User:Clàudia/methods-reflections-glitch
Reflections on glitch
In this text, the concept of glitch is explored and briefly described from different points of view, times in history, and contexts. The methodology followed has been to analyse two sources that talk about glitch from different angles, and to compere them, in order to see the parallelisms and differences between both. These sources has been chosen because of their different nature, and suitability when it comes to compare between them and to see a description of the concept studied from different perspectives. One talks about glitch with the objective aim of analysing it in the context of art, whereas the other, talks about it subjectively from the point of view of the artist. Other broad differences between both texts are structural. Whereas the first one talks about artistic glitch and sets it into an historical context, the second one talks about glitch with a conceptual and politic approach to the matter. After the analysis, there is a conclusion that explains how this exercise has changed my point of view on glitch, and what is my new perspective on it. Overall, the thesis of this text is to find my subjective approach on how glitch can be understand in a broader manner. The first text is an article called Glitch Art: Failure from The Avant-Garde to Kanye West by Carolyn Kane (2014). She is a doctor and specialist in the history and philosophy of new media and digital aesthetics. (Ryerson University, 2013) On the other hand, the other source is an interview done by The Digital Manifesto Archive to Rosa Mankmen (2015), a Dutch digital artist, curator and theorist that works, studies and experiments with glitch. (Rosa Mankmen, 2015) Both texts talk about glitch as an artistic subject or tool, and define the concept of glitch quite similarly. Kane defines it as “the aesthetic use of visual artefacts, accidents, or technical errors”, and accompany the reader through a journey in time from the avant-garde to the present moment. On the other hand, when Menkman describes glitch has a more subjective tone to do so, and gives a broader definition: glitch is “the positive consequence of imperfection”. Both sources agrees in that when it comes of the concept of glitch as a subject for an artistic piece, it has been around for the last century. When it comes to art, glitch is the concept of 'breaking', or going out from the normal course something should follow.
Both texts tackle the topic of the ambivalence of glitch in the context of the digital. Paradoxically, digital glitch aesthetics has become something more commonly used in artistic, design, media, and some commercial scenarios. Whereas in a near past, the majority of the digital glitch works, were used as a way of criticising pop culture. Now, it forms part of both sides of the coin. This text puts both sides into perspective, reaching the conclusion that the critique of a subject by the means of a glitch, might loose meaning set in a different chronological context. And at the same time, when something is used in the pop culture, it also changes rapidly with the new coming fashions and populisms, and might be used again returning with a slightly different presentation. Mankmen also sees dichotomy when she talks about resolution, and says that it can approach the concept in a totalitarian way, or in a democratic way. From her point of view, the fact that resolution can be used in this two opposite ways, it is something powerful and scary at the same time, although satisfactory. She emphasises that the importance is to have the big picture that enables you to see both ways of using resolution. Also by knowing how it works, it is a way to break it.
When in the first text, glitch is contextualised in our present consumerist society, she says that glitch is something that it is tried to be avoided because it is opposed to the model of consumerism, where control and efficiency is what matters the most. Glitch is not welcome by the industry because it makes the viewer to break their immersive engagement and start questioning. Menkman also talks about resolution and the conventions of it from mainstream media. From her point of view, people is forced to navigate and look at the media through very stipulated ways and restrictive manners, that does not leave space for creativity or imagination. She describes it with the following words: “resolution has become a way of looking at stuff, and also a way of becoming blind to other ways of looking”. Therefore, both authors agrees in that the way in how media is presented to users, conditions and limits the way in which the experience of ingesting media is lived.
Another topic tackled on the interview is the concept of 'glitch-speak'. Rosa uses this term as an opposition and reference to 'new-speak', by George Orwell in his book1984. In the book, the term of new-speak is certain patrons that population had to use when communicating between them. These patrons made population to be controlled and think in a very restrictive manner. Menkman says that the protocols and conventions of computers are very restrictive and compares it to the concept of new-speak. At the same time she creates the term of “glitch-speak” in order to fight with those conventions. Then she makes the reflection that “glitch-speak” is something that continuously changes, otherwise it becomes a convention and converts into new-speak. On the other text, after analysing artistic glitch in different forms and during many years of history. Kane talks about the continuous metamorphosis of glitch, and the change on the meaning of it while society changes and evolve.
To conclude, I will make a reflection on how the exercise of analysing and comparing these two sources has change my view on glitch and affect the course of my research and experimental practice. My beginnings with glitch were in the digital era, and I only had experiment with it digitally. This is why, after doing this exercise, the concept of glitch has gain a whole different meaning. It is interesting to see how the concept rawly analysed, equals to the idea of breaking, or that something that it is disrupted from its normal path, an accident, an interruption. This broader perspective on the concept of glitch has given me a wider insight on it, realising not only about it's oldness, when it comes to be an artistic concept, but also about it's omnipresence. Glitch can be found everywhere, in digital forms, but also in our daily life. From my point of view, glitch has become a break on the normal course of a narrative. An example found on a daily basis it could be someone going with bike to school, but falling off the bike and ending in the hospital. This would be a glitch on this person's pre-conceived narrative on how its day would evolve. Another very interesting factor I have discovered is that glitch is something that escapes from our hands. There is a point when the subject looses the control of what happens. Therefore, glitch is the ground of the unknown, the unexpected and the surprise. Glitch is also a powerful tool for critique because it just bends reality, it changes the pre-conceived normal course of a narrative, and powerfully says that something doesn't work as pre-set, any longer. Another point of interest is the changeability of the narrative of glitch. It changes when it becomes a convention. Therefore, glitch has a dynamic narrative that transforms itself while society evolves.
Bibliography
Kane, C., 2014. “Glitch Art: Failure from The Avant-Garde to Kanye West,” Journal of InVisible Culture no. 21 [online] Available on: http://ivc.lib.rochester.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Kane-Compression-Aesthetics.pdf
Menkman, R., 2015. Biography Rosa Menkman. Rosa Menkman website. [online] Available on: http://aboutrosamenkman.blogspot.nl/
Ryerson University,. 2013. Carolyn Kane. Ryerson University [online] Available on: http://procom.ryerson.ca/people/carolyn-kane
The Digital Manifesto Archive,. 2015. Interview with Rosa Menkman - Glitch Studies Manifesto. Youtube. [online] Available on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeJYwBxw73U&t=429s