gas

A New Media Meditation on the Self by Gavin Andrew Stewart

Textblog

The Story So Far.....

June 2004

Not the End; Simply a Chance to Pause Before the Long Climb Ahead!

The first, formal part of the TEXTLAB is nearing the end. So it is time for a plenary. Here is the document I have prepared for Writers for the Future, summarizing progress to date.

****

I came to TEXTLAB with a theory of language and meaning that was rooted in the writings of the Russian philosopher Mikhail Bakhtin. I proposed at the time to explore this theory using computer-mediated text. However, although this aim still remains the overarching context for all of my computer-mediated work, I have now come to realize the panoramic scope of the ‘gas’ project I had sketched out at that time. I have had to acknowledge that it will take me many years to complete in full. I, have therefore, broken the project into sections. Each of these sections highlights key strands of this larger project.

In the course of the TEXTLAB week I focused on the ‘being’ strand represented by the piece called ‘Ontology’. Over the following months I produced several versions of ‘Ontology’ which make use of sound, interactivity and animation to explore the nature of being (Ontology 3.0 & Ontology 4.0).

More recently I have explored some of Bakhtin’s other ideas, about meaning-making and creativity in a piece called ‘Poiema’.

Perhaps the most exciting development that came out of the TEXTLAB experience was the opportunity to collaborate with other artists. For example, Catherine Byron provided the reading performance for ‘Ontology’. Catherine and I have, subsequently, collaborated on a new accessible flash animation, called ‘Landfill’ which provides a poetic introduction for young people (and other ‘greenagers’ regardless of their age) to the issues of waste management.

I am now writing a new creative work that will form part of my PhD submission. This new work ‘Angels’ deals with the ethical strands of Bakhtin’s philosophy, by focusing on the issue of asylum-seeking. This work is also a collaboration, between my self, fellow TEXTLABBER designer Chris Joseph and composer, Andrew King.

May 2004

Poiema: The Sound Of a Poem being Created

I have been revisiting the Poiema project. I have added a vocal track ( another wonderful reading by Catherine Byron), sorted out the code and added some ambient sound effects. Surprisingly the project has come back to life.

When I originally worked out the concept for this piece I wanted to give a sense of how meaning-making is an activity rooted in the moment. I also wanted to convey my sense of mystery and marvelling at meaning-making. I feel that the current version comes a little way closer to those ideals.

Of course, it is still nowhere near my original high hopes for the project. I think that it is quite a strange, awkward little text. The reader-participant is left to stumble around; to reason out the interactivity without any clues or cues.

Here is the link to the new mark 2 version

Poiema 2 file size 440K

April 2004

Ontology: Fellow Travelers

When I teach creative writing I always try to encourage my students to have a 'reading' part of their writing processes. I normally focus on this part of the process at the beginning of a craft session. However, I am wondering whether it might not also work to have it at the end of the artistic process as well. This thought has occurred to me because I have recently been enjoying 'Sunday in the Park' by Millie Niss; a work that has a number of similarities to Ontology (flashmx, sound, re-arranging text) . I doubt that I would have had the same insight into this work if I had read it eight months ago. In particular, I doubt whether I would have enjoyed 'prodding' it as much as I do now. Of course, this is a brand new work so I could not have read it eight months ago anyway. But given that fact, it is also interesting to note that my reading strategies and expectations have also been changed from participating in textlab.

End March 2004

Ontology: The Electronic Sandpit

I have been playing hard his month. By this I mean I have been reading the Friends of Ed Flash Games Studio and using the techniques described there as the basis for making some fresh versions of Ontology. I have had this idea to build a 'fridge-magnet' version of the text - in which the individual lines or the individual words can be dragged around the interface and then re-arranged by the reader. The drag and clicking part of the project was relatively easy. The difficult part is mapping the sound as I wanted to have the words to be capable of being read in any order. I eventually settled on using the x and y co-ordinates of the words ( arranged by an action script) as the way to arrange the thing in real time.The whole project is a mass of buttons and code that took ages to construct.

With this version of Ontology I have taken the granularity of the project down a level. Up until now I have been looking at phrases and lines, rather than individual words and sound. I like the rather chaotic haLF-sounds you get at this level of the work, though it raises all sorts of questions about the relationship between the different frames of semiosis. Is this still Ontology? The Poem? The experience of being?

This level of granularity has also inspired me to produce yet another version of the text. I am calling this to be built version the 'Pin ball' for the moment. I like the idea of this version because it is a game ( an iconic New media form) which uses the sounds of the original poem in an ludic way. I also like this idea because it involves elements of the poem colliding with each other in endless self/other relationships. This seems to me to be the very essence of dialogism. However, there are a number of challenges to be overcome. Primarily, in dealing with collision detection and sprites. This is some heavy duty flash programming. I am not entirely sure that I know what I am doing!

Interestingly, I am not entirely sure that I know what I am doing artistically either. I seemed to have drifted into a kind of dada-ist headspace ( perhaps under the influence of Chris Joseph's article for trAce). Does this really matter? Well in way it does. To quote an anonymous French Minister - " it works in practice ..but will it work in theory". With this project I have constantly felt the need to consider how such apparent random-ness and complexity fits in with the Bakhtinian ideas of meaning that I begun with. More recently, however, I have also felt the need to question why I think that this 'fitting in with' is so important. Do I really think that the life-world is capable of being reducible to a consistent philosophical position. Is this the effect of studying for a PhD? If so, it is an alarming attitude to develop. I am very sure that Bakhtin would have had some words of warning about such a philosophical approach.

Mid- March 2004

Cut'n......Taste!

I have been spending a lot of time recently slicing up Catherine Byron's recordings of 'Ontology'. Two realizations have struck me as I have been doing this. Firstly, that as I have cut the sounds into shorter and shorter sections, the individual sounds have begun to sound oddly inebriated. In some cases in fact I can't actually find the individual word to cut out ( the 'am's','of's and 'at's are proving particularly elusive). This has really intrigued me, for as I noted below, Catherine's performance is very clear and very emotively delivered. Yet despite of ( or is it because of) her skill as a reader, many of the words fade into one another. In some cases the word is actually suggested by the words around it, and it is never fully articulated. It rather strange to hear things so differently, just as a result of the length of the edit. The words are becoming sounds.

The second thing that has struck me is the power of repetition. I often find that I am forced to turn the Soundforge's looping function off in order to hear 'the word'. It is not that I don't like the sound of the loop, much the reverse in fact. It is just that the sounds in the loops quickly turn into music. I hear rhythms and notes. I don't hear spoken words.

I have decided, therefore, to make use of these observations in the next version of 'Ontology'. It will feature very small sections of text, and loops of the sounds so that the user-participant can also experience these intriguing effects. How exactly this will work in practice is another issue entirely.

End February 2004

Poiema Again : Else and Endurance

I have taken a second look at the version of Poiema I posted at the beginning of this month. I am rather embarrassed and dissatisfied with what I have produced. This piece desperately needs sound, and some of the code needs to be cleaned up ( I think I have made an error in the cascade of IF statements built into the buttons). However, most importantly this project needs ELSE. The 'where-to-go-next..' factor that holds ones interest after the initial project has revealed itself.

The problem is that the program appears to do the same thing over and over again. The participation that it draws attention to soon becomes hum-drum. In fact, it reminds me of a poetic version of the tennis game PONG. I am quite sure that it does not fulfil its artistic brief because it does not give me a critical awareness of my on-going participation in the making of meaning. In fact, in its current form it is almost hides the participation I was trying to make apparent.

I have come to realize that it is important to design new media writing in an extremely open-ended way...in a manner that allows it to mutate and develop...to get beyond even a loop of loops. I am now thinking that I should produce a loop of interfaces ( rather like a platform game) that progress one to another to allow the reader to be constantly aware of the changes occurring within their understanding of their experience. More work needed!

This conclusion bring me to my next important realization about New Media Writing. This kind of activity requires endurance. It might take a split second to conceive of a project such as poiema, but it sometimes takes years to bring even a small section of a text to satisfactory inconclusion.

February 2004

Poiema I : Circles and Hierarchy

A discussion on the textlab forum has set me thinking about the importance of interface design for achieving the stated aims of my project. I set out last summer to create a sense of swirling, open-ended text. To this ambition, I have added the extra notion of the less-hierarchal text. A rolling, re-visit able text, if you like. One that does not suggest any particular reading order by its lay-out or paratextual design. I realize that this ambition is not fully realized in my work. I am not sure that the dog can ever bite its own tail and not feel it. However, the Rotating Circles seems to be my answer at the moment. The original interface I designed as a possible entry point for the project was a rotating circle...and my latest piece of work poiema also features a circle, with the view of being less obviously defined.

With poiema I wanted also to blur the boundaries between the traditional binary opposition made out of process and product. In Ancient Greek poiema literally meant 'anything made' as well as poem. I wanted to question why certain groups of words are called poems ( 'finished poem'). I wanted to question why certain peoples words are called poems. In doing so, I also wanted to bring in the ideas of Bakhtin and Voloshinov about the making of meaning.

The dialogic view of language, is that meaning is being constantly made/re-made in the on-gong instances of time. In respect all language is poetic...its meaning is being realized in the moment and then re-made in the next. This does not mean that meaning is free, however. These made-poems can not mean anything, they always mean something specific( for that instance of time only). All poems change their meanings over time. However, with a flexible enough text that meaning-making can occur and be made somewhat apparent to the participants. I guess this is what poiema is aiming to do!

Poiema I - Interface design and animated text filesize 200k

January 2004

Ontology Revisited

Wouldn't you know it! There was no sign of a new media version 'Ontology' on this site for a couple of months and then along come two versions at the same time!

I have completed two versions of this work for a very good reason. One version ( influenced by Peter Howard's flash poetry) is a linear presentation of the work. I wanted to produce this version so that I could feature the wonderful vocal performance of Catherine Byron. Catherine's timing, intonation and interpretation of this text demanded that I try and produce a work that did justice to her skills as a reader. The second version is more or less the work I had in mind when I first wrote this poem back in 2000. It is a cut-up, videogame-style exploration ( that is influenced by the work of Mark Amerika). A VJ/ dance/ remix version if you like. A work to be baffled by. A work that can only be experienced.

I do not see the relationship between these two versions as being either/or though. I hope that both have merits. Indeed, I hope that they do different things.

Let me know what you think!

Both works have been produced using Macromedia Flash MX. Both versions make use of sound. Both are rather large files that will take awhile to download. Both versions also make use of a very large screen (650 by 500 pixels).

So turn on your speakers, maximise the size of your browser window ( f11 in IE6), set the files to download.....and then kick back and enjoy!

Links to:-

Ontology (featuring Catherine Byron) file size 230K

Ontology (the VJ version) file size 480K

You also might like to have a look at :

Ontology (the printed page version)

December 2003

**Do it for yourself or Do it to yourself?**

I have been wondering about my working practices today. In particular, I have been asking myself why I spend so much time learning how the technology works and so little time actually writing. Am I suffering from William Blake syndrome? Is my art suffering from me trying to do everything myself?

A quick look at my desktop shows an explosion of icons; soundforge, flash, director, dreamweaver, photoshop. My real desk is not much better – two borrowed digital cameras (one still, one movie) and a moody old microphone (plus screen, keyboard and mouse of course). The back of the desk is even worse. My machine has more leads than Battersea Dogs Home.

Is all of this stuff necessary…or even desirable do you think? Ironic, isn't it, that a network artist should find themselves struggling alone in an electronic garret.

I believe my Computer Media Writing has come to a crossroads. To date, I have been playing in the electronic sand pit. I have been taking a holiday in serendip ( and spending all my time in its bars). Now the time has come for me to think in terms of a production process...and what it is that I will bring to this future process.

I see myself as a writer and as a researcher. I think, therefore, I should concentrate my practice on these areas. I will leave the shooting the video, recording the sound and photoshopping the images to someone who knows what they are doing. This means collaborating.....this means me being confident of bringing something to the table...confident that I can speak the language of fellow professionals.

Anyone out there want to get together with a textlab thinker?

November 2003

Off to Textlab 2003

It is the night before Christmas....

Well actually it isn't ( it is a November night) but it feels like it. The night before I go to Nottingham to attend the first session of Textlab in fact. It seems no time at all since I put in my proposal for Textlab and now here I am preparing to go.

Recently I have been developing the interface side of the project. I have been learning action scripting and I have just begun to look at Coldfusion. I have some test files up on this Server. These are designed to demonstrate my interface designs ( but they do not do anything else...so don't push any of the buttons!). The files are:

September 2003

Coming to Fork in the Road: Books...vs...Screen?

I have been doing a head-count of all the books that I have bought and read since I conceived of this new media project. I have been impressed by the amount of time and the amount of money that I dedicated to books while working on a new media project. Most of the books I have read have been computer manuals. Books that have taught me how to do things that I did not know how to do. Books that have inspired me to pervert the functional ideas of computer scientists. Books that have impressed me. Books that have depressed me. Books nonetheless.

My working practices clearly indicate to me that I am not a computer-phile. I am a child of the late age of print. I like books and I use books all the time. More importantly, I use books with ease. My education has encultured me in the way of the book. Therefore, I would like to problematize the 'books vs screen 'argument that seems to have defined new media writing in the recent past. I want to acknowledge that I use both (as well as hand written notes, my saxophone and my voice) as media for expression, and I also want to acknowledge that I am now faced with a question of value everytime I use either medium.

What medium should I use for a particular form of expression?

This isn't an idle question. Or a thought experiment for an over-fed philosopher. There is utility in the question. Let me re-phrase it.

What is so peculiarly valuable about computer mediation that it justifies me ( along with a whole generation of writers, designers and artists) investing vast amounts of time and money into this technology?

It sound rather negative when I express it in that way. I hope by the end of this project that I have some kind of answer to this question.In my heart I hope I come up with a positive answer that justifies all the computer books sitting on my desk.

In the meantime, here is a list of books that might help you to come to your own fork in the road.

Advanced PHP for Flash by Steve Webster, Matt Rice, Kev Sutherland, Jacob Hanson, James Palmer, Tood Marks, Havard Eide, Friends of ED
Foundation PHP for Flash by Steve Webster, Friends of ED
Flash MX Savvy by Ethan Watrall and Norbert Herber, Sybex
Flash Games Studio by Sham Bhangal,Igor Choromanski,David Doull,Justin Everett-Church, Thomas Poeser, Glen Rhodes, Kevin Sutherland, Friends of ED
Foundation Actionscript by Sham Bhangal, Friends of ED
Professional PHP by Luis Argerich, Wankyu Choi, John Coggershall, Ken Egervari, Martin Giesler, Zak Greant, Andrew Hill, Chris Hubbad, James Moore, Devon O'Dell, Jon Parise, Harish Rawat, Tarique Sani, Christopher Scollo, Deepak Thomas, Chris Ullman, Wrox

Return to Homepage

Website http://www.gavinstewart.net
E-mail: Send an e-mail to the author