4.

Every week we will be posting our process in the creation of our final thesis project. Here's the first four entries to date. More to come so stay posted.

-jerry

Monday, September 14, 2009
Today was the first meeting with our collaboration at second cup. We discussed ideas surrounding what we wanted to do this our project. We both agreed on creating/marketing/packaging/documenting a certain product. We weren’t quite sure on what product we wanted to create. We referenced certain artists/things we liked and could take from. Jerry mentioned Di Mainstone who deals with interaction clothing. We watched a clip about a piece she co created that addresses garments that are packaged, worn and interacted with.

Wednesday, September 22, 2009
We met again today at Taylor’s house to discuss our interests and future thesis project. Most of the time was spent talking about films and materials. Taylor had seen the newest Gasper Noe at TIFF a few nights prior and explained how inspiring his work is. She lent me one of his films to check out. We both came to the conclusion that we both enjoy using materials such as wood and plexi-glass. We both enjoy the look of wood and Taylor has had previous experience working with plexi-glass. We both agreed that upon our next meeting, we’d have a solid idea to work off of.

Monday, September 28, 2009
Today, we met at Second Cup (our idea hotspot with a terrible Wi-Fi connection) to hopefully have an idea written in stone by the end of the meeting. Sure enough, upon arriving, Taylor was sure she had something intriguing. She mentioned about having a cube/cube’s that the user has to open using hand movements without actually touching the box. The boxes would slowly crack and open slowly and rest flat. On the flat surface would be cinematic cityscapes that we’d fabricate. I thought the idea was brilliant. I later mention that it’d be interesting if we’d hang the boxes/cubes from the ceiling. We also touched upon fabricating a video to go along with the piece to heighten the user’s idea of what the project was. We threw some ideas around on what kind of technology we’d need to open/close the cubes as well as the amount of detail that would go into the cityscapes. After a very successful meeting, we decided to go and do some research about similar projects done/other ideas within the same context.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009
We presented our idea in class with Steve. Discussed our idea conceptually and technically. We met briefly before hand and discussed having the cubes open up when the user is a safe distance away, and then closing when they approach. Symbolic to the cube having a mind of its own. After briefly speaking with Steve in front of the class, he told us we had to act primarily on a nakedness/shyness mind of the cube that will intrigue the user to see what is in inside. What exactly is going on inside that cube and why I would want to see it? He also pointed us in the direction of peephole art including artists such as Janet Cardiff and David Hoffos. We were very intrigued by Hoffos’s work. His infamous installations included people appearing in elaborate fabricated settings but in reality were just reflections off the glass from a TV screen. In all, we need to start in and focus on the content of what the scene is and why it has to shut down. As Steve puts it, we need to have a smart answer as to why we as the user is alienated. Why we want that alienation- that is the question.