20th March- HM Government Non-Consensual Collab filming

20th March-

HM unconsensual collaboration filmingReflections

When I received my feedback from the last unit I was criticised on the fact that I reflected rigorously in words yet I didn't practically reflect and let me work develop. Therefore I decided to re-visit a project that I was working on last unit but didn't want to continue due to the overly critical reflections that took place afterwards. For the Interim show I produced a re-written government document. The UK climate risk assessment that I had edited and word processed with a more true lighting swept over it. Due to my chosen exhibition method I think many people viewing the work were not aware of what it was. I had put both of the works side by side on a desk with an ink pad. The ink pad was intended for people to use and then go through my work, reading the differences in the two texts and realising how the government channel their wording and information to manipulate the reader. However, in reality people used the ink pad to put their finger print on the work and then move along. I don't think that anyone sat down to read through the work. Therefore, in a tutorial I discussed with my tutor the other options possible for producing another version of that work that would be more effective in showing the process. I later reflected upon that concept and found myself talked out of the idea and moving away from the concept all together.



However, after the feedback I received I have been trying to not write quite as much/do endless research when I could be researching something in a practical and artistic manner through practice. Further to this, the process of me dealing with the material in these government documents is simultaneously research also. I am developing the concept of research as practice in external and internal expositions that are taking place. However the work I am doing here I am seeing more as my studio practice. I have however been researching the concept of an unconventional collaboration and what that means. I initially read about it in Co-Art: Artists on Creative Collaboration Ellen Mara De Wacher. This concept for me is an interesting one as the documents that are released by government are a type of unconsensual collaboration with the general public. The information manipulation and the techniques used reduce the amount of input that can be had or taken from a document. Not to mention the fact that so many of us didn't vote this government into power and are feeling the negative effects.

Today therefore I decided to embark on this unconcensual collaboration. I used a video camera to film me editing a government document. The first of a set I have identified as ones that I would like to go through, edit and interact with. This interaction is me directly writing on the paper, highlighting areas and scribbling others out. The video depicts all of this, a full hour of me editing the document and the silent film is saturate with thinking. The stark silence and bland shots are reminiscent of a corporate or government office. While editing the film I blurred the footage. This was due to the fact that when footage is blurred the eyes automatically try to focus it. However it can not be focused by us, a mechanical aspect has rendered the words unreadable. Much as we are entering into a world of mechanical power. This was carefully considered in the editing process. I was also considering how the video would be shown/screened. I have drawn a diagram to show how I envision this taking place.

Also while producing this work I have been thinking greatly about how it could circulate. I emailed to get permission to reproduce the work and have not yet heard back. Therefore, as a blurred version, circulation would not be an issue. However as I move forward with this in my studio practice I would like to make the footage clearer and even more closely following the words. A better view of the words in the shots. This is something I will investigate in and progress with in more video works. Also, I would be very interested to consider and investigate how this would differ as a live performance compared to a video. I like the video concept as it removes my direct view due to my lack of performance confidence however I regard the onscreen view of me editing the work as a type of performance to I am possibly already moving toward that route. I think something else that has been bothering me also is my right to do this. I, as a western female artist is sitting and claiming that my opinion and edited version is better than the real document, more valid or true. Does this make the work indulgent and condescending or does it fall more into the camp of activism with my intention only ever being to point out the irony in the powers that overtake us. I think when 'political' art is made that will always be an issue. However, as someone with a great amount of knowledge of the subject and implications I want to see what the document holds in terms of promise and opportunists for change. One think I have noticed readily with these documents is there lack of progressive thought. There are very few new notions and beating around and issue seems to be key/altering something as a result of the issue instead of tackling the causation. However, this project is something I am glad to have brought back to life and is a extremely experimental way to actively comment on the government and make politically active artwork. My next steps will be technical ones regarding the sheer length of each video and what that means and also the designing of the shots. My 'how text lives' collaboration with Holly on the silent film piece will allow me to gain expertise and be educated by her wealth of knowledge. Hopefully all my projects are feeding into one another in a practical and theoretical manner.