Breakdown is not a yes –– no, it is yes and no
In my research, I investigate the tensions between different interpretations of error: from the binary (and strictly digital forms) to the more abstract and human ways we approach and think about error. My interest comes from a meshing together of these tendencies and the slippages between understandings, where error is capable of breaking down and disrupting digital logic. These methods go against the ways that errors are commonly understood in digital culture, where systems try to reduce, if not erase, error or breakdown.
Error is distinct from breakdown, in that error leads to breakdown. A set of projects reveal that rational thought breaks down when error occurs, which is useful in terms of undermining digital logic, promoting a process of reconnecting, reimagining and renewal. Thus, a breakdown in logic presents an interruption to knowing and opportunity to un-learn. This expanded sense of breakdown has potential to open up new thinking; in that not knowing upholds new beginnings.
Through my practice I question how a collapse in digital logic is understood differently as a consequence of post-digital systems, practices and culture (Cramer), opening conversations about the agency of breakdown in human––machine interactions (Latour). Digital logic is commonly reductive, yet in artistic practice it is messier, and under post-digital conditions it is messier still, uncovering other creative and critical possibilities, through which we can examine social, political and technological breakdown. I create spaces which evoke a connection between the tangible and intangible, speculating on what is material, though exploring systems of knowledge, or belief, and experiences of disinformation on social media. The post-digital can nuance our understanding of error and break–ing–down, beyond a binary informational form. Provoking a discussion on how, in terms of the post-digital, a breakdown is not a yes –– no, it is yes and no (Cocker).