by ·0 Comments

Art; a piece created to perfection by an artist and displayed to the audience for its beauty.

That’s what I thought art was. Now, however, I have an new understanding of what art is. It not only refers to just beautiful artworks done solely by an artist, but also raw and imperfect pieces created by both the artist and the audience.

The Symposium emphasised just that, and showed us through several live art and telematic performances how the third space can be used in art to bring people from all over the world together. Maria X explained that “telematic performances transform the screen or projection surface from a non-place to a place of live encounter”, which showed in one of the examples shown in the keynotes, Telematic Dreaming by Paul Sermon (1992). In this performance,  the artist was videoed live lying down on a bed and a live stream projection was done on a in a different location. This allowed people to meet telematically in the third space, and by projecting on a bed instead of a flat screen, it created a more intimate space for both participants and the artist.

In this day and age, telematic interactions have become part of our daily lives, such as the use of Skype, where we are able to see, hear, and speak to someone in a remote place in real time. In Annie Abraham’s performance during the Symposium, she collaborated with a few other participants, using Adobe Connect as a third space as a performance platform. Throughout the performance, the participants would echo and/or mimic one another’s words and actions based on the topic they are on.

For instance, they started off with no visuals, but just the sound of their voices, saying random phrases and numbers, echoing words such as “excellent”. What I found interesting was that given no instruction or obligation to take part, those watching the performance were actively commenting via text in the chat. At first, many commented on the strangeness of it all, but gradually, we all started taking part, echoing just as the participants were and even retyping the numbers, words, and phrases they said.

They later went on to uncover their webcams, trying to cooperate and show visuals of similar objects, like a white wall and items of similar colour and size. By the end of the performance, everyone had revealed their faces to the audience, going silent the moment they were exposed. They all closed their eyes and only disconnected when they heard Annie’s alarm go off.

This performance embraces and showcases glitches, be it the time lags due to poor connection, resulting in poor synchronicity, or technical issues causing participants to miss out important ques. For example, judging by the fact that Helen, one of the participants, did not open her eyes for a long while after everyone else had done so, it’s possible to say that she might have an issue with her audios.

Aside form glitches, destruction was also embraced, as can be seen in the performances done on the last day of the Symposium. Titled ‘igaies’ (intimate glitching across internet errors), the last performance directed by Jon Cates, who performed with several other artist. The performances were independent on one another, but occurred simultaneously, being recorded and streamed live to the audience. There was chaos and destruction going on, such as the leeches being added to Roberto Sifuentes’ face coupled with Arcángel Constantini’s drawings with noise soundscaped played over the entire performance.

This performance filled with disorder, destruction and glitches shows a few of the little mistakes that happen, yet instead of editing them out or restarting the act to hide them, they were the center of the entire performance. Watching performances like these, I am reminded that imperfection and mistakes are all part of art and should be embraced too.

Overall, I have learnt that art does not necessarily only refer to all things beautiful and perfect, nor is it something created by a single artist. Art celebrates the imperfection in things, connecting people on an intimate level, no matter the distance in between them.

by ·0 Comments

When we think of art, a piece that showcases beauty and perfection comes to mind; a flawless master piece that shows no mistake. Art is creation, but it can also be made with destruction, and that is what we set out to do for this mini-project.

 

 

My group decided to create a video showing the process of destruction of a block of styrofoam through means like cutting, stabbing, dissolving, and crushing. While the process was mainly physical, we also played around with the shakiness of the camera shots and added certain filters to further emphasis the chaos that can be destruction.

With every new method of disfiguring done to the styrofoam, the intensity of destruction increases. There was really no wrong way to do it; we were converting a smooth block of styrofoam into a state of imperfection, full of holes, scratches, and dents. There was a point where by the camera was too close to the block that it got hit, causing shakiness in the shot. Normally, this imperfection would mean the shot would have to be retaken or edited out. However, in this case, we chose to embrace this accident, incorporating it into the video.

The results of this accident actually brings out the unpredictability and chaoticness that is destruction. Accepting and embracing this error helps to capture the raw visualisation of destruction. As described by Menkman, R. (2009) in Glitch Studies Manifesto, ” the beautiful creation of a glitch is uncanny and sublime; the artist tries to catch something that is the result of an uncertain balance, a shifting, un-catchable, unrealized utopia connected to randomness and idyllic disintegrations.”

In addition to carrying out various methods of destruction and keeping all the mistakes made during the process, we also added a few filters and effects while editing the video. In Randall Packer’s, Conversation with Jon Cates (2014), Jon mentioned that, “they might be imperfect and noisy, and that might be what attracts us or me to those systems,” to which I agree with, thus leading to the decisions to make edits to our video. For the first few shots, a filter was added to make the footage look blotchy. As the video progresses, we changed to a negative filter, making everything look dark and distorted. The unnatural colours add a sense of surrealism and  fear to the work, as viewing destruction would make one feel. Some of the footage was also done in time-lapse, speeding up the process of deterioration of the styrofoam. This sped up process allows us to take better notice that something is indeed happening, building the intensity of chaos and destruction.

 

Overall, I’ve learned that that art is not just about creating something perfect, but also about embracing noise and mistakes made. The world we live in is riddled with imperfection, and we tend to cover them up, but as artists, creating something with these raw imprefections can leave us in awe and captivate the attention of others, just as any other artwork.

by ·0 Comments

 

G̨̛͕̭̻̜̱̮̗̀̔̎͐͊̃̃͂̕͜ͅ

Ļ̙͉̘̩̞̘̺̦̤̒͌̅͛̈́̊͑̕͝͠

i̢̯̝̙̥̼̱̝̤͑͗̏͒̂̾̍̅͐̕͜

t͍̫̼̣̪͉͉̱̖̤͆̅̓͒͒͗̀̾̔͂

Ç̢̲̼̤̙͍̖̎̓̾͑͋͒̓̚͘͜͜͝

 

ẖ̢͖͇̥͖̠̫̥̌͗̏̋̂̌̊̒̅͜͝

 

Today, we learned how to create glitches in images, and this is a glitched portrait of myself. With four people in a group, we took turns editing and distorting one another’s portraits.

Since everyone could edit each photo as they pleased, there’s no way for the subject to control the process or know what the final image would look like. This mini-project is somewhat similar to a Do-It-With-Others (DIWO); There is a lack of control on the creation of the glitched image as everyone is free to edit, warp, and distort the portrait, working together to create the artwork.

For this portrait, it gets grainier and more distorted as it goes through each group member, but up till the second last image, we can still make out the outline of the hand and other elements. The last edit, however, with the enlarged cells, makes the portrait completely unrecǫ̴̢͇̙͓͕̲̳͂̂̊̏͞͡ͅgnisable. If anything, we can only make out the dark patch in the bottom-right corner to be my jeans.

Overall, I think this glitch could be improved (ironically, considering how I used to think that glitches were mostly accidental errors), by making the finally product retain certain key visuals, like the hand, while keeping the distorted look.

Nonetheless, no one has full control over the outcome of each portrait, and that’s alright;

it simulates the interesting inconș̸̪̖̻̳̾̓́̋̉͊͟͜͡i͔͔̺̱̍̉̍͆̌̾̇̕͜s̴̨͔͙͚̼̖̣̩̅̉̿͂̃͋̎̏͘͟ṯ̨̠̟̩̠̪̬̦͋́̉̿̀̈̄͞͡é̡̨͔̲̗͈̟̰̝̗̔͆̂͌̆͌̕͠ṋ̡̨̛͇̼͔͎̐̑̎̓̄̏͂͊č̩̠̤̱̞̿͂̎̌͡į̷̢̰̰͚̜̖̬͛̊̀͑̇͞e̷͚̘͓̯̖͈̥͂͂̍͐͗̔̉͐̅͢͝s̛̭͚̞̱̗̝̗̹̤͗͂͒̑̃̕̚͟ ĉ͕̩͙͈̩̪̃̊̀͂̕a̪̮͖͈̺̜̍͛̀̏͌̑́̕͘u͍̣͉̰̞͉̹͈̍́̾̃̅͐̀ṡ̢̧̮̺̤̞̰͐̄̍̍͑̕̚͞͞ͅe̵̡͓̼̩̥̪͑̿̍͑͌̐̃͟͡d̶͍̣̳̺̘̗̀͊̂͊̆̍͝ b̡̧̪̯̜̼͚̯̼̈͑́̆̀̆̂̿͢y̷̨̟̰͉͍̳͑͗̓̓̔͐̆ g̨̱̟̥̩͉̃͒̎͒̑l̵̮̪͍̣̫̃̾͛̌̄̓͡͞i̛͎̺̦̪̝̎̈́́͂͡͞t̷̡̟̮̪̠̳̘̙̐͌̈́̇̎́͘͘͝c̡͓͓̱͔̈̊̈̎͂̀̚͝h̸͕̹͓̦̫̹͕̭̜̏̌̋̐̀̄̔͑͠͝į̤̞̜̼̃̊̾͑͊̆́̾͝͞ͅn̴̛̬͓̥͚̮̈̅͑̀̈g͖̯͍̼̰͚̹͊͌̌̂̾͋̎̂̏͢.̶̢͔̮̗͉̺͑̈͒͟͞͠ͅ