- Literacy of the glitch is up, live and running.
- Recurrent questions about form have been adressed:
- How should ABR and ABER be reported?
- What does visuality bring to ABER?
- How can the potential for interaction and exploration by visitors be enticed?
- Still lingering:
- How can trafic/eyes/minds be driven to the site/project?
- Is posting it and twitting it continually enough?
- Not enough feedback to regard it as successful or failed…
Throughout the semester I kept harping on form and the whole aesthetic experience. but now that it has been set up to respond to those very concerns (literacy of the glitch, I mean) how can I ensure and entice exploration? can I? tweets about it keep getting favorited and re-tweeted by tweet followers, G+ postings get some (very few, very general) responses but nothing strong enough to provide grounds for any conclussions… there is frustration in not knowing if what has been created is good enough to create/disseminate knowledge/information/explorations… maybe the lack of knowledge points to knowledge in its own right. Still very soon to know for sure.
The possibility to conduct ABR may not be enough, avenues/channels must be present for it to reach audiences… they exist,
- how to get to them?
- do we need more of them?
- more open?
- more institutions invested in them?
- less institutional?
Nothing conclusive, only suggestions through questions. Doesn’t that characterize ABR in many ways?
Final project (final thoughts)
- the blog component can also suggest some questions to suggest reflections after each exploration.
- these questions must not require answers (although they would be nice) but really just a suggestion of where to go
- it needs to be housed within its own domain (literacyoftheglitch.org) the temporary adress should be that, only temporary.
- a bibliography section- readings that shaped many of my own explorations…. suggested readings for visitors.
- a section on new literacies that may serve as context within which I wish (I love alliteration) literacy of the glitch to be understood.
Idea for final project (slightly more developed)
- the creation of a website that allows visitors to explore the glitch as a vehicle to understand new media in meaningful way.
- it will center around the question of what are the underlying structures of digital media that can be revealed through the practice of glitch art.
- it will reference seven different notions of the potential of the glitch as tension, failure, design, destination, journey, poetry and deceit. (seven interconnected pages)
- not explicative but evocative… ambiguos experience open to what the visitor brings.
- a blogging component that will de-construct each section so visitors can explore the sites own underlying structure.
- literacy of the glitch=the ability to use glitches not only as vehicles of exploration but also as modes of expression.
Idea for final project.
Some months ago I was part of a conference that celebrated the first 10 years of the Visual Arts program at Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad Juárez. My intervention was meant to be collective in nature where I invited peers and colleagues to create their own manifestos on new media art pedagogy and then present and discuss them with me and the rest of the attendees. Since the majority of us were not in Ciudad Juárez at the time of the conference we decided to present and discuss it as a Google+ hangout:
My own intervention was conceptualized around the idea of exploring new media through the glitch: the unforeseen potential hiding within new media by wielding them in ways they weren’t meant to:
This seems to be the perfect jumping off point to dive into an ABER project that expands upon these very ideas.
Three notions come to mind when discussing the value of visual images in research:
a neurotic monologuist discusses the possibility of losing sight in one of his eyes. a talker requires visuality as much as a painters, sculptors. research has long been considered the realm of language and semantics; the same might be said for monologues.
when I frist heard about this, I had no clue what 24 miles up meant. when I saw it, I knew exactly what 24 miles up meant.
Can I explain the experience of seeing Girl Talk live? Can I explain his practice as a mash-up artist? An infographic sure can.
All semester long I have been thinking about the medium of choice to report the results of an arts-based research project. On the one hand I feel like the traditional academic journal offers a structure that may prove to be too rigid and too focused on definitive conclussions to serve as an adequate alternative for much of the research that results out of art practices. Instead of displaying its possibilities and strengths, in many cases this format ends up showcasing the many ways in which arts-based research does not fulfill the requirements traditionally associated with research stemming largely from expectations created by time-honored scientific principles. In this respect, a process that by very definition favors ambiguity and subjectivity, as arts-based research is purported to do, might be better served to search for different formats and media that will showcase its strengths and uniqueness. I feel like Andrea Fraser’s Museum Highlights: A Gallery Talk might be a good example of how to take advantage of a specific art practice through the written word: the perfomative aspect of the project is echoed in the active engagement that readers must display in order to switch back and forth between the actual text and the footnotes that at times prove to be more important and of more substance. Of course this is only one case of what it seems to be a case-by-case proposition, a proposition that by its very nature might not permit a general consensus be formed as to what exactly constitutes arts-based research, much less what constitutes innovative arts-based research of relevance; a general consensus that has already been formed and been in place for scientific research… in the form of academic journal articles. The road is an uphill one.
Relational Aesthetics [0f_d4t4_5t0r4g3]
it is an embodiment of ‘the cloud’. that amorphous, ethereal space where applications like Google Drive, Dropbox, Facebook and Twitter exist while making data available to every user with the right password. there is nothing amorphous or ethereal about a warehouse filled with the glow of hardrives running perpetually with a security officer looking over the stored information.
its aesthetics are quite relational in nature though; existing out of necessity due to a world-wide community of users constantly sharing data. this is the experience of online communities stripped to the very core.
the glow of harddrives.
a security officer.
each of the subsequent images were created by converting the above picture into a .txt file and randomly inserting the phrase “RELATIONALAESTHETICS” within their alphanumeric information.
PDF of the altered image as a .txt file: Datacenter Times-copy
PDF of the altered image as a .txt file: Datacenter Times copy 2
PDF of the altered image as a .txt file: Datacenter Times copy 3
And now as the required Animated GIF
An indecent docent wants to be “graceful. Rituals of family and love and orderliness…” she wishes the visitor to explore museums from their innards out and wishes the reader to read from the left to right. (footnotes and all).
Museums are detention facilities after all.
to Jongeward‘s own portraits of non-visible and non-heard characters.
An exquisite cadaver of sorts.
Images by Shanna. Text by Mara. Animated GIF by myself.