Meeting Minutes from March 17, 2009
From Critical Practice Chelsea
Phone meeting between Cinzia and Marsha
- We recognized our desire for making this both a relevant and rigorous project. Hence we need a (working) research question aimed at assessing how the proposed space "performed" (this chimes with the application's emphasis on assessment). This question may be something like: How effectively did the conditions created in the immersion environment facilitate non-verbal communication and to what ends?
- We talked about the roll of the "experts" hereafter referred to as "collaborators", in the project and agreed that they'd be part of it right the way through - hence not only involved in the process of building the space and/or experiencing and reflecting upon how others engaged in it. We also agreed that activating their various relationships to the project (both as pre-production/production consultants and makers and as critical reporters on the event) entails clearly articulating our expectations. This led us to recognize that we need an addition question to put the panelists in advance of the project. This question can be expressed as follows: What strategies need to be devised to create the conditions for an effective environment for nonverbal interaction?
- We identified a third question related to the difference between non-verbal and embodiment and recognized that ongoing discussion on this distinction would be useful and interesting and should be developed through practice.
- The distinction between non-verbal and embodiment opened up a fourth and two-fold question related to knowledge. What is knowledge? What is embodied knowledge?
Urgent Action Points:
- Add to wiki prosal – specifically timescale and costing
- Complete letter to collaborators – paying special attention to our limited resources
- Separate out a rationale of the event…Kens students
- Identify how many meetings we need and when to build a timescale for the project thus demonstrating its feasibility.
Return to Embodied Public Domain