SARAH RODIGARI’s INPUT -> Week 12 (Oct 19)
Sarah’s potential insights into conceptual discussion: Through the act of playing the game what do I learn or discover? Could just be the name of someone else. Conversational Qs supplementary. How do they play? How many? Together? Team building is usually around an idea. Politics.. Topic building in these games.
Stakes = winning = want to participate. What’s in it for them? Beyond that they have to out of academic respect.
Lolly bribe. Too niche? I mean, when I described it to other groups they were sold on the chance just to have the experience without any tangible thing in it for them (see below).
Sarah expressed concerns that our plans lacked structure, and the way I explained them to her didn’t fit her expectation, “That’s not a work” was pretty hard hitting. She also expressed concern over the concept, that there should be some sort of conversation or dialogue inspired by the event or piece.
We need to reshape our event and concept so it’s more structured, and has clearer outcomes.
FROM -> A pop-up in-class flash event: Minute-To-Win-It style party games geared towards stimulating the bonding of the collaborative classroom environment in a more exciting, fun and relational way reflective to that of a youth group or corporate team building exercise.
TO -> Examining the concept of time, stress, and their relation to collaboration, creativity, fun and motivation.
TALKING TO GROUPS/SHARING WORK IDEAS
Talked to the group exploring Korean Valentines (14th of every month) and the Body Politics/branding group.
Both really enjoyed our concept and initial examples and wanted to participate in our idea of an all inclusive performative working event/example of adults playing childrens’s party games, or team building.
Directed Research:
Alan Kaprow and ‘The Happening’
Couldn’t find a lot of information that felt relevant to our initial work, concept, or what we wanted to achieve. I.e. informality and smaller scale interaction/collaboration
However, a google image search for, “happening kaprow”, expanded our conceptual understanding of the artistic style event. Audience members were included mostly to watch or engage with the work from within the work itself, and be present while the work ‘happened’ around them. We wanted the audience to BE the work, be EMBODIED in the work, and create a more positive bonding experience.
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=happenings+kaprow&rlz=1C5CHFA_enAU718AU720&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnwZnJvqHeAhXFdt4KHYqWBUEQ_AUIDigB&biw=1154&bih=765
http://www.superweirdsubstance.com/allan-kaprow-happenings-new-york-scene/
An excerpt from Allan Kaprow’s writings, describing a “kaleidoscopic sampling of some of their great moments” and “their purpose and place in art” of “decided impact” but with “no beginning, middle or end”.
Relational Aesthetics
http://www.art-agenda.com/reviews/the-great-acceleration-art-in-the-anthropocene/ exemplifies some clear examples of relational aesthetics, but didn’t really explain why. We think they were to do with ergonomics, or the interaction between body and sculpture but struggled to apply them.
Opavivará, Formosa Decelerator, 2014.
Other examples of interactive work driven by people’s contribution over time.
http://candychang.com/ Candy Chang creates a lot of installation based, fill-in-the-blank style work. We wanted our subjects/audience members to be more in the moment participatory, united together in a chaotic compression under limited time instead of extended time so we could engage with the class in our allotted 10 minutes.