FRACTAL Catalogue[1]

8/4/2019 FRACTAL Catalogue[1]

1/24

CONTENTS

R

!!

Rules for Engagement - 1The Host - 111Snapshot - IVThe Gallery - V

Textually Transmitted Object - VIIPrivileged Layers - IX

On the Cusp - X

The Shift - XIThe Voyeur - XIIIAdorn Yourselves - XV

Unrequited Memory - XVIIPost Agency - XXI


2/24

Rules for

engagement

Jacques Ranciere,Emancipated Spectator, ArtForum March 2007.

A thing that is similar to another thing that is similar to another thing that was

similar to the rst thing may be described as being fractal-like in structure. What

is most notable about this term fractal and its scientic discourse is the use of the

word similar. The quick distinction that one makes is that all of these things arenot quite the same. Chaos establishes itself within this structure, moreover the chaos

that establishes itselfis the structure and its repetition is not obedience to a rule but

the rule that rst created it.

To allow chaos, a lack of control and a new structure to establish itself within a

given structure would seem paradoxical since structures should logically reward us

with consistency and completeness. But what would it mean to allow such a

structure to establish itself in art? Within the given cultural event of the exhibition,what could it mean to allow an artwork to exist in its elements but allow the content

and structure to be rened by its audience?

In the Fractal installation there is a possibility for something other than what is

presented. The individual components that invite participation have the possibility

to redirect that very participation: to restructure the way engagement with the work

takes place and its terms. The audience are invited into a space with particular

arrangements of recording equipment from video, photography and sound towriting implements. The recording equipment has been arranged to communicate

R

!!

Spectatorship is not the passivity that has to be turned into activity. It is our

normal situation. We learn and teach, we act and know as spectators who link

what they see and what they have seen and told and done and dreamt.

There is no privileged medium as there is no privileged starting point.

I


3/24

the opportunity of communication itself and the impact that the audience can make

on the direction of the exhibition. There is little guidance other than that requested

by the viewer. The experience may be considered to be one of participation through

spectatorship. The normal state of spectatorship, as Ranciere denes it, responds to

itself in the main auditorium without a particular effect being asked of the audience.

The exhibition makes a transition into the backstage area, an area where you can bein on the act. There is a dynamic shift as the viewer is now amongst the

performers who will rewrite their actions and re-present the exhibition according

to that rewrite. The opportunity for the viewer to rene the exhibition has become

more limited now that the main event is over. There is only an acknowledgement of

the opportunity that existed in the main space; perhaps the potentiality of being in

the space as a spectator was the possibility of artistic agency in the work.

The exhibition harbours no ambition for a particular outcome for its componentsother than the prospect of communicating that these arrangements are the platform

of the spectator. However, the limited time of the audiences progression through

the space might render it to be reminiscent of a dysfunctional production line, and

the frailty of this set- up makes it susceptible to aggravating forced engagement. Yet

to sincerely offer the prospect of redening the nature of participation, the

exhibition must be delivered in this somewhat clumsy manner. Perhaps it is in the

things that grow from the exhibition such as the subsequent script; the post

exhibition advertising posters depicting the exhibition as a play; and the catalogue,

that the artists dialogue with the audience can reveal itself most uently.

Rosalind Krauss has written about recursivity as being a possible structure for

participatory art in which some of the elements of a work would produce the rules

that generate the structure itself. It is this consideration that we, the artists, feel

most urgent to engage with. We are not merely interested in how the audience have

contributed content or a narrative to the exhibition; be it through writing about the

objects they brought or facing away from the video camera and refusing to perform;

but also how those very things might inform the reading of the work by subsequent

viewers and perhaps allow a different participation that was not wholly dened by

the artist.

11


4/24

"Hi! thanks for coming."

"Can I show you this Polaroid?"

"Can I take it back?"

"When you go in you will bedirected upstairs."

THE HOST

The relationship between the Fractal installation and its viewers is very much thatof a host and its guests. Just as a guest respects the rules and requests of the host, so

too are they free to indulge, converse and express within this structure, moreover

these are encouraged. The rst hosting element that the guests encounter is the

front of house host, seated at the entrance to the main auditorium. A warm welcome

greets them and refreshments are offered. After a brief set of instructions the door is

opened and the host hands the guest over to their new host within. The viewer soon

slips into the role of the guest and as such is more inclined to respect the requests

of a host but as the requests of the host wither the viewer may feel an unguidedresponsibility and aspect of 'care' towards the exhibition. This is vital as a barrage of

requests follow which, while requiring adherence to a certain level, this adherence

is not wholly to the artist but to the previous viewers.

R

!!

III


5/24

"I would ask that you take onephoto of anything in the space."

"Press the button down fully."

"We would like to send you a freecatalogue, if you would like to give

us your address."

"Enjoy the experience!"

(Knock... Knock)

The host in the foyer requests that the viewer would take a single Polaroid

photograph and are given a brief glance at a Polaroid taken by the previous set. This

is the rst glimpse of the fractal, as the viewers see for the rst time that their

experience will be similar to the previous, and will be similar to the following. A

sharp knock from within the auditorium hints that the exhibition is ready and

anticipating the guest, just as the guest is anticipating the experience.

How much the viewer takes from the original photograph is up to them, but whether

they try to recreate, inverse or simply ignore the original; its inuence will be

present. In this way the photographs themselves can be seen as self similar or a fractal

which can be deciphered as containing all the previous images.

snapshotR

!!

IV


6/24

(Knock... Knock)

"Welcome, If you could make yourway up the stairs."

the gallery

The passengers are lead into the gallery space situated upstairs to nd two videocameras overlooking two suggestive open seats and a monitor. Being placed within

this context, the audience observe a video feed through the monitor before them, which

has consequently replaced their view of the stage.

The seated audience observe the video; a scene of two seated gures observing a

monitor, inside this another two seated gures observe another monitor, in which the

image is diffused by this part. This scene happens to be the exact same scene which

they nd themselves in. Conicting similarities and inconsistencies require them to

reassess the situation. They are not watching themselves but the previous passengers

who happen to be in the same state as them. Past and present are unied as the previ-

ous gures respond to this context, often mirroring the present audience's

reactions. Past observation is currently being observed by the passengers who in time

will become observed.

R

!!

V


7/24

"When you are ready, you cancontinue through to the rest of the

exhibition."

1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9.

Progressive documentation of the video from group 1 to 9 on Saturday.

VI


8/24

textually

transmitted object

At the front of the auditorium there is a typewriter and next to it is a bowl full of

folded paper, with each piece containing a question regarding the object the viewer

has brought. A sign instructs the viewer to pick a question and type their answer.

The roll of paper being typed onto extends from the typewriter to a shredder on the

oor.

Answering the question is reduced to a relatively rhetoric activity given the

suggestion of its fate. An interaction and performance requested without seemingto have any goal or product. The text, however, is not totally without reason, as it is

available for the next participant to read before it is shredded. The nature of

participation can be changed through the text written without the artists never

really knowing.

R

!!

VII


9/24

After the Polaroid camera has been

used:

"Can I take that from you?"

"Thank you!" VIII


10/24

privileged layers

R

!!

Each set of viewers were recorded for the duration of their time in the main theatre.

After the rst viewers have gone through the space they are recorded and played back

during the next viewers time in the space. When the next set of viewers enter, the

latest recording is played into the space. This is then recorded capturing both the

previous recording and the sounds created by the new set of viewers. Layers of sound

merge and build until an audience sound is generated: an amalgamation of bleeding

sounds. Recognising similar reactions from voices being played, they may becomeaware that they also are being recorded. Here exists the potential to perform and the

possibility to restructure how participation might take place for subsequent viewers.

IX


11/24

From the privileged position of the gallery, just from the corner of the eye, the viewerglimpses something bright in an auditorium of darkness. Light Cascades through a

heavily fogged atmosphere generating a curtain of light and making apparent the

materiality of space. The spectacular image that is presented suggests an ethereal place

of performance as there is no identied space, just a single line incapable of

illuminating a performer. The viewer then approaches the stage tripping over a line of

light that rests on the oor directly below the curtain. Progression through this

ethereal curtain signies the closure of the fabric curtain, leaving the viewer in a dark

space with no obvious exit. The viewer is free to roam the undened space: the closed-curtain stage, and has no immediate instruction from the technical support team until

the viewer requests it or gestures for direction. The principle of such a place might

be that it is a place of preparation for the next viewer. The viewer can acknowledge

the live sound being recorded and the on stage preparations, perhaps the platforms of

structural change.

"If you could make your way uponto the stage."

"If you could make your way to thedressing room."

"It's just across the yard"

on the cusp

R

!!

X


12/24

"Good evening. Come with me."

"We did have all these candles lit;they looked very pretty I assureyou!"

THE shift

The transition between the front and back stage areas of the exhibition included largechanges in atmosphere and approach by the host. No longer were the audience confronted

with passive elements, which they approached in their own time; they had performers

who actively engaged them. A photographer in a Bowler hat and dinner jacket wielding an

umbrella greeted the viewers at the rear entrance Good evening, come with me every set

addressed in the same polite fashion. The rest of the engagement followed suit; very much

prescribed as if a script was being played out, and the viewer was stuck in the midst. An air

of trust establishes itself through the photographers discourse, shedding light on certain

areas of the viewers experience so far. The atmosphere eases further as the photographer

answers any questions the inquisitive viewers may have about the nature of the work, thehistory of the Lantern Theatre or whatever their mind presents. These responses however,

self similar in their nature, are also prescribed and impersonal, no matter how friendly their

delivery. The photographer is simply part of the hosting machine; an element just as the

sound or the typewriter.

R

!!

XI


13/24

"This is our backstage area wherewe are just finishing your

production." XII


14/24

" The voyeur."

the voyeur

Inside the dressing room the scriptwriter sits comfortably in a chair and observes

the progress of the participants and fellow artists through the main theatre space

on the television monitor. Typing in real time, the scriptwriter develops a running

script which continuously adds more characters to the plot as the visitors ebb and

ow through the space during the two days of the event. The silent activity of the

participants on the monitor fuses with snatches of conversation heard in the dress-

ing room to create a somewhat surreal and paranoid plot by the end of the rst day.The people inside the monitor are like ghosts and their subsequent presence in the

dressing room is too unnerving, too real. They enter the scriptwriters head and the

occupation begins in earnest.

R

!!

XIII


15/24

XIV


16/24

"What I am going to ask of younow is a quick photograph if that'salright?"

"We have various hats, garmentsand silly objects you can adornyourself with."

"That umbrella has been a popularchoice."

"You can have them individuallyor together if you like."

adorn yourselves

Utilising an increase in trust, given a new-found easiness in the atmosphere, thephotographer politely requests a photograph. It is clear this is the part of the experience

where the participant has an opportunity to affect the work in an overtly performa-

tive way, as the backstage area is strewn with an immense collection of costumes and

props. The viewer may choose an outt or item that appeals to them. These choices,

along with the dialogue with the photographer, provided critical material for the

writing of the script; although how aware the viewers were of this depended

entirely on their own intuition. The backstage area was a similar experience to the front

so far that the environment provided a set of boundaries, freedoms and instructions

which the participants could interpret how they saw t or felt comfortable with; this

allowed for a variety in exuberance and involvement. The photographs themselves,

unknowingly to the participant, were to be used in post-advertising posters and the

performances they gave are key in the future of this fractal.

R

!!

XV


17/24

"That's brilliant, thank you verymuch!"

"Feel free to roam around, take alook at the other costumes if you

like."

"I'll have to show you the way out-it's a little tricky!"

"This will take you around to thefront of the building."

"Watch out for the big puddle!" XVI


18/24

Unrequited Memory

A letter is delivered to the attendee of the exhibition several weeks later telling them oftheir involvement in the event. Yet this involvement is not how they remember it. The

event has been rewritten in the format of a script, normally something that comes before

a performance or the main event: a prescription to follow, and a loss of personal agency.

The script itself is only somewhat reective of the event that they remember. More than

this being as a result of inter-subjectivity, there are clear markers that the event has been

thrust into a world of ction tied with tedious strands of the authentic happenings of the

exhibition.

A surreal script unfolds with tales of murder, uprising and prostitution. The script is set

in the time it was written on 28-29th March 2008 in the Lantern Theatre: the place of

the event. The content of the script was constructed through a playful dialogue

between; the audiences actions, appearance and the scriptwriters previous experience

of them; and the opportunity for the scriptwriter to build a master narrative and

R

!!

consensus between the

viewers, which is something

that never really existed.

The viewer brought an

object to the space with

them and responded to a

question about their object

that was picked at random

from a bowl beside the

typewriter. The questions

were tongue-in -cheek andvery playful such as Why

have you brought this

particular object? Is it

because it is not good

enough for eBay? The

random reoccurrence of

a question about the Nazi

ideology of the object al-

lowed for Nazism to form a

central strand of the script.

The garden hoe in the space

that someone had brought asXVII


19/24

their object made available a quick pun for prostitution, and a pig toy beside a

Gordons Bottle of Gin generated the character of the drunken pig in the script who was

to become a key suspect in the murder investigation.

The script was then inltrated by the rst hand experience that the scriptwriter had of

the audience in the backstage area and by the conversations between the photographer

and the viewer. The small bits of gossip picked up through the sound recordings in thespace and the quick snippets of conversations heard in the waiting room amalgamated

through a possibility of tting into the evolving storyline.

In Philip K. Dicks rst ction story he wrote about a real dog that was constantly angry

at the garbage men. In the story the dog imagined that the garbage men were

stealing valuable food which the family had carefully stored away in a safe metal

container. When the container was full, these dreadful-looking creatures came and stole

everything but the can. The dog, fearing that the garbage men would eventually try toeat the people used all his might to protect his owners. The sensibility of the dog seems

to hold some kind of logic and the possibility for reality to exist from individual

perception.

In the rst paragraph I spoke of the script being a thrust of the real events of the day

into a realm of ction.

Perhaps given Dicks story

we can see a more compli-

cated relationship between

the exhibition and how it

will be remembered through

the script and posters.

Whether or not it is regarded

as an exhibition or play is

not important. Perhaps what

is most critical is that the

Fractal structure can existbeyond our engagement

with it. The script is now

held in the collection of the

library at Shefeld Hallam

University. The various

strands of documentation of

the exhibition allow for its

decoding or its progressioninto a play: a potential for

the self-similar.

XVIII


20/24

Act TwoScene 4

DeSmizz has been taken by Ripper to the main holding in the foyer whilst Heideggerawaits Judge Julia Eastermann. Judge Eastermann is here to find evidence for herselfof the murder investigation of John Wonsworth. She suspects that the protesters were

responsible and enters with keen observation of every surface. She knows that the policehave already been but is suspicious of them, as they have previously sabotaged evidencefor their own ends. The keeper is present in the theatre.

Eastermann (Shouts): How could you have done this?

The keeper asks her to remain calm but it is clear that in her quest for justice she maysabotage herself.

A pig stubbles into the room and is extremely drunk. Eastermann wonders if the pig wasinvolved and knows of its evil ways. The pig is clever and was in a trial some months ago.

Eastermann: I know you work for them(Speaking to the pig)

Pig: Oink! Oink!

XIX


21/24

Eastermanns attention is quickly drawn away from the pig to the photographic evidencefrom the night of the murder.

Eastermann: Wheres Heidegger?

Keeper: In the back! What for? What do you know? Is he a Nazi?

Eastermann arrives in the backstage area to see Heidegger and Ripper.

Eastermann: He took drugs that night didnt he? Is that why he died? Did he owemoney?

Heidegger: You cant know everything. No one wanted Wonsworth to die. I cantunderstand it either!

Ripper: We dont know if he was a Nazi anyway. We only know that his granddad wasa supporter.

Eastermann: I shall retreat to the countryside to think things over and then off to thehigh courts in London where I will ensure that the murderers will be arrested and willgo to prison

Judge Eastermann went straight to the countryside already dressed in her riding suit. Itwas only there she could let this information sieve through her head to leave theremnants of truth!

XX


22/24

POST AGENCY

Post-exhibition posters were crafted from the backstage photographs and excerpts

of the script written at the exhibition. Actors and actresses became drafted in from

the extent of their theatrical performance in costume in front of the camera. The

production of Fractal was then publicised in theatres, libraries and other sites

across Shefeld City as an event showing at the Lantern Theatre on the date the

exhibition took place; expired from the point of their rst announcement.

In response to this viewers may reconsider their position within the wider

context of the exhibition; reassessing their role and the implications of their

presence in the exhibition. Still, the poster adopts a standard quality for the public,

whom perhaps presume theyve missed out on a play.

R

!!

XXI


23/24

XXII


24/24

FRACTAL Catalogue[1]

Documents