Late October Dissertation Thoughts
by Beauchamp Art
With regards to my dissertation I keep changing my mind about what I am going to write, and I probably could happily write ten essays of considerable depth and breadth of research, but I would be spreading myself too thinly so I think it ma be best for me to just write a hefty chunk of text as my draft, then infuse it with more and more research as the year goes on, so the draft I submit may end up being a couple of pages of general discussion, and I will work in key examples when ones stand out, as I do not want to fleetingly be mentioning odd bits of work, and would rather have fewer pieces to mention, but keep referring to them throughout the text. Using the written likes of David Shenk, Lev Manovich, and a few other key writers and articles as the thematic punctuation to my essay.
So artistic examples may serve as secondary to the socio-technological discussion, feeding in ideas around ontology and the phenomenology of interface mediums, primarily the computer screen, focusing mainly on the perceived effects of the growing use of social on how individuals see themselves in amongst the tumultuous crowds of the online sea of information.
Having a linear plan of my essay would seem counter-intuitive, especially given the significance of overload as my subject matter; so a more Joycian framework may be more practical; although not divulging into the problematic area of Giles and Deluze’s rhizome and its anti-hierarchical structure. As with such crysitaline formations, key areas of idea deposition naturally occur and ascend the hierarchy. With my essay, this may mean that in the first draft multiple areas may seems of similar importance. But through the redrafting process over an extended period I will be able to refine those areas of less relevance and expand on the more simulating subjects. Whether this be a comparison between multiple key art works or a particular statistical analysis from the Ofcom Media Use and Attitudes Report (2014).
As I have been consecutively addressing similar subject matter since the latter half of first year, and have built on my second year research especially, following up with my summer reading and gallery visits, then it seems natural to reuse previous research and artistic examples in my essay, though refreshing the surrounding discussion with new material. There have also been two guest lecture’s works how fitted perfectly into my research; Cecile B Evans (with whom I also participated with in a workshop at the Wysing Arts Centre) and Dan Hays; so their works may occur more readily than others. Also, I used Evan Roth and Rollin Leonard (who also commented on the blog post) in my previous essay, and they are all contemporary practising artists that still feel especially fitting.
So in summary, I have a plan for my dissertation, in fact I have several, and these will converge in the writing of the essay, and will be richly saturated with research though the drafting process using existing materials, adding more over time.
For an architectural analogy, I am building several small houses in conjunction with one another. They share the same plot of land, and the same bricks, with scheduled deliveries of more cement arriving later one. The interesting areas will arrive when the corridors between these multiple constructs emerge, with the buildings themselves falling to the way side. These non-places of lingering contemplation in-between established thematic areas are where the most considered areas of contextual construction will arise; the corridors forming the foundations of a expanding argument; that the chaos of this construction embodies the chaos of its builders, mirroring the chaos of contemporary individual’s problematic personhood in amongst the hectically exponentially expansion of Moore’s Law. My essay will be less chaos set in concrete, and more Styrofoam blocks in expandable foam.