Parade Minutes for 25th January 2010

From Critical Practice Chelsea
Jump to: navigation, search


This Page Is Currently Under Construction And Will Be Available Shortly, Please Visit Reserve Copy Page


CLICK HERE


Chelsea, Research Hub, E-Block 11:00 - 3:00 - Actually, the meeting occurred on the 26th. Apologies for the error.

In attendance: Cinzia, Neil, Kuba, Ewelina, Michaela, Marsha, Johanna, Mikhail and Ola Chair: Neil <br> Minutes: Marsha <br> <br> Outstanding questions: What's happening on February 15th?

NB: This was a good but disorganized meeting, which helps to explain why the minutes are a little chaotic.

AGENDA: We didn't stick to one, but the main points are grouped together for the sake of some coherence.

We were pleased to meet with Ola Wasilkowska, the architect who will be working with Ken (and CP) to realize the project. She brought with her Mikhail, who will also be working on the project.

Report on Ken's Meeting with Ola

  • Ola is inspired by a slime mould – it reassembles itself under stress and is the only organism that can do this
  • There was discussion around Ken’s students being like a workforce, whereas CP is a team of collaborators

General Organization

  • There was a desire to identify who is participating and to set up deadlines
  • We identified "publicness" in terms of a theme, context, performance

Student Involvement and Other Stakeholders

  • Michaela proposed that she and Katrine Hjelde do something with their students. She observed they have the Triangle space booked for the end of April or beginning of May (TBC) and that this could be used for something Parade-related.
  • Kuba suggested this might be a good meeting op for various stakeholders, an informal meet and greet where we describe and promote the project.
  • We talked about possible "respondents" to Ola and Mikhail's project-in-process and encouraged them to consider CP as "the end users" instead of asking random Chelsea students, as there's no guarantee they will attend. Also, we anticipate various audiences - some from Chelsea (including Ken's and Michaela and Katrine's students), some from our networks, members of the general public, overflow from Tate, passersby...

Letter of Invitation

We agreed to review the letter of invitation at our next meeting on February 2, 2010.

The Format of Parade - A Review

We observed the overlap between the spatial forms and the intellectual forms Intellectual Forms:

  • the four barcamps
  • the Market of Ideas - We should aspire to have 40 stalls and feel happy with 30 strong contributions. The stalls should be understood as involving a variety of approaches. Some stalls will be more literal than others. We're thinking about The Market as a flexible structure that can accommodate various modes of exchange. Ola used the term "scenographic"
  • PowerPoint Karaoke - (as the launch event on the Friday night) This form was suggested by Kuba. Description: contributors are invited to speak to a surprise presentation culled from the Web. Each contributor speaks for approximately 5-10 mins and attempts to engage with the PowerPoint in a creative way. Marsha wondered how this form meshed with our interest in modes of assembly. Cinzia observed it has an element of soapbox about it - that you'll likely speak about something that's familiar to you, like your research. She also observed it was about making the slide presentations public in a new and very different way. We agree to have this as the launch event and hope it will be fun.
  • "the gathering place" (we need a term for this...) This space needs to be large enough for everyone who's on site at a given moment to gather together.
  • Marsha's interested in allowing spaces for unplanned activity to occur.

Spatial Forms:

  • Ola suggests we think of one component that will work for all the intellectual forms--we need a smart system (three functions: a roof, a place to sit and ? [a place practice--barcamping, marketing, Karaoking])
  • The forms need to be flexible enough so they can expand and contract in response to traffic and presence - We agreed barcamps might be limited to around ten people (for everyone to present and to respond and for the process to be engaging instead of taxing) and that should more appear, we'll try and form another barcamp. This sparked a discussion around different audiences: How are we going to manage latecomers who want to listen but not, perhaps, contribute? We talked about the barcamp in Warsaw and the problem of having a table populated by CPer. This created an inner circle that ended up being exclusive. This observation led into a discussion on possibly deploying more coercive structures. Ola suggested, for example, that we might put the barcamp contributors in an outer ring and place chairs for latecomers to sit in the middle. This seemed like an interesting experiment for exploring control mechanisms, but we were all worried about the implications of this approach. The was general agreement, however, that we'd maintain fidelity to the barcamp format...
  • Cinzia observed that, from the beginning, we've been concerned with different modes of assembly and how we'll facilitate these. Neil talked about this in terms of "making provisions". Michaela's interested in exploring preexisting models.
  • Neil was interested in the relationship between the sliders used in Mikhail's online design process and our enthusiasm index, where we calibrate our shared desire and commitment
  • Ola and Mikhail are very excited about the fabric donated by TED and will experiment with it over the next couple of weeks. They will send/post some ideas to CP on February 15, 2010

Activating the Event - Our Ethos of "Hosting" and "Hospitality"

  • Neil observed that he greeted people at the previous Market of Ideas and offered brief explanations. It was suggested we might use "greeters" and Michaela
  • Marsha refreshed a conversation she'd been having with Cinzia and Kuba the day before, where they identified "hosting" and "reciprocity" as two key themes for the event.
  • Marsha was concerned about levels of involvement; Kuba asked Ola, Mikhail and Joanna if they were interested in engaging and they agreed.
  • Ola suggested that we think about having a DJ, who would accumulate the data – and project keywords – Neil observed our commitment to keeping the data distributed...but perhaps the notaries in the barcamp could report back in some way...
  • Marsha is also interested in having roving reporters. Neil worries they might be perceived as spies. Marsha argued this won't be a problem so long as they clearly identify as reporters.

The Rhythm of the Day

  • We talked about having a schedule and communing together once in a while to report back. Cinzia suggested we think about a roundtable model for this reportage and we agreed to contemplate this an other format. For this to work around a lunch hour, we should start the barcamps at 11:00.
  • Kuba suggested we invite a collective that makes and serves food to facilitate the lunch.

Where in the world is the Parade Ground? Public, private, symbolic space

  • There was a lively discussion over the status of the parade ground. Neil observed it's always been public space (Even when Bentham tried to build a private prison here, he was unsuccessful and the prison was public.) Cinzia observed it seems like a private space part of the college...even though it's a thoroughfare. We all agreed it was a very complex symbolic space with various connotations...
  • We're interested in contesting the institution's insistence on renting out this space by being in public on the Parade Ground

Joanna Rajkowska's Contribution

  • Joanna's interested in the unexpected that occurs in public space...especially spaces that don't belong to anyone...this raises questions around ownership.
  • She's thinking about the production of knowledge or no knowledge and of physical experience...different kinds of experience...and how experience is experienced through the senses and how removing one of the senses changes one's experience.
  • She's imagining a soft structure stabilized by a metal platform that's movable. People will cocoon themselves in this structure and then interact with others beyond.
  • She's interested in underdeveloped channels of communication and in experiencing pulbicness in a different way.
  • Neil observed there might be other ways to shifting our sensory perception, such as using canceling headphones and blindfolds
  • Marsha was interested in the status of the cocoon - does it become a private space for the one body that can inhabit it?
  • Joanna's also interested in how we approach people - she talked about the people who walk around wearing sandwich boards and how they become invisible...
  • The project isn't about talking...
  • This seems related to our theme of hospitality and the limits thereof
  • Kuba suggested she talk to Basia, who was going a project on disabled bodies, he also talked about the safety afforded by a public persona.
  • According to Joanna: We can struggle and negotiate the openness and being invisible and perhaps it’s interesting to oscillate in different ways of being…Various ways of being in public…You want to exist and sell your narrative…it can’t be done by way of provocation…shifting boarders between public and private and visible and invisible and being capable of deciding…
  • There was some concern that Joanna's project was well developed and it was now a question of producing it...and that CP is more interested in working with her to realize an installation. She reassured us, however, that this was just a germ of an idea and that it's still very flexible.

Creating Interfaces

  • Neil observed that we need to get cracking on publicity.
  • How can we facilitate engagement at the level of planning? Cinzia suggested that barcamp and market participants feedback on the structure, but Neil felt this would slow things down unnecessarily

Buget

  • How do we secure these resources? Ewelina explained that AIM needs to write a letter detailing 1) where the money is coming from, 2) how much money it is and 3) what it's for. The project will then receive a code and we can claim back monies from the institution. However, Chelsea has strict policies about how we can and cannot spend money. Ewelina has agreed to deal with the budget and maintain a spreadsheet of expenditures.
  • Kuba and Ewelina will prepare a contract for AIM and Ewelina will get it signed off by Chelsea
  • Kuba, Neil and Marsha reviewed the budget for AIM; more information will be shortly forthcoming.

Return to Parade