MEDA WK 05: NIHILISTIC CREATIONISM- The March Towards a Beautiful Dystopia

In week 2, whilst we were working on a practise project proposal, we explored the concept of the creation of Artificial Environments: the urge to preserve even as we destroy. Whether this is for nostalgic purposes or an attempt to cling to the past; how are we to define the change that is occurring around us, which is mostly out of our individual control yet caused by humanity?

The degree to which we preserve- Do we preserve because it is needed or because we desire to?

Continue reading “MEDA WK 05: NIHILISTIC CREATIONISM- The March Towards a Beautiful Dystopia”


Once again, I found myself at a very open, uninhabited crossroads, as my experience with working processes regarding actual instalment pieces or Gallery exhibitions that I have displayed is limited to my University Projects. Exciting to see where I’ll go? Yes. Making this easy to answer this question in any way? No.

Continue reading “MEDA WK 04: HOW AND WHY DO YOU DO WHAT YOU DO?”

MEDA WK 03: OPPORTUNITIES- Where and How do I get Paid? DRAFT

Being an artist, regardless of the time period or medium that you work under, has always been a bit of a bumpy road financially, at least, if you aren’t well known. It’s always been a race to gain an audience/awareness within the artistic community you inhabit in order to keep yourself afloat financially, but also to build your image and style. Once an audience has been attained, it becomes easier to reach a further audience via word of mouth or advertisements- gaining a better revenue and a better audience Etc, Etc. The vicious cycle continues. 🙂

Continue reading “MEDA WK 03: OPPORTUNITIES- Where and How do I get Paid? DRAFT”


Humans have never been good at following instructions. Looking back at our history, a lot of technological and scientific advancements have been proceeded by an attitude and common theme of, “How ‘bout I do anyway?”- In other words, to view humanity, and subsequently our technological breakthroughs, is to look at a creative process that lands solidly within the Chaotic Neutral mindset.

We do things not for any other reason then we CAN do it, and we want to see HOW we can do it.

In more civilised terms, we call this ‘Innovation’.

Innovation is the push for creative meaning, for craft to have a purpose and come together to have a practical use, but to employ innovation you need the foundation of experimentation- which is where we can thank our weird monkey brains for throwing the mountains of conceptual spaghetti at the wall of problems until we had the components to make a solution/meal.

Even outside human ingenuity, this ‘straying from design’ is inherent to the structures of life and progression itself. This influx of stimuli vs response- to use the tools available to us in a way that might not be their inherent use, but adapting it to a new situation where it still works, or even works better, is just an inherent law of the world and essential for progression.

“Technology isn’t rational; with luck, it’s a runaway horse, foaming at the mouth, ready to throw itself off a cliff in desperation. Our problem is that culture’s tied to that horse”- Martin Felipe Castagnet, Los cuerpos del Verano’.

Right now as we speak, the present state of technology that our culture is built on is surrounded by and progressing on this foundation of experimentation. Just look at the internet and how much it has deviated away from its original creation, yet instead of simply ceasing to exist it has now become an integrated and unavoidable part of our everyday lives. As a brief rundown, the internet was Invented in the 1960’s as ARPANET’, an acronym for ‘Advanced Research Projects Agency Network’, this was the first precursor to what we know as the internet today- the foundation that we would build from to reach our version of the internet. ‘ARPANET’ was created from the idea of a time-shared network, a new and instantaneous means of communication and information archiving that could survive in the event of a nuclear attack. Nowadays, the internet is a social hub for social communities, business marketing, software development, Ect. Ect.

But the internet is just one example of creative deviation;



“Its not worth doing something unless you were doing something that someone, somewhere, would much rather you weren’t doing”- Terry Pratchett, Foreword to ‘The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Fantasy’


the invention of the drone is a good reminder that people don’t use items for their intended use. Created for military purposes, Drones have come a long way from their first debut into the public awareness. Once a machine for strategic warfare and combat operations, within the public domain it is used in a wide spectrum of alternative objectives; from the mundane, e.g. postal services and delivery, to the more ostentatious e.g. collecting whale snot.



“Real stupidity beats A.I. every time”- Terry Pratchett, ‘The Hogfather’

 ‘TAY’, (i.e. Thinking About You), is an experimental chat A.I. that Microsoft released in 2016, intended to be a simple chatterbot for twitter, it was instead fed ‘red pills’ by the internet communities until it became, within 16 hours, what is essentially an extremely racist and provocative opinion generator.

(And TAY isn’t the first chat/voice recognition software we’ve misused, how many times have any of us gotten drunk and used Siri as an emotional leaning post? Its more common than you think.)

The second you create restrictions on how an object is supposed to be used, is the moment people start to test the boundaries of what that object can ACTUALLY do. An intended use is by no means a warranty on what you CAN do with/to it.



For Task 3, I plan to research more into human innovation and the extent to which we redesign the use of technology, as well as find the most ridiculous way in which I can, personally, misuse a piece of technology that is arbitrary to its primary use.

Because of the subject I am addressing, some experimentation will be necessary to understand the theory of Chaotic Neutral enterprising. With each entry, I am going to use a new technology outside of its intended use. I will create a video Diary of my results to include in my presentations; this will include a quick introduction to the object, and then an experiment of all the ways it could possibly be used outside of its intended objective. I am not doing this with the intention of succeeding in creating a ‘whole new invention’ in these entries, but rather to push the limits of function outside of original purpose in the hopes of discovering new techniques that can be later employed to create something from the same components. Why? Because a drill is only a drill until you discover it would make a great new handheld mixer. Or perhaps a windmill weapon? Or perhaps-…

 “’Gimme a script, I’ll improvise”-  Andrew Cullen, My actual real life sibling.




My work ‘Supplicium’ is an interactive response to Céleste Boursier-Mougenot’s 2013 work ‘Clinamen’. I drew inspiration on his work especially because the static interaction within his piece was both subtle but highly successful in drawing in an audience through sheer curiosity. I wanted to create my major work around this theme of curiosity, yet I wanted to introduce a more physical element of interaction to the static nature of Mougenot’s work.

Even the name I chose is complementary to Mougenot’s piece, ‘Clinamen’, a Latin translation of inclination, matched his works ethereal presence-A giant pool of water with floating ceramic bowls inside that clink together and reverberate around the room, it was elegant in its design as it enticed people to observe and soak into the arts atmospheric nature- to sit around the work and watch as IT works.
‘Supplicium’ one the other hand is Latin for ‘execution’, the opposite of idle curiosity and static interaction- and the physical intervention of ones person in order to achieve a goal, inviting the audience to soak in the atmospheric nature of my work whilst also inviting them to INVESTIGATE how it works.

‘Supplicium’ itself consists of a smaller scale pool (A large round shallow dish) filled halfway with water to which ceramic bowls float in the water with scented candles within. (I am considering taping coloured cello paper to the inside of the bowls to reflect different colours also for a further visual effect.) When the audience approaches the bowl, they see a small watermill attached to the bowl with a crank and handle, when someone winds the handle it powers the watermill and creates a small artificial current that then causes the bowls to move and, incidentally, encounter each other creating a noise upon contact.


Although physical interaction plays a large part in the function of my work, I am also playing with some static interaction elements- with parts of ‘Supplicium’ that rely more on the senses to engage than physical interaction. The scented candles especially made me reflect on how many of the senses I could engage in the audience, olfactory being a strange but oddly suitable decision I made when I asked myself the question of the extent my work would apply to Static interaction.

Location wise I am hoping to get a black box room to set up in. I feel like a darker space would really enhance my work and the light/vision aspect of the piece. As senses are a big component of this piece I may have to consider isolating it so that another students major work wont overlap and create a sensory dissonance. The bigger scale final model will rest at around waist level on a podium at the very back of the room it inhabits, enticing people towards it if they want to fully view it. If I cannot find a dark room, an enclosed one is essential to fully pull off the ambient music aspect of the piece.

When observing people interacting with my work concept, they were intrigued by the noise aspect of the piece especially. The presence of a crank also seemed to spike curiosity- as the automatic response to a handle attached to any sort of machine is to wind it up and see what happens. My tutor suggested a heavier lean on the audible elements of the piece- to add bells to the floating bells to create a more satisfying noise and a better payoff/reward for the audiences curiosity and interaction.