Shaping Intuition

Genzuk´s Ethnographic Research describes the ‘traditional’ way Social Sciences (and other sciences) have followed when investigating a field; they have a previous hypothesis, they collect data (interviews, observation, documents) and they give it an interpretation that suites the hypothesis. The paradoxical aspect of applying this ‘Scientific Method’ in the Social Sciences, is that more then often, there is a tendency to ‘bend’ the information so that results fit the chosen theory. It is a methodology that has a ‘fixed eye’ so I believe it rarely discovers anything.

Dick’s Grounded Theory, on the other hand, seems to proceed with a ‘cleaner eye’, with almost nothing beforehand, and by observing and comparing (systematically) evidence and data, it unveils the theory that lies underneath. The emergent theory, thus, really matches the situation.

Concerning my practice, theory and knowledge actually emerge from my own investigation. First I move rather intuitively, I follow an ‘image’ that leads me to another stage, and so forth, until I find myself in a place where I can see more clearly. It is always the process that talks back to me, and helps me understand and shape my first inspiration/ intuition. And unlike any scientific method, I try to give memory enough time to forget,  I let things rest beyond my consciousness, I try to ‘run away’ from my ’sight of discovery’, and come back later (late as possible)  as if very indifferent, to see if what ever I found, still works for me, actually builds up with the piece, and allows me to move forward in a certain direction. Of course I take notes and draw lines that guide my thoughts and ideas, I may even have a couple of handbooks around the area, but it might also be a sudden erratic ‘flying paper’, that shows me there is always an effective way in which the back of my mind works.

Filed under: liliana garcia urmeneta, tiip

the visual artist as a cultural agent

In Chapter 5- Artist As Theorist from Graeme Sullivan’s 2005 book Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in the Visual Arts.

The author starts by describing the artist’s work such as being expansive, creative and critical. He then subdivides the practice (concerning knowledge production) in Making in Systems, when related to structure and skills, Making in Communities, referring to negotiating and communicating meaning, and Making in Culture, when it focuses on challenging perception and prompting new ways of thinking.
Sullivan explores the expansive potentiality inherent in a digital era concerning these 3 areas, and points out the change that the artist’s role has developed in society. He says ¨The image of the artist as creator, critic, theorist, teacher, activist, archivist partly captures the range of art practice today¨, as he emphasizes the many functions of the visual artist in contemporary culture. And it is precisely this point that makes the text valuable to me, because it stands on the believe that artists (and their reflective path), when meeting their personal view with the public voice, can bring insight to the way human beings understand and deal with the world. Thus, it seems to me a result of adaptation, that in the current visual environment, the role of the visual artist has shifted, and has also become more that of the role of a cultural agent.

LiLITH`S EVOLUTION

Because my practice is founded in poetry, I have come a long way dealing with images (as metaphors), but it was not until a couple of years ago (maybe sensing the need to communicate), that I decided to materialize them, and so have shifted into the visual arts to continue my practice. In this way, the need of Making in Communities has influenced my Making in System practice. As for Making in Culture, I believe that it is in the visual and textual content of my play, where I intend to exhort the audience: LiLITH’S TRIAL is a play about otherness and what it offers (hopefully) is a new ‘apprehension’ to the way we articulate with reality.

Filed under: e-tivity02-0809, lili, liliana garcia urmeneta , art practice as research, liliana garcia urmeneta, lilith

Beyond Utopia?

New terminology emerges only when new concepts have the need to be coined. In this sense, Produsage introduces an ideal (not totally unheard of) paradigm where the status of community and equality stand up again. Collaborative, user-led creativity through the web is a revolutionary way of conceiving work and knowledge, especially in an ever increasing individualist and competitive world.

As Alex Bruns says in Produsage: Towards a Broader Framework for User-Led Content when he is talking about a working definition: ”Participants in such activities are not producers in a conventional, industrial sense, as that term implies a distinction between producers and consumers which no longer exists…”
Because we now live in the so called informational era, that no longer deals with the prosaic procedures of industry and fixed products, but through web 2.0 moves more fluidly towards an endless intangible stream of information and knowledge, a continuous and progressive process of creation is made possible and everybody has the same chance to contribute and to share.

This new democratic paradigm brings a profound change into society, one could say that a new polis is addressed: Public participation and public domain are crucial issues on the table for discussion. Knowledge is no longer conceived of as the privilege of a few but more as a cooperative self regulated embodiment.
When describing the Key Principles of Produsage, Bruns expresses: “Leadership is determined through the continuous communal evaluation of participants and their ideas, and through the degree of community merit they are able to build in the process; in this sense, then, produsage heterarchies constitute not simply adhocracies, but ad hoc meritocracies.” Following this idea, artists too, are challenged to adapt to this meritocratic regime; surely they still undergo the same lonely mysterious encounter with their inspiring muse, but now, in a highly technological collaborative environment, they must assume that they are part of the ever changing whole in which no man stands on their own for their own purpose anymore. This does not mean that personal talents or efforts receive no rewards, the nature of a social web understands the importance of recognition and motivation, from the beginning, every participant is encouraged to go as far and as deep as they want (spontaneous leadership), and because they do, short sighted lazy contributors are automatically and naturally expelled. Meritocracy is the key word in this new model, it holds a magic power, and might be what guarantees this new paradigm’s success: No more rigid hierarchies in the academic field, no more arrogant structures in culture, instead, roles and boundaries become relative, more flexible, there is a new understanding, a true sense of collective work, a new conception of ownership and credit, more support, more efficiency, and the encouraging feeling that there is no such thing as Utopia, because it has been the lack of a fair scenario, that made dreams feel impossible, not some inherent condition of humankind.

Filed under: e-tivity01-08/09, liliana garcia urmeneta, tiip-0809 , liliana garcia urmeneta