This is a project that has as aim to join together people from different backgrounds and create a group of people to discuss and debate social as well as art issues with the purpose to create a network of people with similar interests and also with the interest of making some changes not only in ourselves but also in the society we live in.
- Living with it interfered with the space.
- The sensation is smooth and pleasant.
- Pleasing and beautiful
- Exists an absence more than presence:
A non-space because of what surrounds it. Provokes visual interference, surrounds the space, (transitory in its essence). By accepting it is a rejection per se (something to be dealt with)
- The packaged of it, was relevant due to the limited period of time in the house (was near the Box as if the Box was going to leave in the following day).
- Temporality and supportive/engaging. (Find a balance in between)
- Integration of the box and them with the space is an unconscious process.
- Wanting to spend every time with the Box, supporting physically.
- Time has effect. Affects the box (A fast engagement)
- Establish a connection with it by sitting side by side.
- Is not a work of art but part of it! (They complete the work in some way)
- Allowing people to engage with it makes them think how to receive it and think about the level of expectation in art; (allow the function of the artwork to engage).
-The object was used as a table during its stay in the house.
- The textile function of the object was also very appealing.
- The object had for them the remembrance of an old suitcase but still a reference to a functional object. Made them think of something inspiring and at the same time romantic.
- One of them used as his own desk for a couple of hours. (They tried to emphasize the functionality and its use).
- Their intervention worked in some way as a written statement a document made for themselves and by themselves.
- The impact of the box in the room was notorious because it didn’t change the spatial organization but it transformed the way they perceived it. In same vague sense was a reunion, inspiring and even healthy.
- Due to all these qualities the box was reserved to create a special occasion and to enjoy the short period of time they had with the box.
- It also worked as a diary of their lives that in some way works as a testimony of what will certainty leave some affection behind.
- However the changes happened to in their lives even if it was for a night. The functionality of the box, worked also as a break in their routine provoking a relationship directly with something more than just a box.
- The experience itself turned out to be different and promoter of new things and happenings in their lives.
- The box was very appealing when it was unwrapped, but there was also a questioning between being a box or a cube in conceptual terms.
- There was an interest in naming it because it was there were several possibilities to go with the box.
- They faced the object as an object so they felted restrained in doing something to the box.
- They used it as a support base, to make it functional.
- in some way the box made part of the family for while, and was created a relation even thought the object itself remained strange to them. The presence of it was a bit frightening because of its size.
- There was a slight contradiction in their behaviour with the object because in one hand it was almost like a sense of loss but in the other hand there was a kind of affection. It is also interesting how the object even thought it didn’t suffered any intervention it became an active object that completed some kind of gap.
- There was also the interest of going for a walk with the box and trying to interact with it in specific places. However the idea didn’t happen!
- At the same time there was a need to not engage with it, because it is something that an ordinary object would not require from you!
- The box had a lot of dust in it.
- The box has also the power to precede you into the room as something that was dislocated.
- Nevertheless there was a creation of a relation due to the box being attractive to them. The physicality of it and its basic and tactile attributes it was not divorced from them because they felt it belonged to the everyday world. Another point that was considered was that it was something natural and very practical to accept.
- There was an objectification of the box diminishing it. The object itself becomes an accumulation of space that seems to belong to place but still does not belong. Remains alienated. There seems to exist a boundary that keeps us to still keep close but at the same time distant from it.
- In some way part of our lives were brought as close as possible because of a need of interacting
- it is also relevant to say with no apparent intention there was created an aura in the object because they felt they could project anything to the box as long as the box remained with no intervention. Afterwards it becomes difficult and there is also other aspect that once the box itself becomes intervened until the point whether it loses its integrity!
- They felt that the smell, touch and smoothness were very important factors to their engagement with the box because conditioned their interaction in order to reflect their interactions within the three characteristics.
- However they were concerned in leaving one side of the box clear because they felt people should have the same experience they had by touching and smelling it.
- The interventions in the box were a consequence of a gathering of people mainly friends around the box. As consequence of this they were tempted to think outside the box and analyze their experiences.
- There was a suggestion of making a suitcase, putting wheels, making a plinth, a skate board, walk it around the city, but they hadn’t the time to do that.
- The box had appositive effect on people making them work collaboratively and for a common interest.
- Some ideas were generated by the presence of the box in the place. In addition the box was placed in several places according to the needs and interest of the people that wanted to make use of it.
- The box itself incarnated the personality of a tourist that walks around without staying much time in one place but always trying to retain most of his experiences.
- The presence of the box was very prom eminent not only in the actual place but also in their memories as something that found a small corner in their conscious.
- Even though it was a short period of time with the box it was a good opportunity for them to be creative. One of the interventions was with candle works, a DJ stand, drawings and chiselling. All these interventions reflected individual instincts that pervaded instead of consideration. According to them this characteristic caused the awareness that the box was already part of them in some way but nevertheless it remained in some way a bizarre object but very appealing and receptive to everyone!
- First reaction was that it had a funny smell.
- The Box represented a distraction and an object that was very intriguing because its presence was very unusual.
- They used as a functional with several functions such as a seat and lather. They also wrote in the object with commentaries very intriguing about the purpose of the project.
- One of them asked what the point of the project was because there was a dialog very effusive about their beliefs.
- There was some investigation about how the box was made and why which resulted in several questions and debates.
- The debate was mainly about modern art and that led to several conversations about modern art.
- The box didn’t facilitate much communication between co-workers because they were already very close with each other. The box gave a new ambiance to the space because it enables them to be confronted by almost an alien that entered their lives for a period of time.
- In addition the fact that the environment of a working space was very restrictive they tried to make use of it in different ways.
- The surface is very appealing and beautiful, even inspiring, which let the ‘temporary owner’ quite perplex about the power of such feelings.
- The presence of the box was in some way quite unsettling. For instance the fact that the box didn’t open and still remains as a box.
- There was a feeling that the box even though was not destroyed it was in other hand vandalized by the multiple interventions.
- The intervention on the box was paintings that were similar to stamps. The paintings were small animals one of them was from Latin America, and in together with the paintings there was phrases written in Spanish and in English making reference to the paintings.
- The box presence was very stimulating because it had connotations with bad things such as ‘I am going to be boxed in’ or ‘they are going to take me away in a box’ associated with the image of death and coffins. In addition the temporary owner made reference to a poem that refers to being boxed in the Second World War[i]. On the other hand it was associated with good things such as presents or the Boxing Day when Christmas presents are opened.
- The box allowed a feeling of freedom that was only overcome after a few days since it was a kind of alien in their place. It was a slightly worrying for them to accept it because there was a sense of obligation to work with it. However after overcome the freedom allowed the temporary owner to even be ironic in its interventions.
- The result was in some way the imprint of a statement in the box of their egos while living with it. Nevertheless this attitude reveals a sense of identity by living their fingerprints quite literally or just metaphorically.
- The impact in the space was not much relevant because the house as they described was almost a building site, so it didn’t disturb any kind of harmony!
- In the end there was a slight affection by the box due to its presence even though if it was for a very short period of time.
[i] VII
Jumbled in one common box
Of their dark stupidity,
Orchid, swan, and Caesar lie;
Time that tires of everyone
Has corroded all the locks
Thrown away the key for fun.
In its cleft the torrent mocks
Prophets who in days gone by
Made a profit on each cry,
Persona grata now with none;
And a jackass language shocks
Poets who can only pun.
Silence Settles on the clocks;
Nursing mothers point a sly
Index finger at a sky,
Crimson in the setting sun;
In the valley of the fox
Gleams the barrel of a gun.
Once we could have made the docks,
Now it is too late to fly;
Once too often you and I
Did what we should not have done;
Round the rampant rugged rocks
Rude and ragged rascals run.
Song by W. H. Auden, 1941
Where is Joseph Beuys soul!?
The process of death leads us to the conclusion of some question!
The chart itself begins by decoding the several meanings and purposes of form but in the end besides the chart gaining the aspect of an object all the information became objectified, the conclusion is that objectification became an autonomous process that is inherent to our nature. Objectification alone is already a morbid process because is directly related with the death of its reference!
Hi Pedro. A kind of confusing and by this doubtful diagram.
ReplyDeleteI can't do it better, but while reading this, there were already lots of questions and doubts coming up to my mind. Probably not that elaborated yet, but well, to be honest For me, Pedro, this document is work-in-progress and not finished yet. Continue working on that!
> Forms and shapes are principles of our visible word. That is what we can see, understand and read.
> What about the interlinking, connecting character of language? The code of communication with words and phrases is of course a way of materializing, well comprehending the world. It is our human way of understanding the world around us and living together in a society-like community.
> Life is impossible to be authentic? I partly agree: Our view on the world is of course subjective. The only conscious idea is the self-reflection of ourself: "Cogito, ergo sum" - but if you begin to doubt everything around you, developing the idea that everything is inauthentic, impossible, wrong and not lasting... how can you continue living in this world. It becomes senseless. A vicious cirlce, if you consider this idea in a consequent way.
> Rebirth = dying? Death equals death? So? Why?
> Art is "a mark that is left by the act of the theft" of what? Other people's time by showing or publishing your personal way of seeing and articulating your perception?
> And finally, your conclusion that objectification is related to death is at least for me not a straight-forward idea from this document...
So: With doubts and greetings,
Henning
Part 1/2
ReplyDelete> Forms and shapes are principles of our visible word. That is what we can see, understand and read.
R: When I am saying that the form ‘is corruption of the visible world’ I am referring not only to the world we live in but for example the appropriation that the artists sometimes do of what surrounds them. Even when you are photographing something you are appropriating yourself of something that will remain in a piece of paper with not much more than a meaning to you but not with the essence of the site or of the person contained in that piece of paper. It remains as a reference to you but nevertheless it took a form so that you could identify yourself with. In addition there is a context to it: form = object = artwork. Nevertheless like I said this can also be applied to the principles of the visible world since nature itself is no more natural, it became deformed and corrupted. We appropriated Nature at its own expense!
> What about the interlinking, connecting character of language? The code of communication with words and phrases is of course a way of materializing, well comprehending the world. It is our human way of understanding the world around us and living together in a society-like community.
R: the interconnections that I do in the chart and the words that use in the chart are already ways of materializing like you say and because of that it becomes already part of an object. The objects as well as language are complex systems that have as aim to simply our methods of communication! I don’t want to seem too radical or pretentious here, but sometimes is that same context of language and forms that make impossible an approach to other dimensions such as a transcendental one. Even though it is not translated in a form of communication it is directly related with a need to feel things in a more personal dimension. In addition do you really think that you can understand the word by words or by making objects of short-term use? Don’t you think it is something much more intuitive!? Nevertheless language is functional and essential but surely when you are doing a project of yours you as well as your client can’t rationalize completely why you like it or not! I leave this question open to you since you tend to be more objective than me!
> Life is impossible to be authentic? I partly agree: Our view on the world is of course subjective. The only conscious idea is the self-reflection of yourself: "Cogito, ergo sum" - but if you begin to doubt everything around you, developing the idea that everything is inauthentic, impossible, wrong and not lasting... how can you continue living in this world. It becomes senseless. A vicious circle, if you consider this idea in a consequent way.
R: well firstly let me say that any human being is authentic. However that doesn’t mean the impossibility of leaving or being satisfied with life! I say it is unsustainable because you can’t live without having any references and being yourself! You have to be conscious that you are not an individual; you are the result of a culture, a context, parents, friends and so many other factors. However this doesn’t imply that you can’t form your own opinions and your character!
In addition when you are aware of that factor you can easily maneuver around it! ‘Conscious of the self’ can go either to rebirth or death according to your intentions and beliefs. Intellectually you can be dormant or not! It is an option that everyone takes consciously or not! In fact you can really become senseless. The example of NFN!!!
Part 2/2
ReplyDelete> Rebirth = dying? Death equals death? So? Why?
R: Phoenix!
You either have two options:
First you follow the example of phoenix and you are constantly regenerating yourself which leads to transcendence, because you are not necessarily attached to something, which leads to an endless cycle of renovation and development.
Secondly you face what is given to you and you accept it without questioning it! The reality is not consensual and because of that the realm that we live is almost an impossibility because there is no escape from it apart from knowledge! I refer to ‘Authenticity in times of political and historical collapse’ because the idea of progress and change is something from the twenty century so far the idea of progress is translated in a compulsive passiveness by for example most of our politicians! Health and safety issues for example: (Why can’t you make a revolution in England?)
> Art is "a mark that is left by the act of the theft" of what? Other people's time by showing or publishing your personal way of seeing and articulating your perception?
R: Your conclusion is very ironic not to say very critical, but nonetheless what I mean by the act of theft is the fact that you as person and as artist you are appropriating what surrounds you and transforming it to present in a similar way but in a different context (Check the text The Creator (part2/3)).
However your point of view is also interesting but that is not the direction that I want to give.
In addition the act of theft makes part of our existence as partly our way of surviving in the world not as plagiarism or robbing, but instead being a sponge to what surrounds us!
> And finally, your conclusion that objectification is related to death is at least for me not a straight-forward idea from this document...
R: we tend to rationalize everything! It is inherent to our nature and the way we need to understand the world! Objectification is not related to people but objects and facts and everything else. People are boxed in because they are different!
Once again death shouldn’t be understood as a straightforward word. That would be an interesting question to ask ourselves what is death!? Believe me if you ask yourself the possible meanings of the word to you, you will find it a rich word full essence and power!
henning m. lederer said...
ReplyDeleteA short reply to some of your answers:
Concerning the intuitivity of decisions and the process of rationalisation, I agree with you that we normally have a first impression, a feeling of like or dislike - in german we call the instinct of the gut - when we approach a work or a piece of art. But at least for me as a designer, I do not rely on that feeling but I try to understand and, yes, rationalize the reason or the origin of these decisions. Otherwise it is only a subjective and by this irrelevant or wrong opinion - at least from an objective point of view.
--
What you describe within the paragraph of self-consciousness, reminds me on the philosophical term of 'dialectical materialism' by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels - joining the Idealism by Hegel and Feuerbach's Materialism:
The material world (what you call the non-individual surrounding), perceptible to the senses, has objective reality independent of mind or spirit. But they did not deny the reality of mental or spiritual processes but affirmed that ideas could arise, therefore, only as products and reflections of material conditions. So, it is both: Your individual self that shapes you and your character, but also the cultural and social envronment around you. And vice versa: The society is forming your character.
--
Why can’t you make a revolution in England? Well. Being in Norwich for about 8 months is already an answer, don't you think :-)
--
...
That's it for the moment.
... and if you are interested in other ways of explaining complex coherences, have a look at this website: http://utangente.free.fr/index2.html ... a great resource of great pdf-versions of maps and visual networks.
ReplyDelete