16.3.15 Double Tutorial Feedback

by Beauchamp Art

(Feedback feedback feedback – in stereo)

(To be read left-to-right, top-to-bottom, and forward with the passage of time, any deviation from this form will only that its original orientation was the mots effective as a means of communication, ad that I have not attempted any poetic palindromic palimpsest prose, rather just place one word in front of another, akin to walking, rather than a free-form jazz dance routine; with accompanying tap interval.)

(This text was originally intended to form part of my weekly reflective journal, but was deemed; like a bomb shelter on the roof of a bungalow: too lofty, and inappropriate for that context.)

(This concludes the footnotes at the start of the text, and as the handstand of text writes/rites/rights itself, the reader is invited to start from the top, and presented with a linear narrative which they may choose to follow. Or simply disregard this and read any words the the order they would find most pleasing, using chance selection techniques akin to those utilised by John Cage in his chance compositions, or like those employed by an amateur darts player, and cast one’s gaze to whichever space sees most circumspect within the circumference of the serial text.)



The week dawned with double tutorials, phonic feedback for frantic practical experimentations which needed tying down, and for focus to be shifted from form to content, as how my work will shape itself is erroneous if it lacks substance. Nevertheless, planning structures for ideas may still be useful for realising the work, without becoming too hindered by the technicalities of how its composite parts are to be order. So by adopting a Minimalist pattern forming approach, by means of dividing up sections of a video into blocks to be allocated function and content in a spreadsheet seems reasonable place to start. Though over preparing may become procrastination, like the author how spends all their time reading books and forgets they have to put something on the page for it to be worth while (rudimentary ‘prosumtion’).

The feedback for my essay was useful, though mostly advisory, given I have – conversely to the practical work – all the content, just the form is a bit shaky. We discussed the potential benefits of embarking on something like an appendix; rather than composing of unwanted, extraneous parts; allowing for more detailed pointed to be expanded upon outside of the main body of the text. Previous, this has taken the form of ‘essay giblets’, the general offal and waffle of my semi-prosaic literary meandering that had to be expropriated into some third-party text or another. However, given the particular nature of the subject area and form of the dissertation, it was resolved that a Glossary of Terms could ease readers’ experience of the essay, save them having to sit half in one text half in encyclopaedia.

This should prove to be a useful exercise, both for the audience and myself, as I have to reconsider specific terms in reference to the context in which they are used, securing the semantic solidity of what is being said, and preparing appropriate pragmatic apparatus for the readers. So as they are not enveloped in a post-modern nightmare of folding form into function; a structuralism implosion hyperbolised given the informational overload of the content. As I do not wish to be developing a sadistic writing style that punishes the audience for wishing to engage in the curious investigation into what has been written; or I may as well use an inappropriately small typeface, with all the text converted into binary, written in Braille, with the grooves then doused in salt. Self-reflective writing can be useful to making the format of the text relevant to what is being written, but, in essence, I; nor anyone else; benefits from making it undermine itself.


In preparation for the Degree show I have booked all the necessary equipment, though it is still uncertain whether I will be able to get what I would ideally like, 2 projectors, with one connected to a camera projecting feedback, and another playing a video from media player connected to a set of speakers, projecting onto a piece of material suspended in the middle of the room by thread of some kind or another to give the sense of a floating immaterial screen which the audience would engage with by moving around it. However, I would not be disappointed with the use of just a single projector, and showing a film that utilises the same format or the suspended screen (which may be an influence of Stelarc suspending himself; following this line of thought I have contemplating using rocks as a counter balance of the screen to reaffirm its materiality – and if i could get rocks thrown in a riot, or bit of the Berlin wall, or some otherwise ‘loaded’ material , then this would be pleasing, but realising, just using some basic wooden dowling folded into the bottom of a sheet make be easier and more professional looking.)

I also booked similar equipment for the week after Easter, for two reasons; to produce a series of experiment displays of a range of visual materials to decide the suitability of the format of display and the content of what is show for a formal exhibition; as well as to demonstrate a range of display possibilities, should I be unable to execute them for the degree show, or at a later date, should the necessary equipment or venue be unavailable.


Since there is a limit on time, I have taken to converting articles to sound using the computer’s built in text-to-speech software, which enables me to more effectively use my time by multitasking; making work whilst simultaneously becoming more critically informed. To test this at length, I listened through an 8-hour audio book (Terry Pratchett’s Reaper Man) in 2, 4-hour sessions, whilst performing other activities, including working on another 3D digital sculpture of a head. As I have previously listened to other talks and the radio at length, whilst working, then I believe that can use this layering of task and sensory inputs as an effective means of retaining information and furthering understanding, with the possibility of subtly weaving in this process and the ambient information I osmotically absorb into what is being produced. It could be said that this means of working is a form of embodied feedback producing and consuming simultaneously from the same material, what I described in my dissertation as the Möbius Ouroboros, the living embodiments of a one-dimension, perpetually renewing system of understanding. Indeed, I have been considering the notion of ‘feedback’ more recently, following reading about how Stelarc’s work relates to feedback, in relation to my own work.