Category: Research

experimental interaction // Research Critique 3

Members: Joey, Amanda, Celine

In what way has our project embraced problems, inconsistencies and accidents, I’d say that with acceptance, we, for one, didn’t keep with similar video orientations and dimensions. We accepted each person’s style of edit, making use of it to create a sense of instability and discomfort to our viewers. As Rosa Menkman says,

“Glitch studies attempts to balance nonsense and knowledge. It searches for the unfamiliar while at the same time it tries to de-familiarize the familiar. This studies can show what is acceptable behavior and what is outside of acceptance or the norm.”

— Rosa Menkman, “Glitch Studies Manifesto”

It’s through this attempt at making the familiar extremely out of the norm, the idea of making you turn your head back to look at it a second time, because you realise something was wrong. BUT! You didn’t realise what was wrong to begin with, untill you looked at it the second time. We gave you scenes of ADM, but with the right edits, it made ADM a little weird, a little wonky, and that was what created a new perspective in the video.

In our project, we decided to use video as our base format, and tried to create a sense of unbalance within the balance of normalcy. Walking around ADM, each of us took our own set of videos, based on what we felt was weird, shaking our devices or leaving them entirely still. We then edited them individually, to create a sense of glitch within the video cuts themselves. This involved either increasing or decreasing the speed, reversing them, or changing the visual aspect of it (changing the levels, adding music, etc).

There was a sense of mind deterioration, where normalcy was disrupted, as well as the idea of the destruction using video editing.

I would like to quote Chip Lord,

“It was more about the power of that image, what it would mean. And of course we have all experienced the actual moments, or days following the assassination, as sophomores in college in 1963.”

— Chip Lord, “Interview with Chip Lord” by Randall Packer

By creating The Eternal Frame, Ant Farm recreated a very powerful moment in American history. For one, the actual murder must have been a very sensitive topic to many, as he mentioned that there were many individuals who were against the type of works they were doing. It explores the distorting nature of media representation in which reality and fiction blend, using a ‘mockumentary’ style of filming. To recreate a scene that had been the childhood of many Americans, it gave a sense of power in something bizarre —  having a coloured HD version of the same moment from a decade ago (as well as a man in drag). It brought questions to the audience, and allowed them to rethink their ideas of the moment that the murder had happened. 

It was looking at a photo or a film and realising its many mistakes, for what ‘could have been solved’, or what ‘could have been retold’. It was giving a new layer of perspectives and opinions that one would not have looked at again if it was merely ‘perfect’.

And with this, I go by this quote by Jon Cates,

“Those systems might be broken, they might be glitched, and they might be imperfect and noisy, and that might be what attracts us or me to those systems.”

— Jon Cates, “Glitch Expectations” by Randall Packer

I am a fan of Korean idols, and recently found a music video which I found really interesting. At first glance, it was a typical song about apology, showing a pretty face with a pretty video.

But on closer inspection, I realise that the idol moved weirdly, and there were times when the video quality was that of a old handheld video-cam. It gave the whole music video a very eery feel, and suddenly it felt very personal, when it dawned upon me that it was a robot being styled to look like the idol. It was so uncanny that it creeped me out, along with the shaky videos and glitches, it was like looking at a scientist’s experiment video. Throughout the music video, the robot apologises, her lips move (although out of sync) and her head jerks (although extremely unnaturally) to imitate that of a living being. It was a very powerful message about being forced to be how everyone wanted her to be, and with this uncanny effect, gave strong feelings to the viewer, that they ‘forced’ her to be like a robot who was ordered around and emotionless.

I feel like this links back to the quote mentioned earlier. Without the glitchy videos and the dysfunctional robot, the video would not have had the same effect, and that makes it attractive in its own way.

If you ever want to watch it here’s the video:

MIANHAE (Sorry) by Heize



experimental interaction // Research Critique 2


“Gradually they realised that they could arrange to telematically meet friends and relatives living on the opposite coast. Eventually, whole families would meet their distant loved ones through the ‘Hole’, some of whom had not seen each other for several years.”

— Maria Chatzichristodoulou, about the ‘Hole-in-Space’

What is the third space to you?

To me, the third space would be to share a moment with someone, even if we were not in the same physical space. It is the idea of being on a virtualised platform, and to sit together to eat and talk and basically become associated with one another, or possibly reconnect with someone else, as mentioned in the quote above.

How do we collapse boundaries in the third space?

In our tele-drift project, Amanda and I shared a drink despite being in a totally different location, and crossed boundaries to “physically” show our emotions. We were communicating verbally through the third space, but adding the physical factor of reaching out to each other, literally. This was what collapsed the boundaries, similar to how “Hole-in-Space” connected old friends and families. Our willingness to share with one another what we normally could not (given the distance): touch and the act of sharing at the same moment, rather than sending a can of milo through mail.

How do we create closeness and intimacy in the third space despite being in different locations?

But most startling is the fact that the third space is simply an integral fact of everyday life in the 21st century.”

— Randall Packer, The Third Space

With reference to the quote, to me, closeness would be the normalcy of everyday life. The fact that someone was able to share with me a very normal task despite being in a different location was a very intimate moment for me. It felt like the two of us were in close proximity and that we were not actually that far apart, and considering that we were so fascinated with the idea of being able to share made the experience all the more refreshing – like an exciting new touch to a typically mundane activity.

How did you virtually touch, hold objects, create a “third” body using different gestures despite being in different locations?

While holding a conversation, we would use our own body parts to represent the other’s while acting out what was requested of us. Likewise with the milo can, Amanda and I used our own hands to hold onto a can of milo and despite them being different milo cans, it still felt like “sharing”, when we passed it to each other and drank it, often asking if the other wanted a sip.

How did you “connect” and collaborate with one another remotely in this third space?

It gave the illusion that we were sitting right next to each other, or in front of each other. It felt like we were truly communicating what each of us wanted from the conversation, and in order to achieve a certain goal, we collaborated in a way we might not have done so easily in a normal, physical space.

“When we can no longer separate the real and the virtual (the post real), when the third space is just the way things are, well, that in sum is the current state of evolution.”

— Randall Packer, The Third Space

The idea that we were able to create that illusion was like, a peek into the realisation that the real and virtual could end up seeming inseparable, and while daunting, could bring across new possibilities in business opportunities, and more importantly, intimacy — something that seemed to have been lost after social media took over our lives.

experimental interaction // Research Critique 1

It’s Storytime!

Let’s create a story together!! 🙂

We worked on our Micro-Project #2 on 22/01 and managed to execute it on 29/01. Joey, Naomi, Nok Wan and myself created a game that involved everyone in the classroom to create a story together.

The Rules.

Every audience member was allowed to write a maximum of two sentence with a time limit of thirty seconds, in sequential order. One by one, they add on to a story being formed together by their peers before them, and at the very end we get to read what they have written. Instead of allowing the audience to have Ultimate Freedom what could be written, our team decided to give the audience some variables to accomplish. For example, we gave the first audience member to start the story a genre, and gave someone in the middle of the “queue” something to add.

Also, by the end of the story, the audience have to somehow work together and make sure a character disappeared, along with a plot twist.

The variables to aid the audience.

Compared to the traditional way of writing a story where a writer creates their own world from beginning to end, nothing was planned ahead – even us as the ‘artists’, did not know what would have been the end result. We were as clueless about how it would go and had no pre-assumptions to how it would have ended. As co-creators of a story, everyone had to work together to make sure that each sentence they made linked to the next, along with the assumption of what the previous co-creator was thinking.

Depending on how one would think, a story can take a drastic turn, and eventually affects how the other co-creators will write the story. It was like creating an infinite pathway, but with each different co-creator, a route was then formed, resulting in the finished story.

The Story.

As Marc Garrett has mentioned in the D.I.W.O article,

“The practice of DIWO allows space for an openness where a rich mixing of components from different sources crossover and build a hybrid experience.”

As mentioned earlier, each co-creator’s contribution could possibly be a dramatic twist. Even though one of our requirements was to create a plot twist, it was evident that what happened down the lane of creation, that what the first co-creator had assumed was not anything like the final outcome. It works the same way vice-versa where a waiting co-creator ends up looking at a piece of work-in-progress that was nothing like they expected. They have to read through everything and decide on a sentence that could create a question in the next person’s head. It was like a constant process of questions and answers not by one person’s hand, but by many: a discussion going on within that one moment of working together without actually conversing.

Our crowd-sourced artwork was certainly different in the sense that it was a literary piece of art. We also gave variables to create a higher level of ‘difficulty’, as a game, but also to guide the ‘players’, also known as co-creators, so they have a rough idea of what to create within 30 seconds.

Lei working hard 🙂

It was very similar to how the Human Clock made use of co-creator’s ability to create their own pieces to contribute to a bigger project. In our artwork, the audience has their own power to change the story in any way they like, just like how the Human Clock gave their audience the authority to manipulate the picture in any way they wanted, as long as it had the numbers necessary to form the artwork (the necessary ‘variables’ for this piece.)

Like-wise, it was similar to Yoko Ono’s Cut Piece, where co-creator by co-creator, their options would be affected by the one in front of them. In Cut Piece, when someone were to cut a piece of sleeve off and there was no more sleeve to cut, the following person would not be able to cut any more sleeve, and decide to cut another piece of clothing instead. In our artwork, if someone were to mention that a character had already disappeared, then the next few people would not be able to mention a disappearance, and rethink their sentences again.

I hope everyone had fun!