...when Neo is shot, then resurrected (triggered by a kiss from Trinity in 'real' space that reverses the Prince Charming tradition) his speed becomes a mark of his Holiness. He is driven by a speed that is so phenomenal he can catch bullets in full flight. And we become party to this holy experience within the matrix. We witness his speed through the stillness of the image. Bullets are literally frozen in time and space and we marvel at Neo who contemplates bullets that we know move so fast they should be imperceptible to the human eye. We see the world through his eyes, eyes that create a freeze-frame effect out of 'bullet-time' speed. In these last minutes of the film, Neo has mastered the frenzy of the visible and we have been granted access to this mastery.
http://archive.sensesofcinema.com/contents/00/3/matrix.html
Sunday, 29 March 2009
Saturday, 28 March 2009
A Neo Miss
I thought it would be good to post a quick reflection on the Reiffel Tower 'experience prototypes' from Wednesday 26th March. When Jimmy went off to make the second 'fake M16' i thought it was unnecessary - i didn't think we'd find anything new out of making a second version in metal. For me, it was all about the image - capturing the experience with an appropriate facial expression - I was very wrong. Making a more powerful/accurate version meant that we could try it from a greater height, with this came a completely different experience. In the morning i was a little bit scared, in the afternoon I felt like Neo.
In the image above you see me in my 'Neo zone"... i felt in control, i felt like i was witnessing/controlling space and time. It was BRILLIANT! You both have to do it! I think these experiments are uncovering something unexpected, in the creation of the 'impossible moment' we give god like status and power! (I know i'm getting a little carried away now)
Bird Box Club (cat version)
I definitely think there's something we should do here as an experiment in surveillance. I propose that we hook up a webcam in mine and Matt's front window, and RFID Inky so that the camera videos the view when he's sat there. I think we'll get some nice footage of pedestrians looking in at him. Mostly people smile when they see him...
So it's him, looking out at them [and other stuff] providing entertainment for them looking in. It's also, obviously, a camera watching outside our house and so it retains a primary function as a surveillance camera. But Inky's in control of it. He might see something important, and if he does then we will know. He'll be able to tell us, a bit like Lassie, only not as smart.
The Cinema Screen as Prosthesis of Perception [quote]
p. 50
On the screen the moving images have a present meaning despite the absence of corporeal bodies, which thereby becomes a matter of indifference. What counts is the simulacrum, not corporeal object behind it. In the prosthetic cognition of the cinema, the difference between documentary and fiction is thus effaced. Of course we still “know” that they are different. But they inhabit the surface of the screen as cognitive equivalents. Both the real event and the staged event are absent. Their appearance of being present is equally simulated.
On the screen the moving images have a present meaning despite the absence of corporeal bodies, which thereby becomes a matter of indifference. What counts is the simulacrum, not corporeal object behind it. In the prosthetic cognition of the cinema, the difference between documentary and fiction is thus effaced. Of course we still “know” that they are different. But they inhabit the surface of the screen as cognitive equivalents. Both the real event and the staged event are absent. Their appearance of being present is equally simulated.
The Cinema Screen as Prosthesis of Perception [quote]
p. 49
In regard to both time and space, the effect of the techniques of cinema is to pry perception loose from the larger world of which it is a part, and subject it to extreme temporal and spatial condensation, and hold it suspended, floating in a seemingly autonomous set of dimensions…
In regard to both time and space, the effect of the techniques of cinema is to pry perception loose from the larger world of which it is a part, and subject it to extreme temporal and spatial condensation, and hold it suspended, floating in a seemingly autonomous set of dimensions…
The Cinema Screen as Prosthesis of Perception
I have a book from the library called The senses still [C. Nadia Seremetakis, 1994; The University of Chicago Press]. It's a collection of essays around questions like "What happens when perception and memory are globalized through transnational media and the homogenization of material experience?".
The first essay I think we should all read is The Cinema Screen as Prosthesis of Perception [Susan Buck-Morss]. Here's an amateur attempt at a synopsis:
She proposes that Cimema (the consumption of images by large numbers of people via a screen) is a good way to understand what Husserl was getting at in The Idea of Phenomenology [1964], where Husserl was trying to uncover the essential truths of 'perception': what exactly it is 'to see'. Buck-Morris suggests that Cinema actually does what Husserl tries to theorise.
When something is perceived you've got:
a) The person perceiving
b) The thing being perceived
But to get at the pure nature of perception (some kind of universal truth of it) you have to get rid of a) and b). He did this in a really complicated and academically rigorous way which most people will never understand.
Because cinema provides a space where no thing or things are actually experienced, only the image of things which are not really there, then b) is removed. What we see is the presence of an absence, and it doesn't matter what we are shown: makes no difference if it's fact or fiction, because it's not actually there!!
Because in cinema every individual perceives exactly the same representation (whatever the director decides the camera should capture), then there is a standardisation which can be allied with universality. In an actual experience, each individual percieves from their subjective view point. In a cinema experience the entire audience perceives from one point of view: they have no choice, there is no subjectivity to their "seeing".
I am going to stop here because I don't know if writing all of this on the blog is useful or not... If it is, then I will post some quotes which feed in to quite a few things we are doing.
The first essay I think we should all read is The Cinema Screen as Prosthesis of Perception [Susan Buck-Morss]. Here's an amateur attempt at a synopsis:
She proposes that Cimema (the consumption of images by large numbers of people via a screen) is a good way to understand what Husserl was getting at in The Idea of Phenomenology [1964], where Husserl was trying to uncover the essential truths of 'perception': what exactly it is 'to see'. Buck-Morris suggests that Cinema actually does what Husserl tries to theorise.
When something is perceived you've got:
a) The person perceiving
b) The thing being perceived
But to get at the pure nature of perception (some kind of universal truth of it) you have to get rid of a) and b). He did this in a really complicated and academically rigorous way which most people will never understand.
Because cinema provides a space where no thing or things are actually experienced, only the image of things which are not really there, then b) is removed. What we see is the presence of an absence, and it doesn't matter what we are shown: makes no difference if it's fact or fiction, because it's not actually there!!
Because in cinema every individual perceives exactly the same representation (whatever the director decides the camera should capture), then there is a standardisation which can be allied with universality. In an actual experience, each individual percieves from their subjective view point. In a cinema experience the entire audience perceives from one point of view: they have no choice, there is no subjectivity to their "seeing".
I am going to stop here because I don't know if writing all of this on the blog is useful or not... If it is, then I will post some quotes which feed in to quite a few things we are doing.
**IMPORTANT BLOG ANNOUNCEMENT**
I think we should start labelling really important quotes on the blog, so we can find them easily. So if you read anything that you think we must all read/use in the future, label it IMPORTANT QUOTES if you please. I'll go back over everything and pull out anything we already have. It could be quoting someone else, or things we have said.
Thank you.
Thank you.
this is just me with a power point hangover looking at images together and how they work, how it helps me create a position on the projects and tell the story from my limited perspective...it might not be the same as yours and its far from complete.
my ear condition is not permanent and will according to my doctor get better when my symptomless cold abates.
my ear condition is not permanent and will according to my doctor get better when my symptomless cold abates.
Friday, 27 March 2009
Sunday, 22 March 2009
Travel thrills
Matt's post about the Grand Canyon Skywalk made me curious as to what else is out there with a similar sense of 'thrill of the impossible'. In a way, the Skywalk is important for technical and financial reasons: someone spent a lot of money putting that up there, and it costs a lot of money to do it. It's also a massive rip off according to many commentators...
So anyway, I found a list and there were a couple of things I think we should talk about. There were lots of high-adrenalin things (bungees and terrifying roller-coasters) but I don't think we're interested in those (are we?).
Zero Gravity
For $4500 you can experience five minutes of astronaut-style weightlessness with Zero-Gravity Adventures at Florida’s Kennedy Space Center. A Boeing 727 traces huge parabolic arcs in the sky and allows even the heaviest of humans to float like a fairy. The walls are padded so you can flip injury free as you fall toward Earth...
Virgin Galactic
Richard Branson and American aerospace engineer Burt Rutan want to fly six passengers to the edge of the atmosphere (or 100km above the surface of our planet) in the world’s most extreme ride. Tickets for this cosmonaut attraction are $241,000 and according to the company 150 people have already paid up.
CSI Experience at Vienna Prater
CSI: The Experience is a completely immersive exhibit that invites visitors to enter crime scenes where they identify and record evidence. It takes them inside laboratories for scientific testing and autopsy rooms for pathology analysis. Then it returns them to the office to build their case, based on the scientific evidence. The exhibit brings to life real scientific principles and the most advanced scientific techniques used today by crime scene investigators and forensic scientists.
(this last one is brilliant)
Hostage rescue team
Have you ever wanted to be part of an Elite Special Operations team and control your own urban block? The Urban Training Centre in Seattle will train you to conduct an urban hostage rescue mission. For $3900 you will be issued with an M4 assault rifle, M9 missile and body armour. Then join other military minded men and women to infiltrate the area and complete your mission.
Wow. This starts to link back to the fictional bomb.
So anyway, I found a list and there were a couple of things I think we should talk about. There were lots of high-adrenalin things (bungees and terrifying roller-coasters) but I don't think we're interested in those (are we?).
Zero Gravity
For $4500 you can experience five minutes of astronaut-style weightlessness with Zero-Gravity Adventures at Florida’s Kennedy Space Center. A Boeing 727 traces huge parabolic arcs in the sky and allows even the heaviest of humans to float like a fairy. The walls are padded so you can flip injury free as you fall toward Earth...
Virgin Galactic
Richard Branson and American aerospace engineer Burt Rutan want to fly six passengers to the edge of the atmosphere (or 100km above the surface of our planet) in the world’s most extreme ride. Tickets for this cosmonaut attraction are $241,000 and according to the company 150 people have already paid up.
CSI Experience at Vienna Prater
CSI: The Experience is a completely immersive exhibit that invites visitors to enter crime scenes where they identify and record evidence. It takes them inside laboratories for scientific testing and autopsy rooms for pathology analysis. Then it returns them to the office to build their case, based on the scientific evidence. The exhibit brings to life real scientific principles and the most advanced scientific techniques used today by crime scene investigators and forensic scientists.
(this last one is brilliant)
Hostage rescue team
Have you ever wanted to be part of an Elite Special Operations team and control your own urban block? The Urban Training Centre in Seattle will train you to conduct an urban hostage rescue mission. For $3900 you will be issued with an M4 assault rifle, M9 missile and body armour. Then join other military minded men and women to infiltrate the area and complete your mission.
Wow. This starts to link back to the fictional bomb.
Friday, 20 March 2009
The Grand Canyon Skywalk
When I described the Reiffel Tower to Bill, Mike and David in the pub Bill mentioned this:
Doing a quick search on the internet it became quickly obvious that both the 'technical achievement' of the structure and the 'awe' that it provokes were its two key selling points (to use the Skywalk you have to pay $80). The comparative height is really important:
Describing the project in an 'academic context' (although it was in the pub), really helped me - the narrative of the project (its genesis, meanings and technical complexities) holds together really well - it makes for a great story.
Doing a quick search on the internet it became quickly obvious that both the 'technical achievement' of the structure and the 'awe' that it provokes were its two key selling points (to use the Skywalk you have to pay $80). The comparative height is really important:
Describing the project in an 'academic context' (although it was in the pub), really helped me - the narrative of the project (its genesis, meanings and technical complexities) holds together really well - it makes for a great story.
Thursday, 19 March 2009
Wednesday, 18 March 2009
Philosophy of futility
Philosophy of futility is a phrase coined by Columbia University marketing professor Paul Nystrom to describe the disposition caused by the monotony of the new industrial age. Nystrom observed the natural effect of this malaise was seeking gratification found in frivolous things, such as fashionable "apparel and goods used in one's immediate surroundings." This tendency, he theorized, could be used to increase consumption of fashionable goods and services, resulting in a vicious circle of dissatisfaction and the desire for new consumer goods.From here. Looks like he said this around 1928. We know this, and it's not exactly what we are about, but it's a lovely phrase and I'm going to read my Thorsten Veblen to see if there's anything in all that Conspicuous Consumption stuff.
Iatrogenesis
Literally ‘doctor-generated’, the term refers to sickness produced by medical activity. Widely recognized as a phenomenon, the debate is over its extent. The term was introduced into social science by Ivan Illich (Medical Nemesis, 1976), as part of his more general attack on industrial society and in particular its technological and bureaucratic institutions, for limiting freedom and justice and for corrupting and incapacitating individuals.From here. I read Limits to Medicine, not Medical Nemesis (but if I had heard of that one I would of read it because it's a great title).
Nic Hughes!
I know Matt already knows Nic well (he taught him on the MACTP), but I just read his spiel on the Goldsmiths website. It's a section for graduates to talk about their experiences. I have bolded a couple of bits because I thought they were important:
Nic Hughes, graduate 2006
“I’m a graphic designer with 11 years of experience - designing for clubs, music, magazines, fashion, art, corporate and retail. I have always maintained a level of ambivalence towards my chosen career. No matter how interesting your client is, inevitably you’re in the game of shifting units. Basically, certain expressions of design cannot be explored within a commercial context. No client is going to fund an all-out attack on themselves, their product, or their culture!
Last year I packed it all in to pursue a full-time MA - the time split between this and childcare. The MA at Goldsmiths explores the relationships between theory and practice and how one informs the other. Yet more importantly it is about design’s ability to generate questions and stimulate critical debate. For me, the programme offers a space to explore through design many of the areas that commercially lie off-limits.”
OK, so maybe we know this already... We teach there for God's sake... But I really like the straightforwardness of his comment in the first paragraph.
That's why Design Research should be funded: because the Mass-Consumable Product Design Establishment does not want to ask any questions or have anyone ask questions of them because then they might sell less. Because Design is about "shifting units" and not about making anything better (not sure if that's the right word) for anyone.
?
Nic Hughes, graduate 2006
“I’m a graphic designer with 11 years of experience - designing for clubs, music, magazines, fashion, art, corporate and retail. I have always maintained a level of ambivalence towards my chosen career. No matter how interesting your client is, inevitably you’re in the game of shifting units. Basically, certain expressions of design cannot be explored within a commercial context. No client is going to fund an all-out attack on themselves, their product, or their culture!
Last year I packed it all in to pursue a full-time MA - the time split between this and childcare. The MA at Goldsmiths explores the relationships between theory and practice and how one informs the other. Yet more importantly it is about design’s ability to generate questions and stimulate critical debate. For me, the programme offers a space to explore through design many of the areas that commercially lie off-limits.”
OK, so maybe we know this already... We teach there for God's sake... But I really like the straightforwardness of his comment in the first paragraph.
That's why Design Research should be funded: because the Mass-Consumable Product Design Establishment does not want to ask any questions or have anyone ask questions of them because then they might sell less. Because Design is about "shifting units" and not about making anything better (not sure if that's the right word) for anyone.
?
Sunday, 15 March 2009
Real life and Futurama
Man shot by killer robot
Tony WilsonFlippin' heck.
19 Mar 08
AN 81-year-old Gold Coast man built, and yesterday used, an intricate suicide machine to remotely shoot himself, after downloading the plans from the internet.
The Burleigh Heads man, who lived alone, left notes of his plans and thoughts as he struggled to come to terms with demands by interstate relatives that he move out his home and into care.
He spent hours searching the internet for a way to kill himself, downloaded what he needed and then built a complex machine that would remotely fire a gun.
He set the device up in his driveway about 7am yesterday, placed himself in front of it and set it in motion.
The Gold Coast Bulletin will not reveal how the machine worked, but it was attached to a .22 semi-automatic pistol loaded with four bullets.
Sunday, 8 March 2009
I R Fallon
These are compressed for web streaming so apologies for the crap quality: the actual movies are much better. It's the quickest way to put them on here so we can all see them. Should we go for a trilogy?
Green=Boom from Laura Potter on Vimeo.
Green = Boom II from Laura Potter on Vimeo.
Green=Boom from Laura Potter on Vimeo.
Green = Boom II from Laura Potter on Vimeo.
Reiffel Tower: To scale [with Sulphur Hexafloride]
Following Brian's email about filling the Reiffel Tower gun tube with Sulphur Hexafloride - a very dense gas - I thought I'd post the results:
The total height of the bullet would be reduced from 2367m to 641m, which would mean that the drilling cost would be dramatically reduced - a shaft of 341m would be needed.
This is another hack of Jimmy's drawing to show the new scale:
So we need to make a decision, do we go for the gas option? I guess the issues are about purity of the idea, presentation of a 'real' situation (no-one wants to think the bullet isn't the same as the ones fired in movies ;-)), cost, health & safety, etc.
The total height of the bullet would be reduced from 2367m to 641m, which would mean that the drilling cost would be dramatically reduced - a shaft of 341m would be needed.
This is another hack of Jimmy's drawing to show the new scale:
So we need to make a decision, do we go for the gas option? I guess the issues are about purity of the idea, presentation of a 'real' situation (no-one wants to think the bullet isn't the same as the ones fired in movies ;-)), cost, health & safety, etc.
Why are we making fictional bombs?
I thought I'd try to reflect on the fictional bomb project because it seems to sit outside of the other themes - or maybe not. There are three main directions that I can see it going (obviously, this is up for discussion and deviation):
I shall illustrate the three areas, with images of our in-house model David James Loizeau
1. Thrilling Prototypes
This direction focuses on the experience of building, arming, disarming and potentially detonating a fictional bomb... it is the activity (making, filming and acting) that gives us, as individuals, value and entertainment.
In the image we see Jimmy's reaction to Laura detonating the bomb... this is really important, it's how the three of us enjoy the task/process - from design, through make, to detonation.
2. Dangerous Domestic Entertainment (DDE)
The second direction is focussed on the use and entertainment value of the object itself - the anticipation and exhiliration of cutting the wire. With this direction we could develop all sorts of objects that sit in-between consumer electronics and board games - all for the discerning consumer in search of meaning and thrill! [Warning: we need to avoid the executive toy and the lads mag approach - see below: notice image source!]
The image to represent exhiliration is:
3. I am Bruce Willis
The final direction sees an integration with MLCM... where the bomb is part of an activity/performance to put the person into a cinematic position or scenario - from this your best ever photo is taken (like a cinematic vanity version of the log flume photo):
I shall illustrate the three areas, with images of our in-house model David James Loizeau
1. Thrilling Prototypes
This direction focuses on the experience of building, arming, disarming and potentially detonating a fictional bomb... it is the activity (making, filming and acting) that gives us, as individuals, value and entertainment.
In the image we see Jimmy's reaction to Laura detonating the bomb... this is really important, it's how the three of us enjoy the task/process - from design, through make, to detonation.
2. Dangerous Domestic Entertainment (DDE)
The second direction is focussed on the use and entertainment value of the object itself - the anticipation and exhiliration of cutting the wire. With this direction we could develop all sorts of objects that sit in-between consumer electronics and board games - all for the discerning consumer in search of meaning and thrill! [Warning: we need to avoid the executive toy and the lads mag approach - see below: notice image source!]
The image to represent exhiliration is:
3. I am Bruce Willis
The final direction sees an integration with MLCM... where the bomb is part of an activity/performance to put the person into a cinematic position or scenario - from this your best ever photo is taken (like a cinematic vanity version of the log flume photo):
Saturday, 7 March 2009
Wednesday, 4 March 2009
Baudrillard
OK so I found this. This isn't a Baudrillard quote, it's from an online piece called The Possibility of Hypersimulation in Architecture by Antti Ahlava. I tried to just put a short quote from the whole thing so that no-one gets intimidated COUGH*JIMMY*COUGH.
In the hypersimulation of architecture, life would surpass experience. The kind of architecture which is lived and not experienced, is the kind of architecture inside which people are born, grow up, and die. It is a social field […]If we are interested in all this theory there's a lot of reading we should do. Really.
In hypersimulation, spatial experience is statistically replaced as a “control field”, “digital space”, architecture by numbers, measures, and costs, and no longer by a geometrically defined space [...] the architecture formed by building standards and contemporary textbooks on architecture design is hypersimulation, for they substitute architecture by what is more real than architecture as geometry: architecture as statistics. As stated in the housing design textbook by Kahri and Pyykönen employed in the Department of Architecture in the Helsinki University of Technology, a dwelling is “a place for executing dwelling activities”. Furthermore, the dwelling activities are categorised according to the purpose of the rooms. The statistics make even architecture “a space of indifference”.
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
Design and the living dead [Manifesto v.1]
Design is no longer design.
The word design has been sabotaged for commercial gain.
We are in a period where profit is more important that people.
In a commercial context design is now marketing and technological application.
In a competitive market it is part of the big problem.
Design should be the mediation of an interaction between an object and person, or person and person.
Everything we do is linked purely to the mediation of an interaction of person and object or person and person.
We are not part of the commercial mechanism.
We are more in touch with the human thing.
We are alive.
Adapted from Jimmy's realisation: please season to taste
The word design has been sabotaged for commercial gain.
We are in a period where profit is more important that people.
In a commercial context design is now marketing and technological application.
In a competitive market it is part of the big problem.
Design should be the mediation of an interaction between an object and person, or person and person.
Everything we do is linked purely to the mediation of an interaction of person and object or person and person.
We are not part of the commercial mechanism.
We are more in touch with the human thing.
We are alive.
Adapted from Jimmy's realisation: please season to taste
Reiffel Tower: To scale
So following the help of Brian the specifications for the Reiffel Tower are as follows:
Height of Eiffel Tower (to roof): 300.65m
Max height of bullet: 2367m
Depth of shaft: 2067m
Apologies to Jimmy for hacking his drawing... but here is a rough scale drawing with a 2000m shaft:
Height of Eiffel Tower (to roof): 300.65m
Max height of bullet: 2367m
Depth of shaft: 2067m
Apologies to Jimmy for hacking his drawing... but here is a rough scale drawing with a 2000m shaft:
Jimmy's realisation slightly reorganised of course
The word design has been subverted for commercial gain.
Design is no longer design in the commercial context: it is marketing and technological application, and generally in a competitive market it is part of the big problem.
Iphones would be exempt if they were not controlled by market forces, because they are generally useful.
We are in a period where profit is more important that people.
We have more of a right to consider ourselves designers than them.
Design is the mediation of an interaction between an object and person, or person and person.
We are not part of the commercial mechanism.
We are more in touch with the human thing.
That is why the bracket is a nice piece of design, so is the mask hat and the camera attachment (in fact all of our stuff).
Everything we do is linked purely to the mediation of an interaction of person and object or person and person.
That's why I think "(architecture) design and the living dead would" be a good book to write... because it could have been written by those people who presented the paper to RIBA in 2008.
Design is no longer design in the commercial context: it is marketing and technological application, and generally in a competitive market it is part of the big problem.
Iphones would be exempt if they were not controlled by market forces, because they are generally useful.
We are in a period where profit is more important that people.
We have more of a right to consider ourselves designers than them.
Design is the mediation of an interaction between an object and person, or person and person.
We are not part of the commercial mechanism.
We are more in touch with the human thing.
That is why the bracket is a nice piece of design, so is the mask hat and the camera attachment (in fact all of our stuff).
Everything we do is linked purely to the mediation of an interaction of person and object or person and person.
That's why I think "(architecture) design and the living dead would" be a good book to write... because it could have been written by those people who presented the paper to RIBA in 2008.
In 2008 a group of architects declared: "We are no longer living, but dying in our buildings" and created a manifesto called Architecture and the warm facilitation of the end featuring a series of architectural proposals that were exhibited at RIBA later that year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)