.::..Nicholas Sagan..::. …:.::..artworks and experiments…::.:…nicholassagan@gmail.com

Lateral Slipstream (into Thesis)

There are a few directions that this could go.  One of which is a further development of the night sky installation featuring more highly developed interactive elements and sound productions (not to mention the logistics of light powering and placement).  Now I’m not totally opposed to pursuing this option.  It would be a chance to further develop not only my technical skills on developing an interactive and immersive installation.  Here is where an objection comes into play; what is the core of this piece? What is it really about?

These answers are potentially found and expanded upon in another option for my Thesis project.  Of all the work I have produced while in this program there are some consistent themes: observation (as Clif so aptly observed), science (more specifically the emotional/romantic approach to science), and the idea of trust in methods of determining truth (as in the truth claims of empirical procedure).

So it seems as if I’ve thought about it and made a decision…at least in terms of developing a theoretical background for my project.  Both theory and execution will have to be developed as this project moves along; neither is anywhere near a point of completion.  BUT there is a way to combine all I’ve been working on in the form of a selection of items from my fictional celestial catalog.  These can exist as models, installations, video, print…any form you can imagine being part of a museum exhibit can be recreated for this project.

At this point I am still not entirely sure what the last form is going to be, and perhaps I shouldn’t at this point, but each “observation” and “object” will have a home in this exhibition.  One possible form is that it will be set up like a traveling exhibition, with everything displayed as such.

Another option is to present the collection of artifacts in the form of an architectural proposal.  I would have the bits and pieces to be included in this “museum” on display much like the previous idea, but all organized under the pretext of “…and this is just a sample! Imagine a whole building of this stuff!”  Or something to that effect…  If something is presented in the same output form of other museums and if that information uses the language and trappings of “valid”, “empirical” and “scientific” information/ artifacts, etc, then the task of the viewer to figure out ‘how something is being said’ will be negated.

If people can get to what the core is more easily, then it seems logical that they will understand the goals of this project, which are to explore the process by which truth and reality are constructed.  Ok.  That sounds a little big.  Parsed out: science is one means of determining certain truths about the universe and reality.  But all empirical discoveries are housed within a certain subjective framework.  It is the goal of this project to examine that framework and encourage a more individual approach to determining “reality” or truth.

That really does get big quickly.  Lets try trimming again: science is approximate.  It takes a little bit of “artistic” license to fill in the gaps.  For every theory that is proven, there are dozens more that are discarded that are sometimes more imaginative than the actuality, sometimes not.  Is truth really stranger than fiction?  What about fiction that pretends to be truth?  Maybe that is not as strange is it may seem.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *