the-space-in-between- first performance planning visit

google found image of textile factory worker (relating to actual history)- issue of being on office door when this activity would have been in the main space



is this site of projection more relevant- onto peeled back traces of deconstructed layers of old surface patterned wallpaper yet the image is an opposing one of textiles production? the way the image now behaves- changes to the projection through surface colour, texture, contour making the projected image in site more fragmented, delapidated, murky and less visible in places, and thus emblematic of a redundant manufacturing activity?


although this is again projecting in the office i like the architectural matching of real vents with virtual window frames, the light cast from the projection defining through shadow the form of the vent, the tear in the wallpaper across the virtual textiles worker's face- how things are breaking up against the rigid lines of machines and repetition of the processes of the industry

site visit- some thoughts-

ok so apart from the fact that 55 leroy street was bloody freezing and nearly lost the circulation in my feet (!) it was a very productive visit in our site investigation, experimenting with both our known histories of the site and inventing fictional ones through moving around the space recording our thoughts. on here are first trials of projected images i had brought with me of offices, factories now cast across the dilapidated surfaces, looking at the interplay of surface and site now affecting the reading of images- not considering the performance body yet as a physical interaction with it (we are devising the performance first) but investigating what the temporal virtual photographic projection offers this space to suggest possible kinds of projections/ interesting locations of projections within the performance. all of the investigations were with multimedia projector merely for convenience in this trial- if the images are nostalgic/bygone era then possible old slide projector that reinforces this? in this small factory space it would be difficult to conceal the technolgical apparatus so making it part of it (old history-old projector, new, fantasy future identity- digital projector??)

the first thing that occurs to me is the odd feeling i have with looking back at these photos i took- composed, constructed images merely as documentation- subjectively framing a trial (to look at surface image qualities) not as an end product i have always been used to creating (although i do like these as images i must not get sidetracked!!!) - this is the first time on the course this has really sunk in how much my relationship to photography has shifted; how its has become a tool to help me devise performance work (to show me what i looked like in the body sculptures of the objects and atmospheres workshop), and also a temporal process within work (photograms, projections, etc)

more photos to follow...

more on ideas for the space-in-between...

ok- so now laura and i have decided to go for it with a short sharp collaboration, very experimental (the nature of the site for everyone wokring on art projects over this month), testing out some of our research ideas and different styles of performance/exhibition and just see what happens. the draft we have submitted for the press release is;

Laura Bean and Harriet Poole are working with site-specifc performance art to explore the fictive and real histories surrounding the site. They will be deconstructing factory processes whilst simultaneously exploiting photography in a performative manner. Audience members are invited to participate and surrender unwanted home furnishings/clothing to help facilitate the performance and leave new traces of occupation.

26th April 2008
3- 5.00 By appointment- please email harrietpoole@gmail.com to arrange.
5-5.30 Performance open to all
5.30-6 Installation

The idea being we can play with the 3 hours event in 3 parts- part one- explore the breakdown of goods produced by light-industry businesses/ home furnishings 'from' future housing occupation, through participatory performance (more non-matrixed),in which we are subverting the norms of manufacturing in generating temporal photograms. part two- devise a performance we are both in (live/mediated?) and watched by the audience, and, part three- create a final installation with experiments with projections.

more to think about- tomorrow we spend the day in the space playing with site, ideas and technology.....yipeee

from the local studies centre- on the-space-in-between....55 Leroy St, Bermondsey

News article on the st, 1964


1976- Annette Display wigs ok, so my trip to the local studies centre in borough wasn't as useful as I had hoped in that small businesses had very little written about them and very few photos existed of the site/street- would need to contact the businesses direct for records although most out of business and impossible to track.... I have a list of the nature of the light industry firms including the following (from Linda Duffy, thanks, from Post Office records );

1893-1900 – Sowle Thomas, wheelwright
1908 – Million Advertising Novelty Co Limited
1912-15 – Simmons W F and Co under-clothing manufacturers
1916-17 – Newey Brothers Ltd hook & eye manufacturers
1928-9 – Barclay, Roberts and Co Ltd trouser press mfrs
1937-39 – Stanley and Woodward Ltd coathanger mfrs
1947-9 – British Novelties (Model Manufacturers) plaster figure mkrs
1970 – nº 51/55 Frederica Display, figure manfrs.
1973-83 – nº 51 Annette Display, Wig Co. Ltd
1983 – No 55 H&M Fashions, ladies’ fashion mfrs
1988 – nº 55 Stacey Ltd. Ladies fashion manfrs.

The ~H& M Fashion may be of interest- is this the current high st retailer? Like the range of businesses listed.

Am also interested in the fact that the article above is talking about reportedly appalling housing conditions on the street with 'dangerous, dilapidated landings,' when this currently dilapidated site at end of April is being demolished and becoming contemporary appartments- there may be material in this.

Image manipulation workshop- reflections and images PART ONE

just a few things to comment on how i felt my workshop went and what i learnt from it....

whose workshop was this? what was achieved? how could i have worked with this better? the main thing i felt was that technology dominated the experiences and that my attempts to have worked with concepts with technology should have followed a tech-know how workshop which everyone really needs- from image resolution to outlining hardware and software and what they do. lauras workshop in the afternoon brilliant tackled one easy use of technology and I want to do more of this. For example, i got very interested in the how isadora software works myself and sidetracked away (but i should have intervened more) from my group working on their own stories for example resulting in some fair attempts to explore projection through stories told in photos- I lost focus on what I was trying to achieve seduced by the technology- doh!.

However, i liked the idea of invisible friend as a virtual projection which lena inadvertently came up with very much. sally's performative lecture requiring a still image she pointed at met with doug persisting in moving the image around;) playing with the software demonstrating what isadora can do, when in her story a powerpoint slide would have been enough.

so what does this teach me...um, that i've led many many workshops before and that this wasn't all that successful for conflict of interests in it being carried out , as well as putting too much in to it myself, and the suggested introduction of text into the workshop part way through which contradicted the intended nature of my workshop....the story text was to come from the images. however I have some interesting images from VLPers to explore related techniques and really want to bring in isadora in my experiments with projections.

Anthony McCall- The Solid Light-hybrid of performance and film

anthony mccall's work at serpentine gallery was described to me as a you-must-go-see-this piece,  by a composer friend. this was in response to me talking about using the technology as objects which begin performing themselves, he thought this solid light piece of mccalls'  was clever in the installation experience enjoyed through moving within a beam of light, the bit normally never drawn to your attention. however, doug was less impressed, saying its been so done before...best then to experience its liveness for myself rather than via second hand retelling or dare i say it, dead documentation of it.

i went to see it and the entrance of a exhibition of process work left me cold- looked like gobledegook token process work (all art students are dying to see an artists sketchbook so lets put them out- couldn't this have been at the back of the exhibition?) and ventured into the first room of more conventional style screenings of film- where you shuffle around sitting/standing/people annoyingly walking in front of you in viewing a projection. can't remember what it actually was though, interestingly. ( i have always hated this method of screening films in galleries, positioned where people keep walking through the image (back projecting where possible?), but even more so monitors so not sure which is worse)

moving into the solid light installation was then the complete opposite- the whole point was to be in the beam of light, and so very refreshing, not to be cinematically arranged with projector there, passive me here- and now we were in an inextricably participatory relationship. less important was the image- although the image curved was shaping the light beam.smoke also hit the beam of light, a naff effect but it was highly sculptural increasing the appearance of the lights solidity.

i loved this piece for many reasons; the interaction and playfulness of activating people in the space to react and interact (although was gutted that was stopped from photographic or videoing this (and who had dictated this- artist/gallery)- if it was in the turbine hall would have been! and was pleased to find sneaky vids on youtube for the purposes of in some derivitive way representing the experience or rather an aide memoire). i loved the solidity broken by a persons head/hands moving in the light, and how this then reshaped the projected light, and when they moved, how it was 'repaired' and solid once again- fleetingly material.

i thought that it would make a great space for a soundscape/ movement performance, maybe some development of the improvisation workshop neil, lena and i did along the crack in the turbine hall could have been situated here, but size of space would dictate the degree of motion and would have impacted on the audience thus more directly, slight repetitive movements  a possibility or holding screen over the beam to sculpt it.

the trouble with this show was when i realised that these digital  solid light installations had roots in celluloid film projected  installations 20 years previously was that i wanted to be able to experience that myself to explore the similarities and differences; the sounds of the projectors, their presence , lines or shapes projected, etc etc. why weren't they included in this retrospective? a great shame for me when in addressing the realtionship between traditional and digital means

contextual connections- complicite- a disappearing number

this performance of complicite at the barbican gave me lots of projection ideas; back projecting film with shadow interplay of performers, live feed from camera in an OHP front projected. I was particularly struck by Helena's blog saying projections were used as a backdrop/ set/collage ,( my usual way of working with projections on a screen,) but that they also became person/performer in front projection, use of hands talking, viewing pages in a book being turned- photos/text and personal letters, projecting from the OHP view. i found this show very visually rich.
in the discussion afterwards it struck me how much i need to develop a greater understanding of style, structure, language of performance to push my visual interjections in new ways. hence reaching for the recommended reading list, and camera lucida by barthes......

i have my complicite-esque guinea pigs lined up in the shape of 14 and 15 year old art students......am trying out some of the back projecting and shadow play ideas within a workshop with schools, animated living gallery, where art works are brought to life through stop frame animation, back projected,and then shadow play within animation, or as live action to frozen tableaux type stills....lets see what kids can do with it :)