The day opened with a brainwave about ‘ambient devices’ that came from the always-amazing Skrekkøggle. This work recorder prototype is precisely the sort of area I want to be working in. It sits there, allowing brief and shallow attention, and operates in the margins the rest of the time. Some of their other devices operate this way, such as the fantastic Durr.
The idea of ‘glanceable’ media seems incredibly pertinent and has opened up a new way of thinking about the problem of making work in this area. What would ‘glanceable’ art be like? How does complex information get simplified to increase its glanceability? It seems to me that the questions that glanceable media answer are qualitative rather than quantitative: how long, how busy, how warm, etc. Quantitative data needs to be gathered to measure this, but the key to making it ambient and glanceably understood is to reduce this quantitative data to qualitative measures: very busy, very warm, etc. The data is made more imprecise, but also made more emotionally resonant this way.
The ADRC seminar was quite a daunting session on two questions: Does quality matter? and How do we know what to read, and when we’ve read enough? The students presenting did an excellent job of approaching these questions, but I found myself feeling very out of my depth in the ensuing discussions. I have my own views on quality, or rather the qualities of a work, but it seems I am not thinking like a researcher about this: I’m not thinking forensically about these issues and how they might be understood institutionally, personally, in terms of peer review, exhibition etc etc. Ouch.
The second question was discussed more comprehensively in terms of the quantitative – the presenter showing books recommended vs books actually read etc. We delighted in the measurable success of the quantitative! Round of applause – this probably wouldn’t have arisen if the number of books read had been described as “LOTS” rather than measuring the number more accurately. Dauntingly, the question of literature reviewing loomed large, and while I’m concentrating on my practice I’m alert to the fact that my literature seems unreviewed. This put me on a bit of a downer.
I spent the evening doing more website work. A new theme, a new layout, and some new archive work added to the site. It seems like this task is taking forever, and it is, but that’s mainly because I’m only spending an hour here and there on it. I suspect I would benefit from a concerted push on it to clear the task once and for all.