This weekend I am taking part in a research project and exhibition called who nose? in Australia, despite being almost as far away from that continent as one can possibly get without leaving the planet altogether. In keeping with that reality, my contribution plays with distance and technology, as it invites others from anywhere in the world to contribute (via a smartphone or computer and internet access, although old-school correspondence would be welcome too). You can read a little about what I’m doing on the home page of my website, or about who nose? and the other artists in the embedded Instagram post below. I will release more details describing ways you might respond to my contribution, Sense and Reason, over the weekend, here and on my various social media platforms (OMG – too many social media platforms for my comfort right now!)
I’m grateful to Pattie Beerens and Stuart Black for accommodating me from afar.
When the Covid lockdowns ended, of course, we were all grateful to get back to some semblance of normality, not to mention a shift away from the awful virus and its high death rates. But many of us were disappointed to see the tapering off of online events. For parents, carers, and people living in rural areas, the plethora of online activities during those strange times meant that we could, at last, attend talks and participate in group workshops with relative ease. Understandably, organisers were eager to return to in-person activities because being in the room with others is often a richer experience than sitting alone (or with kids in the background) behind a screen albeit connected to others doing the same. It’s also pretty soul-destroying talking to a bunch of blank rectangles when everyone on a Zoom call feels compelled to remain hidden (turn those cameras on if you can!).
I think we need to retain that inclusivity wherever possible. Which is why in my part-time job, I have worked hard to ensure hybrid meetings continue. I’m grateful to organisations that do the same – some have done, but not all. Perhaps the cost or practicality prevents them, but I also suspect in some cases ideological intransigence is what prevents organisations from retaining a digital option. It’s not always easy. The technology can fail which is frustrating. But despite the difficulties, I think hybridity is worth pursuing. It is a shame when a conservative view that insists people MUST be in-person at all times otherwise the contribution is not valuable persists.
When I saw the following open call, I was keen to take part. Perhaps it’s down to my parochial positioning, but so many machine-learning-generation-related open calls I see seem to focus on the photographic image when the technology leaves much of the thinking about photography in the dust (something I will have to expand on another time). Pattie’s open call was not so limiting. Which seems right to me as the technology we are exploring inherently questions the hard lines around concepts, time, and space, with its inbuilt fuzzy logic, diffusion and probabilistic reasoning. And perhaps, therein lies so much of the rage many of us swim in today – the dissolution of our structural realities underpinned by a dynamic technology, and the subsequent loss of firm ground within a shaky symbolic realm and beyond, along with its implications (again I will expand another time) is understandably terrifying, and therefore rage-inducing. This is why the inquiry matters and why it’s so fitting that a remote contributor was welcomed.
And so I’m looking forward to taking part albeit across data and technology connections in a different hemisphere and time zone. Look out for invitations to contribute over the weekend!