Hot Rod Biology

1.
I really enjoyed the way she sets up 'the Decorationalist' ñ very amusing and constructive. I especially like the way she sets out to 'induct' people into her cause [but then also to clarify those who don't quite fit in . . . but who you thought might have]. I guess I was thinking I could use [appropriate] this as a strategy to develop my notion of the Hybrid Practitioner . . . and then I thought that maybe that's what Elvis was already kind of beginning to do for me ñ inducting people?

From Denise's blog . . .

"* * * D E C O R A T I O N A L I S T S * * *

Decorationalist: Dave Eggars
Mostly Because Of: McSweeney's journal
Inductor's Notes:
McSweeney's makes sense unto itself. Its logic is self contained, but its delivery plays a game of beguiling . . .

Decorationalist: Chris Ware
Mostly Because Of: All his comics
Inductor's Notes:
Much of his work functions at many levels . . .

etc ñ then . . .

* * * NOT DECORATIONALISTS WHO YOU MIGHT THINK ARE AND WHY * * *

Not Decorationalist: Jennifer Sterling
Mostly Because: the work is more akin to automatic writing.
Abductor's Notes:
While it is obsessively sincere, the complex delivery only appears complex . . ."

etc ñ you get the picture . . .

2.
This bit . . .

"Pushing pennies to make sense

When artists and designers want to mess with the tools and the materials of their craft, or invent completely new ones, the initital investigations are abstract and devoid of meaning. Explorations tend not to take the form of samplers for instance, projects used to build skill and understanding. No, experience and mastery of what is already possible is presumed. Content of the experiments, then, can be somewhat arbitrary, a bit of nonsense, iterations of form stories that may point to and spawn significant ideas, but later.

The first impulse to push tools and materials into new territory seems to create the insignificant artifact, things superfluous and maybe even freewheeling. (John Maeda's early computational studies might be an example of this: see the timeline of work done through Maeda Studio and his MIT Media Lab courses which begins with little forays of questionable consequence and culminate into a body of work that has inspired a shift in how we think of the computer (represented in a soon-to-be-released book entitled Creative Code .) I think it must be so in order to free up the experiment.

This is no doubt the difference between form/material experimentation and the scientific method."

. . . interested me because, well maybe because it felt like it somehow validated my own work that at the moment could seem a bit "arbitrary . . . nonsense . . . of questionable consequence" . . . but also because I've been trying for this whole term now [3 weeks] to get my 3rd and 4th year students to start making work!

This passage reminded me of something I think John Cage said? Something about if you don't know where to start, start anywhere" . . . I think this might have been from that big 'ol Bruce Mau book? Also made me think about Wiengart whose early experiments with lead type were perhaps of little consequence, but which lead him into rich ground.