about sound installation
1. The voices could be recordings from the people talking about their experiences.
CONS. My concern with this is that people have no theatrical expression. They are boring even when they talk about the most painful or upsetting experience, unless they are put under the spotlight, like in therapy sessions, or even in a bar. It is only in those situations that they manage to get in touch with their emotion and I can not insert myself into that closed space. I want to have a glimpse of their worst moments.
PRO. It might be interesting as a mirror of society. A mirror cannot produce something that is not there. I leave the responsibility of their actions and behaviors to the interviewed groups. If several groups are interviewed about sadness/anger. The mirror piece could make a statement on what groups are more affected, or how the groups are affected in different ways. It is not a mirror of myself, it becomes a psychology case study.
Then the essence of the emotions that I am trying to get wouldn’t be built by the expressiveness of the text but by an setting up situations I could hear 1 hour audios of 1 group, next hour another group, …
Possible target groups: abused, lost jobs, minorities, grief, woman shelter, families of suicidal, veterans, … (do I feel related or closer to any of this groups? not really… )
About the robots
Robots BEHAVIOR
Sergio proposes reverse engineering approach. Instead of thinking all the possible actions in a begin-end order and logic, think about the last action and go backwards.
Instead of robots that are moving to find people and then staying close, maybe they start together, and they are not moving until someone approaches. Enters their space and disturbs their order. The goal could be to try to get back together, and restore their harmony. If they have empathy for each other, I might have empathy for them.
–> this works!
Robots BODY
My bigger problem hating these robots I’ve been building and abandoning for 8 months is that I am not interested in the formal solution, because i see the impossibility of creating empathy with something that is on the floor and looks like a toy. What makes it look like a toy: the motor noise, the motor interrupted pace, the size, the plastic parts, even the glass dome seems like plastic, just because we are used to see plastic.
Diagnosing the situation, the body would have to change. Now, everything is presented in an utopian way. Uniform, polish, symmetrical. I have to elevate the body to the human sight to perceive it differently. If I build or add something on top, the platform looses importance. It’s just a moving platform, it is not the piece anymore.
What to build/add on top: organic? inorganic? branches? paper sculpture? balloons? fabric? the non-symmetry gives personality. Convert it into a joke? humor is a way to share feelings.
My argument to not knowing what to built is that I have no experience or training in building objects! Sergio: you should see the not knowing as positive instead of negative.
Sergio: Even if I came to OSU to learn how to do new media projects by myself instead of hiring. Sergio says that grad school may also be the place I figure, i have the conceptual control, knowing what I want, and keep working with others and give them control on their part. (like Ann Hamilton, and basically how I have been working for 10 years)