March 31, 2014
I was hoping to invite everyone to bring at least one technique for foregrounding the elasticity of the interval, one drawn from from our collective praxis and procedure-building. The reason i'm interested in accumulating some techniques that activate such a quality of experience, is because what we are actually trying to design with 'the almost': the not yet, the potentialities moving towards an actualization ( via "pre-acceleration") that haven't yet fully 'actualized' but are palpable through the elasticity of that 'almost'.
For this issue we are trying to create a landing site (a taking off point that spirals) for precarity-becoming (in contrast to creating the essence of, a narrative around, or metaphor for… etc.). We of course can not control how anything will actualize, or the qualities of experience others have, but we can develop techniques to attune the relational experience in such a way that creates zones of resonance from which these potentialities of experience may then spiral.
The reason this isn't just an abstract exercise is because we actually engage such a process of creating all the time, primarily through intuitive tendencies in our own practice. We 'feel out' for the subtle differentiations in the affective tonalities of each shift of a posture, of each compositional arrangement, we intuitively feel out how the rhythm of a sentence provokes thought in the larger relational experience of what we want our work to articulate.
Although (as touched on before) we can not directly control how our work 'affects', or our ability to be affected, we can 'feel-out' for those moments when we feel a great palpability of multiplicities moving through an experience. We all have habits of engagement or tendencies in our perceptual experience that we intuitively engage that allow us to craft a particular experience of our work. Maybe its something in your routine, a type a music, how you like to arrange your materials, your rhythms of engagement, modes of procrastination… all these tendencies may also be intuitively driven techniques for opening us up to a greater sense of how our work becomes. I am interested in getting closer to what is 'working' in the work, the activity of its articulation in relational experience.
The reason this is not just an abstract notion is because we know this experience when we feel it. Some had discussed it as a 'pushing off' from the immediacy of an experience, while still remaining within it. Somehow this created a kind of 'doubling' that made the pre-acceleration and actualization of potentialities more palpable.
Such an experience was articulated by Céline last session.
Unfortunately I have to paraphrase from Ronald's translation of what Céline said in french (something no doubt incredibly articulate and insightful), but she had described the experience of reading two sets of the same text at different font sizes. Their close proximity and juxtaposing sizes seemed to open up a sense of the multiplicities moving through the reading/sensing/sounding experience. Words and phrases began to foreground and background themselves with a vibratory quality amongst paragraph blocks, while loops and recursions in the relational experience of text blocks accumulated differentiating affective tonalities that continuously coloured and recoloured that text with a mulitplicity of 'sense'. Although the 'same' text-contents were present, a vibratory shift in the relation (provoked by the relational experience of moving between the different scales and recurring words) opened up a space for multiplicities in the experience of that text to become more palpable, and spiral.
Multiplicities are always moving through an experience, but the pre-acceleration** of those sense-making potentialities somehow became more palpable here (**the experience of potentialities in the virtual, moving towards an actualization). This is that lovely space where you can feel the 'becoming', at that edge where potentialities move towards an actualization .
When Céline's experience was shared with the group, a very ripe conversation over perceiving the 'doubling' of experience arose. Such an experience could bring us to a sense of our 'sensing' (the activity of it), in the immediacy of that sensation. Both the relational experience of the shifts in scale, and the recursive experience of the 'same' words foregrounded differentiating affective tonalities that began to fold on top of each other and somehow thicken the palpability of what was at work within the immediacy perceptual experience: what was 'working' in the work.
In such an example it could be said that the relational experience of the text was agitated (in a way) so that the text-content began to background and the potentialities of experience moving through the virtual of the interval, foreground.*
I think what was at work here was made possible through two techniques provoked by an accidental attunement that brought the experience of the interval to the foreground. This kind of process is what I’d like us to consider in your preparation for Monday.
In my view, the two techniques were something like this: On the one hand there was a lived experience (in the moment) of a shift in scale, and on the other a recursive experience of the 'same' words foreground differentiating affective tonalities. Together, these began to reverberate and magnify shifts in the interval. By interval, I mean the opening this experience created. These potentialities were always there, but the techniques (scale and recursion) allowed for an attunement of the two qualities of experience. This created a plane of resonance across which the experience could be felt to 'double' which in turn brought a singular quality to the recursion of words and the shifting of scale: the relational experience made the potentialities of those words more elastic in their 'almost'.
Perhaps we can develop this experience into a techniques of research creation, techniques for exploring fields of attunement, across materials (inclusive of the human and more then human).….whatever we use to attune fields of resonance across our procedures.
Although not limited to this, two techniques that have emerged from our collective work are scale and recursion.
Recursion or recursive movement may foreground the interval of experience by putting into question content-driven interpretations of what a text can do, what language can be (as a starting point).
These two techniques hold resonance with what emerged during our procedural exploration, where we read in the round. From that procedure, we first read the same text over and over, foregrounding the affective tonalities of everyone's voices, accent and intonations. The second time we read one after the other, but each with different texts. But this time, instead of holding strictly to our sequential order of reading, Ronald introduced a recursive loop by re-reading a section of his text after someone who had initially two people after him. This provoked not just a re-layering of content, but a shift in the relational experience. What the seemingly 'same' text could do in the second reading was opened up: new multiplicities in the experience actualized in ways that brought a new texture to that text's experience.
With this accidental attunement in mind, maybe we can move forward using these techniques to open up the potential for multiplities to become more palpable within our procedure propositions.
**my 'techniques of research creation' bible: