Well, yesterday our team presented our idea for an I2 collaboration in (un)usual spaces. It was very interesting, in that everything we presented ended up being completely different from our original plan!
Our plan had been to put one team member with a camera in a bathroom and another in an elevator, where we would interact with people in those spaces and with the class via the technology, and the images sent back to the classroom would be mixed with some other images online. Unfortunately, we weren't able to get decent connections in the elevators, but we were not dissuaded. We talked about the lobby, stairwells, other public "ordinary" places. But the bigger problem ended up being the connection via iChat/Skype, which over and over again, failed. We tried several computers, different logins, different configurations of cameras and computers, both Skype and iChat, and we didn't give up. Suddenly, for no reason that we could figure out, we were able to get one connection to work. So, Nick grabbed the computer, a camera, and ran out to the plaza in front of Stern, a public, "ordinary" space.
From there, he tried out several places in the library that we had considered in our group meeting-the lobby, stairwells, elevators, and bathrooms. He interacted with people in these locations and got some terrific shots of the library lobby from the 8th floor. Additionally, since we were only able to get one connection to work, Shih-Yu was able to stay in the room and record the presentation. This is something we had not originally planned on but ended up working for the best. In the original plan, she would have been in another location with the camera, but since the connection failed, she was in the room with the camera and we were able to record the entire event.
Another thing our project draws upon is the transformation of a classroom space into something extraordinary...one could say that our project is something of an extension of what we have experimented with all semester in our I2 connections with UCI, BCC, and other parts of NYU. For all of us, the classroom space is an "ordinary" space. We experimented with this in particular in our BCC connection in the Avery. Our presentation seeks to transform other, more public, "ordinary" spaces into something special by connecting these spaces with technology. The technology creates a virtual space between the spaces through which the information passes, and our experience of this virtual space is through the moments of latency.
To paraphrase from a UCI blog, we have created a virtual space through which we move...
This virtual space is created between two "ordinay" spaces, and its existence transforms the ordinary to the extraordinary, or the mundane to the divine. The transformation is the key, for as Marianne Moore reminds us: "Nothing mundane is divine. Nothing divine is mundane." The technology facilitates this transformation by creating a new, third space which allows the personal connection; in a way, adding the space in between actually shrinks the distance between the two places. Part of our classroom becomes the plaza, the library, the elevator, etc.
Yesterday, despite the technological headaches, which we are all learning are a big part of this process(!), we successfully transformed two spaces and were able to explore the idea behind our project. We were able to do this in real time, and to involve other people in the spaces. And, we were able to record the event, which is really great.
For a moment, these spaces served a greater function than normal use suggests. I think Team Orange really enjoyed the challenge of this project, the strategizing of the technical difficulties, and the commeraderie of the group dynamic, within the team, in the class, and in the interaction with the "innocent bystanders" whose participation became such an entertaining part of our presentation.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Unusual Spaces-Team Orange
In class, we have talked a lot about transforming spaces using technology, and creating and utilizing virtual spaces with I2. Our team project seeks to experiment with the use of I2 in unusual spaces, where the space is not transformed, but rather explored for its own worth. Our spaces are explored and celebrated for their normal, seemingly mundane uses. We are interested in exploring the mundane and the ways people might interact with unusual technology in a space so "normal" that we cease to acknowledge its presence as anything other than completely utilitarian. To see pictures of examples of spaces, see my webpage.
We seek to find the unusual in the usual, by flipping our perception of what is normal. To find the extraordinary in the ordinary, by first acknowledging the potential of the ordinary to be, in fact, extraordinary.
To quote Marianne Moore:
"Nothing mundane is divine.
Nothing divine is mundane."
We seek to find the unusual in the usual, by flipping our perception of what is normal. To find the extraordinary in the ordinary, by first acknowledging the potential of the ordinary to be, in fact, extraordinary.
To quote Marianne Moore:
"Nothing mundane is divine.
Nothing divine is mundane."
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Connection with BCC-The I2 Blues
I really enjoyed the connection with Bergen Community College the other night, and for many reasons. It was exciting to see them and to hear about their new facility, which I would love to visit! It was also exciting to meet another PhD student and get a feel for the exciting teaching he is doing.
But my favorite part of the evening was the improvisation. I was feeling vocally exhausted and was more than happy to leave the singing to someone else. Also, I was worried that I may have had broken thumb, and so frankly, I wasn't looking forward to the connection. But once we got them up on the screen, it was a lot of fun!
I enjoyed working the camera in the first part of the connection, but once I had a chance to try out the mini-keyboard, that was a lot of fun. It was the perfect size keyboard as I was only able to play with my left hand, and as I'm not really much of a pianist anyway, I felt quite honored to get to play with those present.
I felt that the improvs with BCC were by far the most successful of the semester. I think the main reason for this was the structure offered to us by Ron Mazurek. The nature of the structural directives did two things: 1. it clarified tonal area and style, within which the players were free to play, and 2. it made listening and interacting necessary acts in the improvisation, not only by both sides of the connection, but even within the separate ensembles. This aspect in particular has been missing from past improvs, most noticable of course in the connection a few weeks back where part of the class was in Nonken's studio. This exercise was not only fun and rewarding, but also necessary in order to fully experience the positive and negative implications of the technology.
On the positive end, the idea that we were able to create such a clever and fun "blues" piece from across the Hudson was truly remarkable. It was a lot of fun to participate and to watch the interaction, especially between the singers. They listened carefully to each other's texts and even improvised together, instead of just taking turns. Although I didn't actively participate in the singing, I was venture to say that their experience would be similar to the experience Michael from UCI and I had doing our spoken word improvisation, in which, during the process, the mind completely forgot about the distance and technology as the mind was so focussed on the acts of listening and creating.
Also, the set-up of the room was really great. As Dr. Gilbert said, we really were able to transform the space, and I do think that is only the beginning of the potential to transform the space in that classroom into something interesting and unusual. Once the chairs are out of the way, the room becomes a wide open space, a blank palette, and the more we few it this way, rather than focussing on its limitations, the more successful we will be in its successful (hence, creative) transformation.
The limitations, or course, lay in the problems with the sound, but thankfully technical gurus on each end were able to deal with the problems as they arose. With each set-up, I think we can expect to find new challenges, since each set-up is, in a sense, an experiment. I think the experiment with Bergen was quite successful in many respects, including this one.
It was also exciting to see UCI on the second screen, although unfortunately we didn't have much of a chance to interact with them. In considering this connection, I would say that is the only reason to sing the blues.
But my favorite part of the evening was the improvisation. I was feeling vocally exhausted and was more than happy to leave the singing to someone else. Also, I was worried that I may have had broken thumb, and so frankly, I wasn't looking forward to the connection. But once we got them up on the screen, it was a lot of fun!
I enjoyed working the camera in the first part of the connection, but once I had a chance to try out the mini-keyboard, that was a lot of fun. It was the perfect size keyboard as I was only able to play with my left hand, and as I'm not really much of a pianist anyway, I felt quite honored to get to play with those present.
I felt that the improvs with BCC were by far the most successful of the semester. I think the main reason for this was the structure offered to us by Ron Mazurek. The nature of the structural directives did two things: 1. it clarified tonal area and style, within which the players were free to play, and 2. it made listening and interacting necessary acts in the improvisation, not only by both sides of the connection, but even within the separate ensembles. This aspect in particular has been missing from past improvs, most noticable of course in the connection a few weeks back where part of the class was in Nonken's studio. This exercise was not only fun and rewarding, but also necessary in order to fully experience the positive and negative implications of the technology.
On the positive end, the idea that we were able to create such a clever and fun "blues" piece from across the Hudson was truly remarkable. It was a lot of fun to participate and to watch the interaction, especially between the singers. They listened carefully to each other's texts and even improvised together, instead of just taking turns. Although I didn't actively participate in the singing, I was venture to say that their experience would be similar to the experience Michael from UCI and I had doing our spoken word improvisation, in which, during the process, the mind completely forgot about the distance and technology as the mind was so focussed on the acts of listening and creating.
Also, the set-up of the room was really great. As Dr. Gilbert said, we really were able to transform the space, and I do think that is only the beginning of the potential to transform the space in that classroom into something interesting and unusual. Once the chairs are out of the way, the room becomes a wide open space, a blank palette, and the more we few it this way, rather than focussing on its limitations, the more successful we will be in its successful (hence, creative) transformation.
The limitations, or course, lay in the problems with the sound, but thankfully technical gurus on each end were able to deal with the problems as they arose. With each set-up, I think we can expect to find new challenges, since each set-up is, in a sense, an experiment. I think the experiment with Bergen was quite successful in many respects, including this one.
It was also exciting to see UCI on the second screen, although unfortunately we didn't have much of a chance to interact with them. In considering this connection, I would say that is the only reason to sing the blues.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
Time and the Internet: an uncharacteristically personal post
Well, call me the comeback-kid, I've finally returned to this blog.
If I was raised in a Christian home, one might call the fact that I'm about to post this on Easter Sunday somewhat ironic. Perhaps it is anyway?...
I just did something I haven't done in ages: I googled my father. My father died when I was in college, but we were very close and most of what I have done since then in some way reflects the many lessons I learned from him before and during the experience of his passing.
But here's the funny thing about the internet! It's like he's still alive. There are lots of hits of his work (he was very active in local government, was a professor and writer, and also one of the first labor union negotiators). There are even more hits now than there were the last time I googled him, which was perhaps a year ago.
I'm reminded of a short story by English author Will Self, which can be found in his book "The Quanitity Theory of Insanity," though the exact name of the story escapes me at this moment. The protagonist is walking down the street and sees his dead mother. He follows her and is astounded to discover that she is living a totally new existence in a different neighborhood.
At any rate, among other things, a letter to the editor he wrote to TIME magazine appeared in my search. I could literally hear his voice as I read it. I never even knew he wrote it! Several of his articles, many written in conjunction with his colleagues, are now available via JSTOR. Some of his books are available on amazon.com. Is this for real??
The growth of the internet has somehow managed to merge the past and the present in a very strange way. As more articles become available, as more cites are developed, as more information joins the free and constant circulation of this virtual world, time as a linear continuum becomes obsolete.
We've talked about this a bit in class, but I must admit that until this moment the subject has seemed quite abstract and detached from my existence.
Now I wonder if in our I2 presentations, it might be possible to manipulate the experience of time in the same way we are experimenting with space. The subject of latency comes to mind-here of course we experience time in the delay, which is in itself a different way of considering time.
I also think about the upcoming concert-we've talked a lot about the experience for the audience-entering into a new world as they enter the theatre, using disorientation of the audience in order to re-orient them to the experience of our production. I wonder how the experience of time and the passage of time factors into this equation. We've all had the experience of attending a concert or movie and emerging, feeling strange as we re-adjust to reality, wondering what the time is as we blink uncomfortably in the sunshine, right? Is there a way to simulate this experience of adjustment before the production? Is that too jarring? Do we risk alienating the audience with such an exercise?
One thing is certain, it's *time* I started posting here again, so I'll welcome my*self* back. There's Dad again-we punsters always stuck together.
If I was raised in a Christian home, one might call the fact that I'm about to post this on Easter Sunday somewhat ironic. Perhaps it is anyway?...
I just did something I haven't done in ages: I googled my father. My father died when I was in college, but we were very close and most of what I have done since then in some way reflects the many lessons I learned from him before and during the experience of his passing.
But here's the funny thing about the internet! It's like he's still alive. There are lots of hits of his work (he was very active in local government, was a professor and writer, and also one of the first labor union negotiators). There are even more hits now than there were the last time I googled him, which was perhaps a year ago.
I'm reminded of a short story by English author Will Self, which can be found in his book "The Quanitity Theory of Insanity," though the exact name of the story escapes me at this moment. The protagonist is walking down the street and sees his dead mother. He follows her and is astounded to discover that she is living a totally new existence in a different neighborhood.
At any rate, among other things, a letter to the editor he wrote to TIME magazine appeared in my search. I could literally hear his voice as I read it. I never even knew he wrote it! Several of his articles, many written in conjunction with his colleagues, are now available via JSTOR. Some of his books are available on amazon.com. Is this for real??
The growth of the internet has somehow managed to merge the past and the present in a very strange way. As more articles become available, as more cites are developed, as more information joins the free and constant circulation of this virtual world, time as a linear continuum becomes obsolete.
We've talked about this a bit in class, but I must admit that until this moment the subject has seemed quite abstract and detached from my existence.
Now I wonder if in our I2 presentations, it might be possible to manipulate the experience of time in the same way we are experimenting with space. The subject of latency comes to mind-here of course we experience time in the delay, which is in itself a different way of considering time.
I also think about the upcoming concert-we've talked a lot about the experience for the audience-entering into a new world as they enter the theatre, using disorientation of the audience in order to re-orient them to the experience of our production. I wonder how the experience of time and the passage of time factors into this equation. We've all had the experience of attending a concert or movie and emerging, feeling strange as we re-adjust to reality, wondering what the time is as we blink uncomfortably in the sunshine, right? Is there a way to simulate this experience of adjustment before the production? Is that too jarring? Do we risk alienating the audience with such an exercise?
One thing is certain, it's *time* I started posting here again, so I'll welcome my*self* back. There's Dad again-we punsters always stuck together.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
W.H. Auden (and Internet, too?)
Last night, I attended an event at the 92nd St. Y. The event honored poet W.H. Auden through photography, readings, anedotes, and music. It was a lovely event; it had just the right combination of humor, thoughtfulness, and nostaligia.
I couldn't help but look at it through the lens of our work, and I was pleased to see the extent to which multi-media, though only in a small way, was incorporated. As presenters took the stage to make brief remarks or to read poems, a large screen behind them almost impreceptibly changed photographs of Auden from different periods of his life.
The music was settings of his poetry by Ned Rorem, performed live by Ned Rorem and tenor Scott Murphree, a friend of mine who teaches here at NYU. Again, behind the performance were the pictures of Auden.
Most interestingly, at the end of the performance, they played a recording of W.H. Auden reading at the Poetry Center in 1966. It was both beautiful and somewhat arresting-the feeling of being transported to another time as both his voice and his poetry filled the room.
Would the performance have been better served with more advanced media or the involvement of other sites? It's hard to say. Because the evening was organized in such a sensitive and interesting manner, I did not feel that anything was missing from the experience. I wonder if it would have felt somehow anachronistic to honor someone from an earlier generation with advanced media techniques, but then I wonder if it depends on the work that is being honored. An evening honoring John Cage, for example, or Milton Babbitt, or even Andy Warhol, might seem unsatisfying without the use of new, cutting-age technology.
However, in this setting, the easy transition from readings to reminiscings, to song and finally, to Auden himself, was quietly exciting, in the same way that reading his poetry is.
I think this experience proves what we have been saying all along, that I2 is a new media, a new tool with which to communicate or experiment, and while it opens so many doors for us as researchers and artists, it is nice sometimes to attend "old-fashioned" performances, and retain something of the feeling of artistic development before the advent of such technologies.
It was not so long ago, really, and remembering it can only give depth to our work now.
I couldn't help but look at it through the lens of our work, and I was pleased to see the extent to which multi-media, though only in a small way, was incorporated. As presenters took the stage to make brief remarks or to read poems, a large screen behind them almost impreceptibly changed photographs of Auden from different periods of his life.
The music was settings of his poetry by Ned Rorem, performed live by Ned Rorem and tenor Scott Murphree, a friend of mine who teaches here at NYU. Again, behind the performance were the pictures of Auden.
Most interestingly, at the end of the performance, they played a recording of W.H. Auden reading at the Poetry Center in 1966. It was both beautiful and somewhat arresting-the feeling of being transported to another time as both his voice and his poetry filled the room.
Would the performance have been better served with more advanced media or the involvement of other sites? It's hard to say. Because the evening was organized in such a sensitive and interesting manner, I did not feel that anything was missing from the experience. I wonder if it would have felt somehow anachronistic to honor someone from an earlier generation with advanced media techniques, but then I wonder if it depends on the work that is being honored. An evening honoring John Cage, for example, or Milton Babbitt, or even Andy Warhol, might seem unsatisfying without the use of new, cutting-age technology.
However, in this setting, the easy transition from readings to reminiscings, to song and finally, to Auden himself, was quietly exciting, in the same way that reading his poetry is.
I think this experience proves what we have been saying all along, that I2 is a new media, a new tool with which to communicate or experiment, and while it opens so many doors for us as researchers and artists, it is nice sometimes to attend "old-fashioned" performances, and retain something of the feeling of artistic development before the advent of such technologies.
It was not so long ago, really, and remembering it can only give depth to our work now.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Playing with words-Thoughts on 2/27 UCI/NYU meeting
I really enjoyed last night's connection with UCI. I was struck by the beauty of the phrases the dancers created on the text. In particular, I enjoyed that the phrases took the words and added a level of abstraction to the presentation of the text. I think experimenting with abstraction in the text itself might be a fun way to explore ulternative methods of its presentation-such that lines of the text do not always have to be read "in time," "in meter or rhythm," "in order," or with any kind of regular intonation or stress. I think that if we are going to present text, it might be interesting to, at least as an experiment, consider that the text is, like a dance phrase or a musical phrase, a structure upon which we can be free to improvise.
Also, I offer that if we are lost, we must also explore the concept of "found," otherwise, what is lost? (pun intended)
And if improvisation is itself a form of play, I offer here, although not improvised, my own brief "play" with some of the words and text from last night:
Alone
a one L
La one
Le ona
nae, Lo
Lo, an e
No ale
O, lane
On ale
On Lea
Between the past and the future, we are lost.
Lost the past between we and the future are.
Past and we are lost between the future.
The past and the future are lost between we.
Bet the past and the future are lost, we are ween(ed).
Alone, between the past and the future, we are lost.
On ale, the past and the future are lost and we are ween[ed].
Lo, an e between the past and the future, lost are w[e].
O, between the past and the lane, we are future.
Nae, we are past; lo, we are between the future.
One la, lost between the past and the future, we are. Let us sing.
Also, I offer that if we are lost, we must also explore the concept of "found," otherwise, what is lost? (pun intended)
And if improvisation is itself a form of play, I offer here, although not improvised, my own brief "play" with some of the words and text from last night:
Alone
a one L
La one
Le ona
nae, Lo
Lo, an e
No ale
O, lane
On ale
On Lea
Between the past and the future, we are lost.
Lost the past between we and the future are.
Past and we are lost between the future.
The past and the future are lost between we.
Bet the past and the future are lost, we are ween(ed).
Alone, between the past and the future, we are lost.
On ale, the past and the future are lost and we are ween[ed].
Lo, an e between the past and the future, lost are w[e].
O, between the past and the lane, we are future.
Nae, we are past; lo, we are between the future.
One la, lost between the past and the future, we are. Let us sing.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Truckers and Trackers
I recently viewed a performance on the Body, Space, Techonology website entitled "Truckers and Trackers. Alien Unmade" produced by On Air Productions. It can be found at:
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/bst/vol07/home.html
This was a really cool performance. I'm not totally sure how they did it, and was unable to find an article about it before posting this. At any rate, one actor read the voices of three characters and the use of the screen behind the actor was thought-provoking and entertaining.
It was interesting to see an actor portray different characters nearly simultaneously using technology. I'm not sure how the slightly different costume changes and things worked, as the actor was in full view on the stage at all times, although it was clear that he was the voice and face on each screen.
The tongue-in-cheek comedy of the computer voice was really well-timed-in fact, the entire performance was very clever and cleverly executed. It might be interesting to experiment with the idea of different charaters and voices interacting on screens and in person...I guess in a way that is how our performance will take place anyway, but with more than just one performer. It was fun to see the slight mocking of technology in a piece that uses technology as such an integral part of it's execution.
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/bst/vol07/home.html
This was a really cool performance. I'm not totally sure how they did it, and was unable to find an article about it before posting this. At any rate, one actor read the voices of three characters and the use of the screen behind the actor was thought-provoking and entertaining.
It was interesting to see an actor portray different characters nearly simultaneously using technology. I'm not sure how the slightly different costume changes and things worked, as the actor was in full view on the stage at all times, although it was clear that he was the voice and face on each screen.
The tongue-in-cheek comedy of the computer voice was really well-timed-in fact, the entire performance was very clever and cleverly executed. It might be interesting to experiment with the idea of different charaters and voices interacting on screens and in person...I guess in a way that is how our performance will take place anyway, but with more than just one performer. It was fun to see the slight mocking of technology in a piece that uses technology as such an integral part of it's execution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)