User:Emily/Self-directed 03/03

Introduction

to be added

Methodology Text

In the text below, I will explain my recent research and works. By reflecting on them I will state my previous working method and also try to establish new working methodology in order to assist my later practices.

In last two trimesters, I have been working on how manipulation of audiovisual content (mainly cinematic materials) could alter the way of seeing. My work started in a quite simple manner, in which films are utilised as input which produces books, videos, and browser-based work, and interactive installations. The idea derived from my previous experience of déjà vu, a sensation that you feel what you are experiencing at the moment, have been already experienced before. This may has complicated reasons about how our brain works, however that’s not what I want to address here. For me it raises doubt about the ability of recognition - namely the recognition to time-space, to real fact, to personality, etc. Because of my interests in video editing. It brought me back to think about montage, but in a more broad and free sense. I started to research the cut-up techniques through different times. I have looked at the French Surrealists' game of Exquisite Corpse , Tristan Tzara's cut-up poems, the French literature group Oulipo, William S. Burroughs's and Brion Gysin's fold-in technique, etc. They were mainly used in the creation of literature and later later have been extended to video making. All these works are more or less leave a space for the performativity of their own materials.

Review of recent works

• One of my works reflects on this research is a photo book, which was produced using images and texts (subtitles) taken from the Roman Polanski's film, “The Tenant”. The images and texts are extracted at moments when characters say the word "know", and then the frames and texts are reassembled into the form of book. Some of the pages are designed to be shorter than the rest, which provides the opportunity for the reader to read across pages, and at different intervals. The repeated “know”s are situated in a half-baked story (original film), within which readers can break the linear reading experience.

(image to insert)

How can a moment be altered when we view a narration from one point, and jumping to another, or starting from the middle, or if we were to then move the beginning to the end?

• I try to experiment with different ways of experiencing and perceiving. Later on I made a split-screen video work. The audiovisual content is extracted from the most dramatic part of the same film, The Tenant. The original shots play along with reversed each single shots. The beginning and the end of each shot can be viewed at the same time and goes on playing to the end (and beginning) of the sequence.

(image to insert)

There are actually doubled contents but the work does not aim to double the vision but produce an altered viewing experience, different from watching a linear narrative. What I liked here is since in the work I used such a simple strategy, people could already get it straight away while watching. But they would still sense the altered experience, which I think will make people more aware of the manipulation of the content. The same data can be addressed to different experiences and purposes.

Since I got a lot of question about why I used films within my work I started to think about the content I worked with. At first sight, film may be considered as a closed system. I understand by closed system it means actually the director's choice of moving image sequences, the final result. But the media form itself rests on a database upon which choices can be made. I read an articlefrom writer, Daniel Coffeen, in which he states "a film is the product of a selection from different shots, hours of dailies and coverage – the film rests on a database." As he told the film, “what we end up seeing is only one possibility. Cut it again and there's a different movie.” Therefore, it is not hard to imagine a film has the potential to be treated as raw material. It is open-ended. The database of it is autonomous. The pieces of footage relate to each other in one or other way, which makes the permutation more exciting.

• At the same period, with newly learnt coding technique, I tired to develop different permutations with film. I wanted to make a chat-bot like Eliza which uses films as its database. The work will invite people to go into a dialogue with different characters in films. Participants can lead the dialogues, cut them and reassemble them. But in fact only a vague topic bouncing back and forth. As we know from the Eliza effect, it was sometimes so convincing that there are many anecdotes about people becoming very emotionally caught up in dealing with doctor Eliza. Even though I haven’t managed to create my own algorithm, I assembled my film according to the characters’ lines and made a video out of them.

(image to insert)

• Besides that, I also made a browser-based work. <http://www.tangyuzhen.com/browser-based%20works/dialogue.html> People can interact with this piece by scrolling the webpage up and down. The movement/paying of each clip and the conversational text will be presented accordingly. The organisation of the materials also follows a question and answer format, like André Breton developed Q&A form in Exquisite Corpse. Indeed there is more or less unpredictable randomness. But it is not randomness that I aim to create within them. On the contrary, in order to present its performantivity, they have to work with rules and conditions.

Broad context

Omer Fast’s work, The Casting(2007)

Marc Lafia's work, The Battle of Algiers()

Research strands

It was a nice experience to explore different possibilities from the same material. After I took a look at my previous works as a whole, I would conclude that the cut-up technique (permutation) as a visualising strategy are used in my work to explore the performativity. However, within the text, I would more like to think about what is or will be the coherent interest leading me to where I will be in the near feature.

During the on-going thematic project about encyclopaedia of media object, we discussed Heidegger's essay The Thing. What he discussed about readiness-to-hand and presence-at-hand quite interest me. The substrate of thing will not present until it malfunctions. I started to reconsider on what is "media design", the name

of our major while we had the thematic project about encyclopaedia of media object. The notion of each terminology varies through time and they are all reasonable by itself. It is clear that the notion/knowledge is situated in somewhere and at sometime. What it means from that time, that places differs from what it means from other time, and other place. But then I fell into an old saying "what is rational is real; and what is real is rational." If it is not the case, what would be an exit. I read what Andrew Pickering stated about “seeing knowledge as situated (rather than transcendentally true) while continuing to take it seriously (and not as epiphenomenal froth)” (Pickering, 380)