feeling of a bigger (immersive) work (body scale) is something which in small scale situations is easier to dismiss. But I like the idea of interactive artefacts in a suitcase too.

JK: But small film can be a huge projection which makes it, chances it, … so it can be interesting to work for some time with scale and experiment with it as one of the behaviours in your work.

RW asked for some idea where he is actual now, on which level JK sees him operate?

JK: A ha, would you like some bar chart?

RW: No thanks, stars maybe :)) ?!

JK: The most important thing I am looking for: is somebody pushing himself, is he developing and challenging himself, is he pushing his own boundaries, and you are doing that from my perspective.

 

Next steps to be done:

→ Send feedback proposal to different parties

→ Write summary for research paper, the main ideas, in preparation of coming tutorial with Gareth Polmeer

→ Prepare request for interview with Professor Kwastek

→ Based on available studio space, work and experiment for interim MA-show

→ Think about ideas and experiments where SCALE is the key