Second level practice-research reflection. (2)
Research issues
In examining the research journey to date it is necessary to look at some of the obstacles that have affected how the research project has unfolded.
In retrospect there have been some impactful turning points that can be partly related to timing of external events, needing to acquire necessary skills that are required by the researcher, meeting the requirements of academia and the necessary practice process.
The first year was engaged with finding ones location within research practice, to better understand current knowledge and research within the discipline and academia. This required training in research skills in locating research and examining the hot topics, current live discourse and gaps in knowledge.
It was necessary to locate my own practice within the field, and here was the first problem. The work, although considered to me animation was located at the periphery between disciplines. In being asked where do you see the work being placed drew a complex set of questions. Was I being asked where I was to present and consequently promote practice, where the audience to the work was, where the work would be most affective or the most financially self supporting, or in fact what the work intended to promote in it's research?
I was unsure as I saw myself as an animator having the training to produce animation both commercially and experimentally, yet I engaged with three dimensional making, film projection and still image. The work was interdisciplinary in process but I saw the work as an art form as I engage with aspects of the human experience, and this began with my own experience and personal biography, extending to the region and country of birth and extending to the experience of motherhood, and humanity.
The first year saw the studies of location a, b and c, although the work seemed tenuous and undeveloped the work enabled the study of motion, construction and time in it's emerging form in nature and was a working metaphor for enabling research in the field.
This was approached in observing, studying and reflecting on the natural motion and change that occurs in the 'natural' environment. In practice it was attempted to define the three locations as geographical and metaphoric boundaries to the project. This work became an 'organic diagram' that illustrated the start of the Pennine way. In the beginning 'nature' was central to the themes of the experimental practice, but there was something very critical missing in animation theory that was at the heart of practice...
In turning to theory it became clear that if the project was going to be successful then it would have to have clarity, definition and clearly meet the needs of the academic community. The project also needed to meet the practice needs and may not necessarily evolve in a way that would be successful. I was unsure what was being defined in the terms 'animation', 'life' and 'motion'.
This research carried on in the form of researching natures phenomena ( complex dynamic systems), motion and invisible structures. Theory had recognised a need to be more conversant in philosophical language as this would enable the expression of ideas within the academic community, it was not sufficient to express notions as moving image, it was necessary to underpin the origins of thought through philosophical enquiry, and speak in an acceptable language. The consequence of not having this was to be inarticulate in the expression of ideas, potential miscommunication and the achievement of a poor academic reputation.
Locating the right words within the personal philosophical positioning was to be the next problem. I had an unusual frame of reference leading to a difficult and potentially problematic world view. This has developed partly from my own biography and partly from my own human experience. The difficulty of this was only going to be realised fully after the first year review.
Although I could demonstrate certain qualities and skills at the first year review, the project was not articulated very well. It was necessary to turn fully to practice and examine the roots of its current form. This was to be the next major turning point. In examining the developments of the practice, I was forced to encounter difficult emotions related to the origins of the personal experimental animation work.
The work kicked back against intense encounters with the tools of CGI, and in doing so turned to craft practices. It was necessary to delve into this emotional response and better understand the motivations at play.
Rather than analyse the development of 'interconnection', 'one' and 'time' at this point I will surmise in saying that I was deeply concerned with identity and desired to locate 'self' in space-time, finding connections in quantum theory, deep ecology and craft materiality.
I was concerned that I had no defined disciplinary boundaries to practice, I was not satisfied by the term 'animation', or align my own thinking to current theorists in the animation field. I still didn't have full grasp of the academic language or seem to find philosophy that fully expressed my own notions of 'life', that would enable a better definition of the term 'animation'.
I felt lost in theory and needed to turn to practice to make work, and physically work through some of these issues. The starting point was to turn make to the central site of tension within the practice work, the tension between human-computation and it's relation to ecology and nature.
I began experimenting with the tools of cgi however instead of complying to the training that was instilled to produce photorealistic worlds, I chose to examine the tool on its own terms without desiring to construct representationally. So as not to get caught up in object construction, I used an old model I used in the first animated film 'betamaximus' as this had its origins in practice development from stop-motion modelling to cgi animation.
The wire tree was itself conceived from the process of deconstructing a Betamax video recorder, the wires from the machine were used to construct the original electrical wired tree. This wire stop motion model was constructed as a cgi tree.
The process of encountering cgi on its own terms highlighted it's function as a tool primarily for the construction of a photorealistic environment and object model, but also as a form of life in animation. This aesthetic is the dominant model and so what I was interested I was to examine exactly what is engaged with when making a virtual world using these kinds of tools.
The processes produced the film experiment 'glitch' that illustrates the functionality of the tool that were revealed in breaking the codes and conditions of its use. Virtual cameras traversed boundaries to reveal the glitch of 'back-face' culling to attempt to capture the uncertainty of the machine I deciding which face was the front and which the back. This revealed five frames in which a hole appears. This is only visible to the animator in the still frames prior to rendering the film, these frames are automatically removed by the machine on rendering, the glitch is removed.
It was experimented with placing objects within the spaces created by the machine as an aesthetic attempt to find beauty within the glitch, a metaphor of human within the machine maybe the privilege of human to have logic processing over computation.
Other aspects of the tool of cgi were the affect of lighting on rendering and production values, rendering lighting of transparent materials was a costly process. Handling cgi was like handling light, I began to relate to cgi as a light form. I also began to revisit notions of light within the natural environment and also examined practitioners engaging with light such as maholy Nagy, Stan vanderbeek, thinking of the aesthetic and functionality of Light in both the virtual and real environment.
In examining the work of Stan vanderbeek, John Cage, Maholy Nagy and rauschenberg it seemed that the engagement with time and space was conveyed in a different way to mechanism or animist models of world but engaged with notions of entropy and an unfolding of time.
It was recognised that this form of thinking about world required the necessary philosophical underpinning at that a survey of the work could reveal the philosophical influences could help in articulating the project positioning and frame of reference. Research revealed Zen Buddhism within the work of Cage andRauchenberg, Bergson in maholy Nagy and Stan Vanderbeek.
In reading the work of Bergson and reexamining the practice biography and my own personal experience of Buddhism, I could align my own thinking and frame of reference with Bergson. This gave the necessary language with which to articulate practice-theory ideas.
Although practice experimentation turned then to craft materials in paper making, I had lost sight of the importance of nature within the practice. I had spent a lot of time indoors and it would require the change in seasons, free of academic timescales and freedom to explore making again to bring back this influence in the work. I had by this time five practice experiments on the drawing board, all of which were I varying states of development, the timing of these was critical.
Exploring the cusp of cgi and craft had raised questions related the tension between human-computation regarding notions of identity, agency and control. The formation of an alternative understanding of the notion of 'life' was in process but this was not necessarily mechanistic or vitalistic, it was reconfiguring 'life' as a complex system of dynamics, connections and communications that had a form of 'systems theory' at its root, the agency of this system was uncertain but the configuration of agency would affect the positioning of the notions of liberty, control and identity within practice.
It was in turning to philosophy that Bergson led to and Gaston Bachelard I thinking about technology and the tools engaged with I animation practice, the dominant traditions of cgi and the relationship between animator and tool.
In reconfiguring the tools as cgi as a form of light art, and in recognising that the essence of practice materialises light and structure through craft materiality I turned back to theory in order to bring the line of research back to animation theory as I still believed that I am an animator, but the work I produce is on the periphery of fine art and experimental animation.
The text 'remaining animation' revealed the work of Joos ad light animation. I felt that the essence of Joos practice aligned with my own except that Joos materialised light and I made light material, however, we both seemed to draw from the same philosophical sources to articulate practice. Joos posted a text from Donna Haraway 'cyborg manifesto' . This text was instrumental in drawing together previously researched philosophical texts under the construct of the cyborg.
I have since that time configured cyborg as the cybernetic organism, aligning practice with organismic biology and biophilosophy more than cybernetics. The reasons for this is in having a strong humanistic world-view and a strong repulsion of Transhumanism in regards to mechanisms of control and free will however that is not today that technologies shouldn't be used to overcome physical limitations in the less abled human however I recognise that this is actually the site of anxiety and tension in the human-computer interface. The authorship of agency, free will and human autonomy is essential to current configurations of what it is to be human and not machine.
And so the current position of the practice-theory is that animation can be configured as cyborg, Notions of space-time be reconfigured within the construct of bio-philosophy and the cybernetic -organism practice work is animation in this model.
In establishing the position of practice-theory it is now possible to review current theory and practice within this extended notion of animation I aligning aspects of contemporary animation practice through the lens of the practice positioning.
Practically what this means is a review of animation theory and practice by examining animation using the terminology of Bergson, Bachelard, Weiner and Haraway.
The premise is that Animation is a form of cybernetic organismic art that can be substantiated by examining where the artist engages with technology to produce moving image as an evolutionary process of frame by frame stills but that also express then experience of what it is to be human in an age affected by rapid advances i technology.
This is evident in the work of experimental animation as can be best revealed I practice that engages with technology to produce new aesthetic and functional experimental effects or in articulating the tension between human-technology, that of liberty in extending human function but in also risking enslavement to external agencies.
The focus is now to properly form the evolving experimental animation experiments in practice while drawing references for key texts to support the current line of investigation into cyborg and light art in relation with evolution and metamorphic processes.
In addition to the five short film experiments there is work going on in the construction of a cyborg stop-motion amature, paper/rapid prototype stop motion models and films/images for project also form part of this interdisciplinary research as part of the exploration on the cusp of cgi and craft materiality.
Investigations into The authorship of agency at the interface between human-computation is also being tracked back to the language of binary and u DNA coding as a way in which to articulate the tension of identity and boundary of the human experience relating to issues of control and liberty... This may extend to the social engineering of control mechanisms and physical movement/ mental control and the will. (This concept illustrates an emerging concept that may form over the next few months if the research into locust physiology and swarming behaviour is possible)
Concept treatments and animatics will be produced to articulate the relevance of the practice experimentation to my supervisors and this will help in project management of the production schedule.
In examining the research journey to date it is necessary to look at some of the obstacles that have affected how the research project has unfolded.
In retrospect there have been some impactful turning points that can be partly related to timing of external events, needing to acquire necessary skills that are required by the researcher, meeting the requirements of academia and the necessary practice process.
The first year was engaged with finding ones location within research practice, to better understand current knowledge and research within the discipline and academia. This required training in research skills in locating research and examining the hot topics, current live discourse and gaps in knowledge.
It was necessary to locate my own practice within the field, and here was the first problem. The work, although considered to me animation was located at the periphery between disciplines. In being asked where do you see the work being placed drew a complex set of questions. Was I being asked where I was to present and consequently promote practice, where the audience to the work was, where the work would be most affective or the most financially self supporting, or in fact what the work intended to promote in it's research?
I was unsure as I saw myself as an animator having the training to produce animation both commercially and experimentally, yet I engaged with three dimensional making, film projection and still image. The work was interdisciplinary in process but I saw the work as an art form as I engage with aspects of the human experience, and this began with my own experience and personal biography, extending to the region and country of birth and extending to the experience of motherhood, and humanity.
The first year saw the studies of location a, b and c, although the work seemed tenuous and undeveloped the work enabled the study of motion, construction and time in it's emerging form in nature and was a working metaphor for enabling research in the field.
This was approached in observing, studying and reflecting on the natural motion and change that occurs in the 'natural' environment. In practice it was attempted to define the three locations as geographical and metaphoric boundaries to the project. This work became an 'organic diagram' that illustrated the start of the Pennine way. In the beginning 'nature' was central to the themes of the experimental practice, but there was something very critical missing in animation theory that was at the heart of practice...
In turning to theory it became clear that if the project was going to be successful then it would have to have clarity, definition and clearly meet the needs of the academic community. The project also needed to meet the practice needs and may not necessarily evolve in a way that would be successful. I was unsure what was being defined in the terms 'animation', 'life' and 'motion'.
This research carried on in the form of researching natures phenomena ( complex dynamic systems), motion and invisible structures. Theory had recognised a need to be more conversant in philosophical language as this would enable the expression of ideas within the academic community, it was not sufficient to express notions as moving image, it was necessary to underpin the origins of thought through philosophical enquiry, and speak in an acceptable language. The consequence of not having this was to be inarticulate in the expression of ideas, potential miscommunication and the achievement of a poor academic reputation.
Locating the right words within the personal philosophical positioning was to be the next problem. I had an unusual frame of reference leading to a difficult and potentially problematic world view. This has developed partly from my own biography and partly from my own human experience. The difficulty of this was only going to be realised fully after the first year review.
Although I could demonstrate certain qualities and skills at the first year review, the project was not articulated very well. It was necessary to turn fully to practice and examine the roots of its current form. This was to be the next major turning point. In examining the developments of the practice, I was forced to encounter difficult emotions related to the origins of the personal experimental animation work.
The work kicked back against intense encounters with the tools of CGI, and in doing so turned to craft practices. It was necessary to delve into this emotional response and better understand the motivations at play.
Rather than analyse the development of 'interconnection', 'one' and 'time' at this point I will surmise in saying that I was deeply concerned with identity and desired to locate 'self' in space-time, finding connections in quantum theory, deep ecology and craft materiality.
I was concerned that I had no defined disciplinary boundaries to practice, I was not satisfied by the term 'animation', or align my own thinking to current theorists in the animation field. I still didn't have full grasp of the academic language or seem to find philosophy that fully expressed my own notions of 'life', that would enable a better definition of the term 'animation'.
I felt lost in theory and needed to turn to practice to make work, and physically work through some of these issues. The starting point was to turn make to the central site of tension within the practice work, the tension between human-computation and it's relation to ecology and nature.
I began experimenting with the tools of cgi however instead of complying to the training that was instilled to produce photorealistic worlds, I chose to examine the tool on its own terms without desiring to construct representationally. So as not to get caught up in object construction, I used an old model I used in the first animated film 'betamaximus' as this had its origins in practice development from stop-motion modelling to cgi animation.
The wire tree was itself conceived from the process of deconstructing a Betamax video recorder, the wires from the machine were used to construct the original electrical wired tree. This wire stop motion model was constructed as a cgi tree.
The process of encountering cgi on its own terms highlighted it's function as a tool primarily for the construction of a photorealistic environment and object model, but also as a form of life in animation. This aesthetic is the dominant model and so what I was interested I was to examine exactly what is engaged with when making a virtual world using these kinds of tools.
The processes produced the film experiment 'glitch' that illustrates the functionality of the tool that were revealed in breaking the codes and conditions of its use. Virtual cameras traversed boundaries to reveal the glitch of 'back-face' culling to attempt to capture the uncertainty of the machine I deciding which face was the front and which the back. This revealed five frames in which a hole appears. This is only visible to the animator in the still frames prior to rendering the film, these frames are automatically removed by the machine on rendering, the glitch is removed.
It was experimented with placing objects within the spaces created by the machine as an aesthetic attempt to find beauty within the glitch, a metaphor of human within the machine maybe the privilege of human to have logic processing over computation.
Other aspects of the tool of cgi were the affect of lighting on rendering and production values, rendering lighting of transparent materials was a costly process. Handling cgi was like handling light, I began to relate to cgi as a light form. I also began to revisit notions of light within the natural environment and also examined practitioners engaging with light such as maholy Nagy, Stan vanderbeek, thinking of the aesthetic and functionality of Light in both the virtual and real environment.
In examining the work of Stan vanderbeek, John Cage, Maholy Nagy and rauschenberg it seemed that the engagement with time and space was conveyed in a different way to mechanism or animist models of world but engaged with notions of entropy and an unfolding of time.
It was recognised that this form of thinking about world required the necessary philosophical underpinning at that a survey of the work could reveal the philosophical influences could help in articulating the project positioning and frame of reference. Research revealed Zen Buddhism within the work of Cage andRauchenberg, Bergson in maholy Nagy and Stan Vanderbeek.
In reading the work of Bergson and reexamining the practice biography and my own personal experience of Buddhism, I could align my own thinking and frame of reference with Bergson. This gave the necessary language with which to articulate practice-theory ideas.
Although practice experimentation turned then to craft materials in paper making, I had lost sight of the importance of nature within the practice. I had spent a lot of time indoors and it would require the change in seasons, free of academic timescales and freedom to explore making again to bring back this influence in the work. I had by this time five practice experiments on the drawing board, all of which were I varying states of development, the timing of these was critical.
Exploring the cusp of cgi and craft had raised questions related the tension between human-computation regarding notions of identity, agency and control. The formation of an alternative understanding of the notion of 'life' was in process but this was not necessarily mechanistic or vitalistic, it was reconfiguring 'life' as a complex system of dynamics, connections and communications that had a form of 'systems theory' at its root, the agency of this system was uncertain but the configuration of agency would affect the positioning of the notions of liberty, control and identity within practice.
It was in turning to philosophy that Bergson led to and Gaston Bachelard I thinking about technology and the tools engaged with I animation practice, the dominant traditions of cgi and the relationship between animator and tool.
In reconfiguring the tools as cgi as a form of light art, and in recognising that the essence of practice materialises light and structure through craft materiality I turned back to theory in order to bring the line of research back to animation theory as I still believed that I am an animator, but the work I produce is on the periphery of fine art and experimental animation.
The text 'remaining animation' revealed the work of Joos ad light animation. I felt that the essence of Joos practice aligned with my own except that Joos materialised light and I made light material, however, we both seemed to draw from the same philosophical sources to articulate practice. Joos posted a text from Donna Haraway 'cyborg manifesto' . This text was instrumental in drawing together previously researched philosophical texts under the construct of the cyborg.
I have since that time configured cyborg as the cybernetic organism, aligning practice with organismic biology and biophilosophy more than cybernetics. The reasons for this is in having a strong humanistic world-view and a strong repulsion of Transhumanism in regards to mechanisms of control and free will however that is not today that technologies shouldn't be used to overcome physical limitations in the less abled human however I recognise that this is actually the site of anxiety and tension in the human-computer interface. The authorship of agency, free will and human autonomy is essential to current configurations of what it is to be human and not machine.
And so the current position of the practice-theory is that animation can be configured as cyborg, Notions of space-time be reconfigured within the construct of bio-philosophy and the cybernetic -organism practice work is animation in this model.
In establishing the position of practice-theory it is now possible to review current theory and practice within this extended notion of animation I aligning aspects of contemporary animation practice through the lens of the practice positioning.
Practically what this means is a review of animation theory and practice by examining animation using the terminology of Bergson, Bachelard, Weiner and Haraway.
The premise is that Animation is a form of cybernetic organismic art that can be substantiated by examining where the artist engages with technology to produce moving image as an evolutionary process of frame by frame stills but that also express then experience of what it is to be human in an age affected by rapid advances i technology.
This is evident in the work of experimental animation as can be best revealed I practice that engages with technology to produce new aesthetic and functional experimental effects or in articulating the tension between human-technology, that of liberty in extending human function but in also risking enslavement to external agencies.
The focus is now to properly form the evolving experimental animation experiments in practice while drawing references for key texts to support the current line of investigation into cyborg and light art in relation with evolution and metamorphic processes.
In addition to the five short film experiments there is work going on in the construction of a cyborg stop-motion amature, paper/rapid prototype stop motion models and films/images for project also form part of this interdisciplinary research as part of the exploration on the cusp of cgi and craft materiality.
Investigations into The authorship of agency at the interface between human-computation is also being tracked back to the language of binary and u DNA coding as a way in which to articulate the tension of identity and boundary of the human experience relating to issues of control and liberty... This may extend to the social engineering of control mechanisms and physical movement/ mental control and the will. (This concept illustrates an emerging concept that may form over the next few months if the research into locust physiology and swarming behaviour is possible)
Concept treatments and animatics will be produced to articulate the relevance of the practice experimentation to my supervisors and this will help in project management of the production schedule.
