Tag: CS LO3

End of Module Reflection: CS

~ Sarah-Jane Field ~ 1 Comment

Three-minute read

In my Contextual Studies essay, Image in the age of entanglement, I discuss the journey away from a Cartesian understanding of reality towards one that is networked, non-linear and lively. I was influenced by a wide range of writers but focused in particular on Karen Barad, author of Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and The Entanglement Of Matter and Meaning (2007). 

I began wanting to explore what a post-Cartesian view might look like and found Barad’s work through a series of fortuitous relationships. Getting to grips with Barad’s ideas was and continues to be challenging. I do not come from a scientific background. I found it all very difficult indeed to research and understand.  However, in doing so, my own view has developed and my way of working too. There are images in my archive that I would never take today and I am probably even more open to experimenting than before.

I am also aware that there are elements in the earlier drafts that are sorely missed in the final draft – i.e. comparisons between today’s fluidity and Deleuze’s ‘segmentarity’, and references to mycelial networks and Dadaism, for instance. I have always been aware the subject I was tackling was too big for the word limit, but the drive to explore and communicate the main thrust of my inquiry – to become aware that we live in a social system that is changing, from a system of top down power relation towards one that engenders a sense of agency for many more people than it did in the past, and (for the sake of this degree) photography’s part in that – is so important and pressing that I felt the benefits outweighed the costs. Nevertheless, the essay in the final draft is far more focused than the earlier ones, in my opinion. Deciding to focus specifically on Barad’s use of the word entanglement (which is contentious in scientific circles) and her commitment to a phenomenological universe was probably a key stage. Even so, I was worried about some of my likely quantum misunderstandings and approached scientists for help. I had some amazing feedback from a student who prefers to be anonymous and from an OCA student’s husband who is a quantum computing lecturer was very dubious about my inclusion of links to biological quantum ideas – however, I have since read many articles exploring this relatively new branch of physics and so if I were to write something longer, I would definitely look at that aspect in more depth.

Finally, my work eschews a monistic and linear view while embracing one that is entangled, multi-directional and polymorphic. It asks what image-making is, was, and is becoming, and although the photograph is definitely a protagonist, it must share the stage with other forms of exteriorisation. In doing so, the collection of expressions and traces on pages and screens are an investigation into the decoding and recoding of reality – and perhaps prompts us to believe we have the wherewithal to make critical and much needed revisions as we (re)discover more about our place within the universe.

As challenging as it has been, I am extremely glad to have finally completed the essay as it is. I could not have done it without help from the following people:

  • Thanks to the many proof-readers (OCA and non OCA) and my highly educated friend Mariana for checking the citation style.
  • Thanks to the three scientists who read through earlier drafts, Professor Peter Doel – University College London, Professor Alan Woodward – University of Surrey, and a quantum mechanics student who prefers to remain anonymous.
  • Thanks to artist Rowan Lear, who is far more knowledgeable about Karen Barad and agential realism than I am, for reading through excerpts I was unsure about and clarifying for me.

Barad, K. M. (2007) Meeting the universe halfway: quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.

Rubinstein, D. and Fisher. A. (ed.) (2013) On the verge of photography: imaging beyond representation. [PDF] Birmingham: Article Press. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/25121246/On_the_Verge_of_Photography_Non-representational_Imaging (Accessed 14/06/2020)

Zuboff, S. (2019) The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. (First edition) New York: PublicAffairs.

BOW CS: Developments/Updates

~ Sarah-Jane Field ~ 10 Comments

A couple of weeks ago, I planned to devote a day to OCA work. The kids’ computer went awry and so I had to hand my Mac over to one of them to attend a live lesson, and I ended up cutting down an overgrown ivy bush which I’ve been begging the landlords to deal with, to no avail, for years. I ended up spending the day at it and went to bed exhausted. (It’s still not quite finished!)

As I did, I noticed the way the wooden fence had warped, rotted, become enmeshed with the plant, and of course, the entangled nature of its growth. And ever since, I have been thinking – that is not quantum entanglement. That is physical entanglement. I have been thinking about this ever since and what that means for the whole thrust of my essay.

I gathered up the bravery to send the essay to a couple of scientists working or studying in a branch of quantum mechanics. I asked the following:

    • Big worries of mine apply to my use of the word Entanglement which informs the whole essay (:-/) and also the brief description of Superposition. The other night I lay awake thinking, I need to make clear that quantum entanglement is different from the entanglement of a fungal system/rhizome (or any physical system for that matter) because in QS (I think) we don’t have any way of seeing how two entities might be connected, we simply see, under certain experimental conditions, that they are. (Am aware, there’s is stuff we can’t see but suspect must exist)
    • If that is so, do I need to suggest that the entanglement of language, time, ideas is ‘merely’ metaphor, which Karen Barad asks us to avoid. Also, if that is the case, the whole argument of matter and meaning being ‘entangled’ is undermined. If the essay is flawed because of this, that’s OK, as long as I acknowledge it. I also think I am muddying the difference between superposition and entanglement in my thinking – evident in the writing. There are a couple of highlighted sentences that concern me but basically, Part 1 which begins on p5 ends p22 would benefit from a scientist’s eye.

I am really glad I did ask. Thank you fellow Holly for asking her husband, Professor Alan Woodward from the University of Surrey to help out. I can almost hear the deep sigh – the following has helped me to clarify.

  • The concepts you are describing relate more to quantum social sciences and to philosophy than to quantum physics. Physicists would argue that quantum processes can only occur at the nano-particle level and cannot be applied to the Newtonian level (our experience of the world). Also, that quantum entanglement and superposition are provable physical processes. He’s aware that social sciences are importing some of the theory of quantum physics and of but argues that using them to describe human behaviour is a metaphor rather than a potentially provable fact. From a philosophical point of view, the concepts make sense, but it would be wise to steer clear of correlating them with the natural sciences.
  • An easy to understand explanation of superposition is to think of tossing a coin. When it is in the air it is neither heads nor tails but has the potential to be either. (I knew I had got this wrong – I have removed it as I suspected I would and focused on entanglement only for now – word count was an issue in any case.)

Everything is interrelated physically but the forces that have hold sway are different at different sizes. Take for example when you sit down on a chair – in our world, the Newtonian world, although everything is made of the same particles, you do not fall through the chair. At cosmological scale, the rotation of our solar system around the galaxy is something that clearly exists, but does not affect us at planetary level – the size and timescale are irrelevant to us. Equally, for most purposes, quantum forces are not relevant to our experience of the world.

 

The above section has prompted me to really underline the post-structural aspect of the essay, quoting Barad as well as using her repeated words to drum home the point that a Cartesian view is challenged in her reading. I have also quoted Prof. Woodward (I suspect Barad would refer to PW as a scientific realist) the use of the word by writing “Barad’s entanglement” often, as well as including the work philosophy to make that aspect loud and clear. I have in addition underlined the fact that entanglement in the physical world is not the same as quantum entanglement. But I have included extra citations from Barad about living in a quantum world and dissolving the boundaries between the two models – classical/quantum.

As far as correlating quantum processes with biology goes, this is something Vedral explicitly does over and over again in many of his talks online and in articles. I now appreciate that he is probably a maverick  – he does refer to “experimental” science when he discusses these macro quantum processes. I really wish I could ask Vedral some stuff but so far no joy in my attempts to contact him.

Later today I will be chatting with Matt and will then incorporate his advice and suggestions before posting another version which I hope will be closer to where it needs to be by September!

All in all – the doubts in my mind were right and I am extremely grateful to Holly and her husband for their time and patience. And thank goodness I took the time to cut down that ivy plant – it was a useful exercise for so many reasons in the end.

BOW Developments

I have been wondering about the online version of the work. I have always been very clear it should exist online and off but be not exactly the same. The online version should be animated and should take advantage of the possibilities offered by digital media rather than simply be an exact digital copy of the offline object.  A website like Lisa Barnards thegolddepository is an inspiration and the work may still go that way. But I have been playing with the idea of an ePublication book. Seeing another student using it was interesting as I was able to follow an informative email conversation that explored some of the pitfalls.

Here’s my first early experiment: https://indd.adobe.com/view/6b1b7241-7472-4f7c-becf-2d18508c8607

  • There are issues – my font is too small but I’ve animated it to go big and then it’s too big. I might need to address the font size and type throughout.
  • I don’t want animations on every page – judicious  – at the moments it’s just an early, oh, look what I can do here….
  • The moving image fragments I’ve placed are not sized correctly so they don’t work   – I need to take them into Premier Pro and size them exactly as they will be used. The scaling feature which works great with still images doesn’t handle moving image at all.
  • I will probably include a hyperlink to a short film – have asked someone if they’d be up for writing some music for it. That would take the viewer right out of the book so I need to consider carefully where to place it.
  • I am wondering about sound – at the moment there is no audio. Something to experiment with I guess.
  • I wonder if Lisa Barnard’s design people used InDesign to get some of those animations on her website… maybe that is something I can do anyway. Not sure. You can save as gifs and Squarespace does take gifs. But it’s a template and I am not comfortable operating outside the template – maybe need to look at creating web pages which feels daunting. But maybe the ePub book is enough… all things to consider.

 

CS A5: NB NB – some additional notes after sending the essay to tutor (my own feedback)

~ Sarah-Jane Field ~ Leave a comment
  • I have focused on two things in Barad’s interpretation – entanglement and phenomenology = reality, fixed photograph’s role within. Since submitting I have gone back and rewritten a couple of sentences in the intro and conclusion to underline this point. (Already adjusted)
  • I have re-written the first sentence – it was a bit sloppy and I have tightened it up and changed the word ‘evolving’ to ‘shifting’ to avoid the idea of a linear journey for civilisation from bad to good. (Adjusted on Matt’s copy in Gdrive)
  • I am concerned Appendix i – the second half of it – should really be in the essay but can’t see the space for it.
  • I miss Deleuze’s segmentarity, which I wrote about in the first draft (A3) recognisable in Talmor’s work – and as an example of difference to the fluidity seen in Klingemann’s images – again cannot see the space for it.
  • There is a comment in Superposition about it not being a mixture  – I feel like this is too flippant and needs explaining but can’t (it’s too complex for me! and there is no space) Should I take it out? I think so – maybe the whole bit about superposition. Perhaps I can just use it elsewhere and rely on the glossary?
  • Objects – I probably should have acknowledged something like OTT but don’t have space. It may be worth simply acknowledging that not everyone agrees with a purely phenomenological reality – although Bohr’s interpretation makes it hard to argue with. (Not to mention Hoffman’s theories about seeing and the brain)
  • I would have liked to discussed Diffractive Practice (an agential realist notion) but took it out after A3 – again, I am not clear enough about it in my own head and there is no space. I have tried to write diffractively and one of Rowan’s comment was that I was a bit inconsistent which feels accurate. (see feedback)
  • Another thing Rowan mentioned was how the AI was trained – “it is programmed through existing patterns (can you please explicate what the ai was, how it was trained etc – this is important).” I think I do need to find a way to include this – but it may be that the information is included in supporting text for my BOW and rather than expand on it in the essay, I link to it. If the writing were a longer piece it would definitely warrant a whole section. For the sake of the BOW – it’s really important the AI is a proprietary app that costs me £6 a month – an artificial friend I subscribe to. That relates to the anatomisation of relations – which I really wanted to cover in the essay – and Zuboff’s book The Age of Surveillance Capitalism where she discusses behavioural surplus.  This is something I really need to think about because I will need to do quite a big edit at this stage if include it and it will be a very different essay.
  • In a longer piece, there would be a good argument to include references to King Lear – it seems it is a play about shifting paradigms but instead of like our time – moving from Cartesian towards post – it was pre-Cartesian to Cartesian. There is also so much symbolism about seeing and nothing being something which ties in with a section I recently cut about the void not being empty space.
  • The work by Mikhael Subotzky I saw this morning is so relevant. I really feel I ought to mention it in Part II – maybe even use one of his images for the cover
  • It was interesting to note that the first UVC assignment I wrote came under the course heading of The Interaction of Media.
  • Although the concepts I look at come from quantum mechanics, they’re not brand new or novel – Julian Baggini’s recent book on cultures around the world seems motivated by the desire to show how western ‘common sense’ looks to those not influenced by a Cartesian history – I removed a quotation and might need to underline this point again in intro and conclusion.
  • I may find a way to add one of two possible examples to Part 2 – both counter the documentary tradition by using the style or equipment of those ‘hero’ photographers – but if I do this I need to give space and word count over which is going to be very challenging

Or

  • And what a terrible shame not to have found space for this guy! (His book isn’t out in time in the U.K. – but there are interviews aplenty and I might even have a sneaky way of getting an early copy)

https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/1115381/entangled-life/9781847925190

Overall – The essay feels a bit slim in parts right now. I have been through it, removed bits where I was a bit apologetic or seemed to be excusing things I’d included. I will wait until I have spoken with Matt before making any of the above adjustments and then upload another draft for assessment.

CS A5: OCA Reflection form

~ Sarah-Jane Field ~ Leave a comment

I’ll be handing in my essay to Matt early next week. Here are my reflection answers in the meantime.

Demonstration of subject-based knowledge and understanding

I have taken a major risk by focusing on Barad’s writing to underpin my argument. It is not the theory that is taught usually within photography although that is changing and Daniel Rubinstein who I quote is heavily influenced by a quantum view of reality and Fred Ritchin has a chapter on it – quoted in CS A5 and in A1 and 2. Barad’s view does draw on many of the people I have looked at during my time with the OCA, synthesising that with science. I know that my understanding and knowledge is hampered by having to tackle quantum science – and a relatively esoteric reading of it at that. The ideas are not brand new – I have been reading articles and essays trying to figure things out for some time now but understanding this stuff properly will take a great deal more than just reading some articles. However, I have learnt so much while writing this, that it was worth it. I did not know what was meant by performative at the beginning of this (a word frequently misused I have noticed) nor could I see why Barad suggested matter had been overlooked in favour of discourse, mistakenly thinking that it meant language was being undervalued by a Baradian view. (It’s not, it’s being equalised).

Demonstration of research skills

Every time I rewrite the essay my understanding is deepened. I’ve asked for feedback and my peers have helped by pointing out bits that made no sense to them whatsoever. That prompted me to revisit and unpick my own understanding, to go back to the source, rewrite and see if I’d done any better in explaining. Finally, when I really needed some help, I approached someone I knew would have some answers. I have sought out expert opinion (not always receiving answers) but the process is ongoing.

I have got better at keeping a track of my reading and used Zotero to help which was useful, along with the Notes app on my phone. I also post links constantly on my blogs so I don’t lose things, even if I don’t say very much when doing so. I’ve labelled those posts more clearly so they are easier to find. The bibliography is extensive (probably too long) and demonstrates a wide source of references.

I still lose things so there is room for improvement. 

Demonstration of critical and evaluation skills

There is evidence of analysis and critical thought – I talk about Barad and her detractors’ concerns about analogy and ‘brazenly’ make an analogy which I think is warranted because ultimately, the lines separating analogy from fact can be just as nebulous (given Barad’s theory) as any other lines. Ten days ago I asked for feedback and peers suggested the third section of my essay read like some interesting information rather than educated opinion and synthesis. Another peer read the following draft and suggested the ‘real me’ came out in the third section. So I am synthesising for sure when prompted to – sometimes it takes an extra nudge. In terms of criticising and evaluating my own work, I am able to take on board feedback but also reject it when unhelpful, or else take something from it and make it useful – sometimes feedback might simply help me see where I have failed to make something obvious and it requires more underlining. I have also applied the thinking I have learnt to my own BOW in the essay, in particular, my comments about an image of a cow’s eyes are very analytical. (An image I have not been comfortable with for lots of reasons, least of which is, I am not sure it’s a good photograph – and yes, I know the word ‘good’ is unhelpful).

 Communication

There is room for more clarity always – but that is a lifelong project for me (see my hair analogy in a peer feedback post). For this level, the positive aspects of my writing such as enthusiastic engagement hopefully counters any lack of clarity. It is probably also worth restating the following: Roberta M (my original OCA tutor) was very encouraging about writing experimentally – I wasn’t quite sure what she meant and now see that simply including “I” is viewed as experimental by some – oh, to go as far as Chris Kraus. I believe this is behind the curve but accept that is seen as a risk. However, the crux of the essay is the rejection of separation between subject and object and the sheer importance of that (in my opinion) cannot be underestimated. Every article and essay that I come across right now is crying out for society to acknowledge the connections between race, climate change, the pandemic and the economy, for instance. Intra-activeness has to be taken on board. Removal of self and “That’s nothing to do with me” has got to be challenged at every opportunity. To quote my late friend Mandy (see Appendix 4) again, …

Our “…way of viewing and understanding the world via logical, rational empiricist study – which encourages detachment and abstraction – is connected to our failure to finding new ways of understanding our world in a deepening social and ecological crisis” (Thatcher, 2016)

 

 

 

 

 

CS & BOW: Notes following online presentation with Dr. Ariadne Xenou 24/10/19

~ Sarah-Jane Field ~ Leave a comment

It was good to hear someone say don’t separate CS & BOW. Students keep saying, you don’t need to connect CS to BOW and I can’t for the life of me understand why you wouldn’t connect them or why you’d want to disconnect them either. I have actually been thinking about these reflections which are are usually relevant for both and wondering how to rearrange the menu system as both modules become more and more interconnected.

It was also useful to think CS A3 as a research document setting out my plans and suggested research question – which I have yet to identify.

The other useful thing that came out of the session for me was thinking about overarching topics I’ve been investigating since the end of UVC, and how I can put those into some kind of tangible form. Here is an attempt to pin down some of these very big themes and links to relevant subtopics.

Inside Outedness

From my Sketchbook blog:

For millennia, language was on the outside. We could, in retrospect, usually see it. On walls, in caves, then tablets, scrolls and eventually in books. [Lately on advertising hoarding and signs telling us how fast we can drive, where we can park, if we play, enter, stay out, smoke, shop, make noise, and of course, what we can buy, how much better we will be if we buy whatever it is.]

Today, as many but not all are aware, it [language] somehow exists more and more on the inside [but not the inside of us as it did before emerging – although I think it is generally thought of as outside – rather the inside of machines and devices]. And in places it can’t be seen.

This means we often have no idea what’s being said. We are less able to read the signs [Or even see them]. Vast dynamic archives of language exist – somewhere – affecting everything. We know they are there. But they’re invisible. We see the flimsy surface only.

It’s true, in the past archives tended to be secreted, were often sacred, and contained as well as emanated power.

Very few would have had access.

It’s just that today the whole world is one big archive. And it’s hard to imagine how anyone escapes. [Could do with expanding the final thought.]

Random notes for a short story #12

Derrida’s Archive Fever, University of Chicago Press; Reprint edition (19 Sept. 2017)(The first chapter may be useful here)

Chapter 7, Turning Reality Inside Out and Right Side Out: Boundary Work in the Mid Sixties of Philip K. Dick, Hayles, K. (1999) How we became posthuman: virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatics. Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago Press.

 

When I was a child a boy in my class used to turn his eyelids out. It revolted me. The other boys found it hilarious. I hated seeing him do it. It hurt to look at and to think about, and still does. Seeing my reaction, he did it all the more to taunt me. 

 

 

Gossip & Performance

I believe these aspects of our existence are inter-related. From my BOW A2 assignment:

As part of my on-going research into language, culture and reality, I’d been reading Richard Wrangham’s The Goodness Paradox (2019) and books by Nicholas Christakis who wrote Connected (2009) which is about social networks (in general, not just digital ones.)

Wrangham’s book centres around the idea that human beings evolved with an ability to temper their immediate aggression, while simultaneously developing a propensity for calm, rationally-considered, pre-planned violence. Humans also became hyper-co-operative; today collaboration is part of our DNA. Wrangham suggests these trends are underwritten by our ability to talk to and about each other, and that we have an ever-present unconscious fear someone might be watching, gossiping, and planning to do away with us if we don’t conform. Gossip allows us to conjure up stories, deny and blame others, and plan punishment for anyone deemed a deviant. Wrangham’s theory along with Christakis’ ideas about connection sit at the centre of my contribution to the project. (2019a)

Performance grows out of the knowledge we will be seen and so we must ‘act’ the part in order to be accepted, to survive in the group. However, as Karen Barad tells us – entanglement is critical and without it perhaps nothing at all emerges. Her description changes my understanding of the conscious agent which I wrote about CS A2 – assuming a notion which I accepted in books about systems. However, Barad says something which fundamentally changes the underlying nature of performance and I’m still trying to get my ehad around it: ““A phenomenon is a specific intra-action of an ‘object’; and the ‘measuring agencies’; the object and the measuring agencies emerge from, rather than precede, the intra-action that produces them.” (Barad, 2007, p. 128). From Sauzet, 2018 – https://newmaterialism.eu/almanac/p/phenomena-agential-realism.html Accessed 21/10/2019 From https://sjflevel3.photo.blog/2019/10/21/bow-cs-notes-research-karen-barad/

Today we appear to perform for ourselves and the manifestation of such is available for all to see on social media. But there are also more private performances which people don’t necessarily share widely (although some do) which emerges from tracking devices. See Lupton’s Data Selves book.

Langauge

At the beginning of Self & Other I wrote about Léopold Szondi. After reading The Body & the Archive by Allan Sekula I was reminded about his thoughts on language. I said, “Szondi was also I believe interested in those ‘in-between spaces’ I’m so keen to find out more about. “language is a ‘social fact’. It is the glue that holds society together; through ‘language a child becomes integrated with a social community,’ and ‘it serves to maintain social interaction’. Since dialogue is the primary vehicle of interpersonal relations – what Szondi calls the sphere of the between -it lords it over traditional theatre” (Holmberg, 1996; 67).”

Notes: The Body and the Archive Allan Sekula

I am interested in the changing nature of language, the structural implications of a language which is coded and incomprehensible to most of us. Flusser’s thoughts on the ease with which we use devices compared to the complex nature of them which bypasses most of us may be useful to revisit.

Flusser, V. (2012) Towards a philosophy of photography. London: Reaktion Books.

Data Selves by Deborah Lupton also contains useful content about language and its relationship to new materialism. “In new materialism, the poststructuralist emphasis on language, discourse, and symbolic representation is enhanced by a turn towards the material: particularly human embodied practices and interactions with objects, space and place.” (2019: 15) However, she also writes a great deal about how data (language) manifests as those things – so although data seems immaterial, “things that are generated in and through material devices (smartphones, computers, sensors), stored in material archives (data repositories), materialised in a range of formats that invite human sensory responses and have material effects on human bodies (documenting and having recursive effects on human flesh” (19).

I need to revisit Barthes’ Myth Today (1957) https://uvcsjf.wordpress.com/2016/07/18/notes-project-3-3-myth-is-a-type-of-speech/

I suspect Karen Barad’s ideas are going to be important. And I suspect they will inform all three of these key themes. I need to investigate further before adding them here. However, I think I have identified three key topics: Inside Outedness, Gossip & Performance and Language. I wonder if the latter is the umbrella under which Inside Outedness, Gossip & Performance exist.  And the term assemblage which I’ve talked about quite a lot lately is not a theme but rather a structural reality, and our modern form of assemblages are what’s resulting in inside outedness. How I bring any of this into a semi-coherent work yet is anyone’s guess a this time!