From the pecha kucha presentation my focus was on the project “Being Instinctive” and trying to explore the perceptions of human instinct. Something that had additionally risen from my work on this project was the idea of discussion and debate, of sparking conversation between people on subjects that they may not know much about but still have judgements and opinions on. The moment I realised I was interested in this was while I was discussing people’s perceptions of instincts, which I spent much of one day doing; talking to people in the studio and friends and family on the phone. Initially it was informal discussion, followed by a series of questions, which in themselves stimulated discussion between various people in the studio. It was while talking to Miriam, with Stacey joining in that I really became aware of my interest in this area. This got pushed to the side for the moment, as I was trying to draw my work on instinct to a close in time for the pecha kucha presentation. It resurfaced again during the drawing week as I attempted to divide my focus between the ideas of instinct and discussion but struggled to find an interesting area where these ideas meshed.
I was torn between one idea, discussion, which I was really engaged and interested in but found hard to explain, and the other idea, instinct, which I thought would possibly make a better area for a final year project. It was holding me back from fully exploring either concept in any kind of meaningful way, making the whole experience of the week of drawing unpleasant and frustrating. Eventually, after getting to the point of ripping up some of my own drawings, I realised that I had to make a decision on which direction I was going to explore. I chose instinct but after a tutorial with Matt, realised that it was pretty much a dead end direction and that my real interest lay in discussion and debate
Before Sunrise
Since I watched this movie a few years ago, there’s one quote that has already stuck with me:
“I believe if there's any kind of God it wouldn't be in any of us. not you or me but just this little space in between. If there's any kind of magic in this world it must be in the attempt of understanding someone, sharing something. I know, it's almost impossible to succeed but who cares really? The answer must be in the attempt.”
During the drawing week, while attempting to explore discussion, one of the things that continued to surface in my mind was this idea in the quote of “the space between you and me”. The movie as a whole served and still serves as a source of inspiration, a kind of leaping off point. Of course, it’s entirely scripted, but it’s very well done and the conversation seems to flow naturally as the two central characters move through the city. It really focuses more on discussion than debate, but the two can evolve very easily into each other, which perhaps raises a question of when a discussion becomes a debate and vice versa. I have been using the two terms in a sort of slightly vague way without really knowing entirely the difference and perhaps as a short exercise need to find a way of defining and pining them down.
With Before Sunrise, and perhaps the sequel as well, despite raising the above points, also led me to think about how time and place can effect discussion. I don’t particularly mean time in the sense of here and now, November 2008, 10am or whatever, though that would of course have an impact, but more the sense of how long a discussion might last, how long that ‘space between’ is going to exist. The effect this can have on levels of intimacy between people seems to be important, and whether people knew each other before the discussion they might be having. The point with the film, I suppose, in relation to this is that the two central characters didn’t know the other existed before that night and believe originally that this will be the only time they have together. Therefore, the amount of thoughts, feelings and memories seems to increase in proportion with the decreasing amount of time they have with each other. From a perhaps more cynical angle, this could be seen as a result of the fact they are in a way ‘stuck’ with each other and have a need to keep conversation going, which seems to have more of a connection to real life. This is just a general point, and possibly a rather sweeping statement but sometimes it seems these situations can create an area of false intimacy. Or perhaps it's simply that everyone wishes to be understood on some level, to have their views and thoughts aired and as with pub based conversations, the introduction of alcohol can encourage this. A slightly obscure reference but it leads me to think about a character in Stargate Atlantis, and when there was a possibility the city and it's inhabitants would be destroyed in a week or two, he decided to record all his ideas and thoughts to be sent home in case they might be of use to someone.
But this is all musings on the side. Continuing with exploring discussion and debate I was interested in the idea of formal debate on serious subjects set in informal locations such as cafes and pubs. It plays with this idea of "setting the world to rights." I think some of most interesting ideas can arise from casual conversation which is a large part of why I'm interested in this topic; the things that come out of conversation between individuals, the area that is created between them, where they each bring their own experiences, ideas, prejudices, theories into one time and place which then becomes unique.
So, basically I’ve been just exploring debate a little; visited the House of Commons, cafe’s, pubs. The studio is obviously a place of rich discussion and easily accessible. My big problem at the moment is I need a more effective system of mapping what is going on, a clearer focus and I need to be immersing myself more completely in debate. Probably the greatest, most deeply frustrating weakness I have is inaction, and I need to be producing a hell of a lot more, starting from now.
Presentation slides
No comments:
Post a Comment