User:Lidia.Pereira/Trimesters/RWRM/Int

WHAT
"SLASH News" is a website whose interface mimicks that of BBC News. When you access it, a new narrative is generated based on the daily BBC RSS Feeds and Harry Potter Slash Fiction. "SLASH News" brings into play ideas of promiscuity as deeply connected to power structures. Also, as part of my interest towards our participation in culture and how that participation, even when explicit, is monetized implicitly, I tried to reflect on how can that explicit participation remain in the user's domain.
"Tea Time Talks" is a browser-chatroom in which you can interact with authors whose literary work is in the public domain. You start the conversation by searching for a specific word. The conversation unfolds by picking up a random word out of your answer to the result you got from your search, and so on and so forth. When you're done chit chatting with Balzac, or say, Dostoevski, you can save your interaction, thus generating a new narrative.
The "Cadavre Exquis" project is a simple experiment with a digital, browser based cadavre exquis.

Why did you make a work about Slash Fiction?
I was interested in the idea of user generated narratives as opposed to a narrative which is closed, contained within certain institutions. In thinking this I was also questioning what kind of narratives would be meaningful to mix. What new meaning can be extracted from these narratives? What already existing meanings can be made more visible? I chose Harry Potter Slash Fiction, that is, user-generated content (fan-fiction), and BBC RSS Feeds, contained narratives which are not as transparent as one would hope. Behind the idea of mixing these two narratives was the hope that it would underline the promiscuity within power structures. I'm using the language of ridicule to underline the aspect of Slash Fiction that already exists in the news, that they do already contain this "erotic" aspect in them. Even in the presentation of the work I try to showcase this by appropriating the corporate image of BBC. I tried to underline this on my platform, where i tried to create the feeling of strangeness, where something is off but not quite.

In your work there is an element of "geekiness", you seem to be interested in the rebellious internet communities. Do you see yourself as part of this communities, do you actually spend a lot of time in chartrooms or reading user made content?
Actually no. Until recently I was quiet info-excluded, I was more into books and analogue information sources. The user-generated content online platforms are more or less new for me and I'm still discovering my way in those waters.

Do you see these communities as counter movements to the BBC type institutionalized information source?
Yes I do. The internet became the central platform for sharing information. So it's interesting to see what kind of place these subcultures have in it. Can they have a say or can they have a role in this ever-more centralized and institutionalized information platform?

In all your works there is an element of randomness and chance. Is that important for you?
It is not a conscious decision even though I do like the element of surprise. It may be because I'm still in the process of exploring different programing languages. However I'm in control of the content after it has been produced by the users. That's also a challenge: how you bring the outcome that has been generated by others back to the idea that started it, at the same time being able to mantain these elements of randomness.

This element of chance and unpredicted outcome is very appealing for the user. It makes it kind of a play like activity. Don't you agree?
Yes it is kind of a play. In general I think it is one of the compelling things about browser-contained projects, that they allow you to play with it, to use it, to make it your own. For example in the Slash News project the user ends up clicking the refresh button on the webpage to see what else will happen, laugh on with the results and so on. I think humor can be used to engage the viewer, which is very important for me.

Is humor more of personal satisfaction or deliberate conceptual choice?
I never really though about it, I guess it's something that I do out of enjoyment. What is deliberate is the aspect of play and engagement. To make users aware of certain reality or, if they are aware, to allow them to share their knowledge, to contribute to mine or the community knowledge.

The subject of your works is quite political but you use programming languages as your main tools. How do you combine this two, do you see any similarities?
When you write code you use an existing tool, but you still have a certain control over it. I have read somewhere that in the present economy code is the new means of production. So if you have an access to writing code or you understand the basics of programming you are more likely to participate in more meaningful ways. In this sense writing code relates to politics because it is also about how you affect and participate the environment that you are in, it is a tool of empowerment. I think it comes down to not being satisfied with the tools that others created and instead creating your own.

Do you feel that the tools you create affect the content of your works?
They do indeed. At least in the sense of the technical limitations I have when it comes to programming. It is indeed a challenge to realize your ideas when you don't have the technical skills that they require. Sometimes I can't execute my ideas in the way that I would hope to so I need to make compromises. The challenge is to not let this affect the content, to not oversimplify the work.

How would be the ideal way to present your work?
That's a pickle! I don't have much experience with presenting this type of projects. My background is graphic design, so I'm used to very practical realities. This is very different. I don't know if all these projects would work in a gallery space.

Do you find it challenging to present a work that is made for digital/online world in an actual space?
Yes, and recently I started to worry more about it. When I started them, they were meant to exist in the browser. Something that exists within the (sub)culture of user-participation. My main interests were the instrumentalization of user generated content and how can one counteract it. What content users can produce that makes it harder for institutions, corporations and agencies to grab and monetize it?

So you think that there are presentational challenges in the digital/online space as well?
Ideally these project have to exist in the online space for some time before they are presented in a gallery space. Then I can experiment with the possibilities that the physical space can offer. I think in their current stage the projects won't be engaging enough just yet. In a conversation I had with Thomson and Craighead about the project "Cadavre Exquis" I received some advice on possible gallery presentations: what about having multiple narratives being projected and changed by users on the fly?

Almost like a fruit that needs to be ripen before being picked from the tree?
Exactly, I feel that at this point the projects are still in proccess, very much "under construction". When the time comes to present them in the gallery I can think about the elements that can be added: performance, play, interactivity etc. These are the points that I can focus on as the next step of these projects.