I
MET GEERT MUL ....
at the Come on Petunia symposium at BEK
19 -26 September 2004
....and was interested in the way he went about analysing things.
His current work, "Match of the Day" is described like this:
“MATCH_OF_THE_DAY” is part of the project ‘SPLIT REPRESENTATION’
by Geert Mul. Television images are recorded at random from satellite television
and compared with each other. Some 1000.000.000.000 (one billion) equations
are done every day. In this e-mail-series you will find a selection; the match
of the day.
SPLIT REPRESENTATION uses the image analyses and image composition software:
‘NOTATION’. (concept by Geert Mul, programming & software
design by Carlo Prelz.)
During the Petunia event Geert started to work on a way to understand time/space
relationships in visual media and concocted the following model for the structuring
of time in relation to space:
And his "quick and dirty" report/description went like this:
PETUNIA TIME
Some Time has passed since created his video Why Do Things Get In a Muddle?
(Come on Petunia) (1984) In which “he demonstrates how order is caused
by -- rather than causes -- the interlocking linearity of language, narrative
and history.”
‘Some time’ as in ten years..
In those ten years the linear medium called ‘video’ is used by
CNN and alike, in places where there is an interest in straight forward linear
representation of events. (and time.) A simplification of reality which matches
the politics, which are the mayor ingredient of the fiction format, called
“NEWS”
In other environments video ended up in the computer, where the timeline still
refers to the linear origin of this medium. What else is new in 2005? The
new thing is that computers are faster and cheaper. And so the true potential
of computers, dealing with complex structures, and dealing with complex structures
using variables, has become within the reach of virtually anybody in the western
world with interest enough to go out and buy one…
You don't necessarily need a 2005 computer to deal with “complex structures
using variables”. But you do need a 2005 computer if you want to give
those structures a visual representation. For a representation in sound, a
1984 model should do…
This is why the digital tools for music composers and researchers are far
more advanced as structure generating/analyzing tools, than the tools for
people working with visuals. The science of analyzing and creating complex
structures as an art-form is as old as the notion of music itself.. That's
why the most advanced and promising tool to work with visuals in a complex
dynamic structure, is originally a tool to create music.
I’m referring to MAX msp.
What is the advantage of a structural approach of the Visual Arts ?
Perception, to start with. An ‘understanding’ of the dimensions
that are involved in a simple visual representation of anything, helps you
to see. ‘See’, as in ‘perceive’. Things get rapidly
more complex once time and space are involved. Not to mention; architectural
structure, social structure, hardware information structure, information structure
(semantics) itself.
For myself, its an challenge to try to relate my work to such complex environments.
Especially the notion of ‘dynamic systems’ (complex structures
which include variables), is important. It has made me into a designer of
‘dynamic visual systems’ which function in relation with other
dynamic structures. (Architectural structure, social structure, hardware information
structure, information structure (semantics) itself.)
A structural approach to this challenge not only results into understanding
of the dynamic visual system itself.
It also makes it possible to transpose the Artwork into different media, scale
and time.
And that, in the end, makes a living…
In the initial presentations of the artists participating in this workshop,
some of them explained there perception and definition of TIME related to
their medium. The most explicit explanations came from:
Christian Blom (composer)
Peter Tornquist (composer)
Håkon Lindback (performer)
All of them worked out interrelations between various time definitions and
how those definitions where related to the expression and perception of there
Art-works. I was interested to categorize all definitions, and putting them
in a system, or order.
That was a mistake.
There was no apparent order. The value of their definitions was relative and
related to their medium and the way they used it to generate expressions.
I was perceiving a three-dimensional model of elements, in which all of the
relations between the elements would change as soon as you where to focus
on any particular element.
A nice visual model by itself.., but not very helpful
I had to ask myself for which purpose I needed the TIME model I was trying
to create. The purposed I realised, was creating visual expressions (narratives,
poetry, stories) using dynamic media, related to dynamic environments. This
was different from creating sound structures for music, and visual structures
for physical performance. Although, they have a lot of things in common.
I finally used 4 definitions of time, to construct a simple evaluation model.
1. INHERENT TIME
2. CONDITIONAL TIME
3. EXTREME SLOW TIME
4. ALIEN TIME
“Inherent time” was defined by Håkon. He used the example
of a candle burning during a performance. I interpreted his definition as
“dramatic time”, in which time is defined by a dramatic expression
as a part of the expression (story, narrative). It is time within the framework
of the expression.
“Conditional Time” (Christian Blom) or “absolute time”
as Peter Tornquist defines it, is time that sets an condition for an event
(or inherent time) to happen in. The length of a theatre play is a clear example,
but inside the movie-time of “the third man”, conditional time
was created by the fast changing and dynamic setting of Vienna just after
W.O. II.
“Extreme Slow Time” is a nice one.. (used by Christian Blom) as
it relates time to ‘room’ as he calls it. Space or Architecture
are also related. The difference of something we perceive as a ‘room’
and something we perceive as an ‘explosion’ is the speed of the
process. Thus defining time as the perception of a process. In which a ‘room’
is a manifestation of ‘extreme slow time’. Interesting: Vienna
just after W.O. II was such a fast changing environment that it functioned
as ‘conditional time’. Normally architecture would function as
‘extreme slow time’.
“Alien Time” (Håkon) Time outside the time. MAC time, or
the time of the titles before and after the movie. Or the time on your watch
while having a ride on a rollercoaster…
This little model can be more complex, I had to leave some things out because
of the ‘lack of time’ (ha !, ha!) But I will incorporate them
in the near future. I made a small clip in which I demonstrate the distinction
of these time layers, but also, most importantly, how they play a roll in
telling a story. The biggest surprise was how these formal time definitions,
had a strong relation with SPACE !, or LOCATION. Hardly a new concept, but
it was the proof the coherency of the constructed TIME-MODEL. This relation
time-space is also clearly demonstrated in the little clip. It’s interesting
to see that the choices a made based on formal perception of time, resulted
into a clear order of visualisation of space.
So time and space are visually interrelated because perception of time in
a visual medium is visualisation of process. And our perception of process
is very much space related. A shot of a mountain range in a movie will usually
introduce the notion of an enormous time-span, as a backdrop for the events
(short processes) to happen. Clearly the length and speed of process in this
example is related to the amount of space included in the image.
A visual interactive model of this principle could be made with MAX. Imagine
a range of screens placed one after the other, but with the rules of perspective
reversed so the further away the screen, the bigger the screen.
Standing in front of these screens every screen provides a partly visible
backdrop for the screen in front of it. Now imagine the there are ten of this
ranges organized in a circle. Standing in the middle of this circle you are
surrounded with screens, and if you go past one screen, you end up in a new
circle with screens behind them. Video-clips are displayed on these screens
and the order of time perception. So scrolling trough the screen into the
dept will result of scrolling from short processes and limited space perception,
to scenes with long-term processes and a lot of space. But scrolling in a
circular movement will provide you with a selection of scenes which are all
similar in time and space perception…
So What?
This simple model could be the basis of different dynamic visual systems dealing
with complex time and space relationships. Imagine as a visual input not the
video material but live footage. Satellite-television, security camera’s,..
You now have a perceptual model to relate a visualisation of dynamic live
footage to an interactive three dimensional model.
Is this art?
Not yet…..
I am interested in pursuing potential time/space models in relation to "synaesthetics", and as such, Geert's working method and analytical approach was inspiring. I think of time/space relationships in terms of dynamics - movement in time and space = dynamics. Movement can include all the scenic elements - light, sound, body or any other kind of information, including the lack of movement, which may exist in the performance space. The structuring of ebbs and flows of dynamics create a dramaturgy. I identify this approach as an inheritance from my background in dance as a primarily non-verbal expression or medium.
I am currently in a muddle about how I should approach this subject in terms of synaesthetic experiments (research). Geert has identified his focus on visual media as media, medium and message. As he pointed out:
"The value of their (the Petunia participants) definitions 8of time) was relative and related to their medium and the way they used it to generate expressions."
In "Mind, the gap" the focus on cross-sensory multi connections and disturbances intrinsically leaves the stage open for all mediums and medias. As for the message - well that's another story. While the two planned projects "Ikon" and "The 8th Sister" offer me a twig to grasp hold of (the context and concepts have been formed and offer a framework for focus) I am still wondering whether it is possible to develop "dry" synaesthetic models that also deal with time/space perceptions, and then apply them to art works. This is difficult for me. This is something I do in a retrospective mode - examine and evaluate choices and define methods in a post-natal manner.
I am seriously thinking of reviving an earlier Motherboard project concept that has never been developed, namely "The Emotion Organ". Inspired by Philip K Dick's novel "We Can Build You" which featured an "Emotion Organ" that, when played, could conjure up the deepest of emotions in the shallowest of people, I am thinking of transforming Per's somewhat pumped out pump organ from 1890 into an electrified Emotion Organ of Dickean dimensions to test my as yet undefined principles on .......