Micro-Project 2 – Crowd-Sourced Art

What is the content of the work and who is creating it?

This is a continuous narrative told by various random individuals who contributed to the storytelling by writing one sentence each; in other words, this is a form of open-source storytelling.

Just like an open-source software, like Gimp, this form of storytelling acted as a space for individuals to craft and dictate how a narrative unfolds. However, a scaffold had to be first set in place in the form of instructions and the first sentence which suggests the setting. Participants contribute to the narrative by continuing the story with a sentence. Hence, although the work was first created by Gwen and I, the essence of the work was created through the collaborative efforts of the public, giving the public due ownership.

Where does this work take place?

This work takes place online, on a Google document. Since this was a Google document that was made public, anyone on the internet could access the document, regardless of their possession of a Google account.

How does this work involve social interaction?

The work involves social interaction between individuals online. With a semblance of continuity in the narrative, participants had to collaborate or at the very least, consider the content of the previous participants so as to keep up with the storyline.

How is your crowd-sourced project different from one that is created by a single artist/creator?

This crowd-sourced project is different than if it were created solely by one artist as it took on many turns and turned out nothing like what Gwen and I (the initial creators) had thought it would. Since it was open to the discretion of the individuals to dictate the narrative, their idiosyncratic thought pattern, humour and decision making were all part of the process of crafting the next sentence.

I noticed this especially when one participant assumably, from business (she was sporting the business faculty shirt) seemed to have struggled to continue the narrative as the storyline got absurd at that point. She broke the fantasy chain and wrote that “Imagination isn’t real” instead. This was a stark difference from the whimsical and ridiculous sentences that came before and after, mostly written by ADM students. This reminds me that an interaction piece, if received by a wide array of individuals, would render differing perspectives and responses. This reflects also, the social behaviours of different strata of people or personalities.

The story also took on a very bold leap after Shrek appeared which embolden the rest to add on the incongruity and silliness of the narrative. This instance of herd mentality reveals to me that an interaction piece could strive to push beyond the social boundaries or to break social codes, so as to deeply engage my audience with my art.

Assignment 1: Axonometric Drawing – Castle on the hill

With the task of creating a structure out of a minimum of 15 pieces, I came up with a castle-like composition when I saw the door lego piece.

Since the lecturer often made references to lego instruction manuals during class, I took inspiration from vintage instruction manuals for kids and came up with a counterfeit brand, “YAGO”.

Click on image for full-sized image.

Isometric Drawings of lego pieces

Process of digital rendering

Creating the Third Place

1. Why did you choose this space or object to photograph?

The central exit was my selected space as it represents the threshold between work and play for me. I’m usually only within the physical construct of the ADM faculty because of mandatory appointments like class or project meetings. Thus, being in school is somewhat dreadful since it meant that work has to be done. However, beyond this threshold, work becomes an option and I’m allowed to play and or relax. As cliché and stupid as it sounds, I feel more liberated when I interact with that space/threshold and push through those doors.

2. What are some of the characteristics of this alternative virtual space you had created collectively?

It is a public space where the individual can contribute and interact with other contributors to give a host of perspectives about a specific topic, in this case, about a space, also known as ADM.

Due to the multitudes of sentiments conveyed about this physical space, #1010ADM can transcend its simple physical presence and is now personified online, in which specific places now carry their idiosyncratic features. For instance, as much as points of exits (doors and stairways) exists physically as a barrier between physical spaces, they are also synonymous with the notion of a gateway to another mind space – respite.

3. Under what circumstance will this alternative virtual space change?

This virtual space may change when contributors remove their content from #1010ADM, this is destructive as it creates a deficit to the online persona of ADM. In the event that everyone removes their posts, ADM then ceases to exist beyond its physical concrete walls and is void of attachments or sentiments.

4. How does this project relate to what we discussed in the lecture regarding co-creation, the concept of Do-It-Yourself (DIY), Do-It-With-Others (DIWO)?

This is almost similar to DIWO, only that sentiments are shared instead of ideas. This could also be a microcosm of the mechanics of DIWO and its benefits. #10101ADM could exist as an online persona of ADM only because its contributors had the incentive and stake to share. This made their contributions genuine and thoughtful. In the same sense, perhaps DIWO can only work if its contributors are equally invested.