Morophospace
Experiential aesthetics the mechanics of learning behaviour
© 2016 Morophospace. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress. Designed by 
© 2016 Morophospace. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress. Designed by
Phil, this is really good. I can hear the different voices, it seems like it is reflecting the process or experience of being immersed in MOOC perhaps or edec? I like the narration about the apparent and the existence, and the role of technology in making this possible, and having to get outside it etc. It does seem the idea of a mulitimodal artefact, and the move away from the primacy of text, presents some disorientation at first before one can see/hear/feel clearly!
I agree Chantelle – the primacy of text in relation to the spoken word is very interesting… Something to with the stability of both perhaps? There is immersive experience with voice set in a physical context, voices crowding – would like to try the same with the visual.
Love the narration, great insightful information. Esp like the concepts linking visual to text to web. Wish the visual related more t othe fabulous narration. Love to see it more experiential ala vito conti. Big room, movement triggering text, image narration interactions.
Yep… Didn’t have the time to get interactive! But being an interactive designer I’m not sure regards interaction – it feels a little old hat! I’m looking for something new, and I think it begins in sound?
This is like an audio tapestry, very rich and enchanting. It takes effort to listen to it and to take it all in, but well worth it.
I was struck by the problem of categorising apparent/existent in terms of ‘real’ objects that have been digitised. I was thinking, for example, when I recklessly linked to a Pollock jpg on some random site, that the digital artefact was distinct from the original painting, or for that matter a copy of it in a book or poster. Does copying create a new existent object, in a sort of (reverse) Warholesque kind of way? Is the copy somehow less ‘existent’? Certainly the creatorship is very different… I suppose this also raises the question of when a repurposed object ceases to be a copy and becomes a unique–existent–artefact?
Hope the interview went well : )
Didn’t get the job! Maybe a blessing, a difficult task!
Like your point ‘Does copying create a new existent object’ – difficult one! If the image maintains its uniqueness I would say that image is the same no matter how many generations of that image exist. The image can only be existent once, even a physical copy will change.
sorry to hear it, though.
This was a really interesting experience. My main observation was that I was increasingly frustrated by the overlap of the voices towards the end of each piece. I think because normally a story has an end, or an article has a conclusion, I felt that I was owed the final bits and I couldn’t quite hear them because of the new voice coming in. This reminded me of Kress’s piece in which he says words narrate whereas images display. It also reminded me of the MOOC experience – so much to see/hear not enough time to get to the end of every strand.
I also hope the interview went well!
there was something (generatively) disturbing about the format of this sound artefact – I think because we web users are so used to the progress bar and controls, not knowing how far through I was, not being able to pause or rewind, combined with the weaving and repetition of voices and sounds, and all those eyes staring out at me, gave it an insistent and strange quality. It took me a little while before I could hand myself over to the experience, but then it was rather hypnotic. I know and trust Phil, so I could get there, but I wonder, was the stranger adequately invited in? If not, is that a problem (given the brief for the artefact, to be a response for EDCMOOC participants)? Or is this designed to be elusive, to explore the apparent (and the massive?) in form as well as substance? I can’t decide, but it is very thought provoking!
Take your point regards being invited in Jen, but does fascination invite us in? I know that if I see an accident I have to stop myself from stopping and looking (is that just me, am I simply odd?). Or if I witness a spectacle on the street, I will attempt to understand that phenomenon (in some way). My #edcmooc artifact was a very real attempt (in what time I had) to mirror #edcmooc (should have made that more explicate). The layered sound was an attempt to mirror mass voice, and sound content was an attempt to understand that phenomenon combined with core texts. I think if I had more time I would have made voices more clear, but still textural. I also would have used image sound interaction for immersive properties. But all in all it worked for me, and did what I wanted – fascination, sense of unease, and as you say designed to be elusive. All directly associated with my sense of strangeness (and scale) of a MOOC.
great point about fascination, and I like how you are building on it in your tumblog. I suppose I’m particularly tuned in at the moment to the idea of educational openings, and wondering how (if) ‘fascination’ and curiosity is natural (as you suggest) or if it is something that can be learned and supported. This seems to be important in the context of the MOOC (and education) – is providing access to fascinating stuff enough to ensure that people will learn and engage? Is there more that we need to do? Your comment about being explicit might connect, here.
Fascination & curiosity are natural (as you say). Art&Design, Image, film, the commercial world, all play on this human trait. It seems as though mutimodal, and the visual has greater impact at this level than writing. Are we wired semiotically to respond to ‘Badges’ and identity? I think allowing access to fascinating stuff is what education is about, that must trigger our innate curiosity and need to make connections (?). But what are the signs that are fascinating before we reach learning content, and how can those signs help deliver understanding? This has to be very important in the digital domain, I get so frustrated with many digital environments – all fragmented, no continuity. The only environment that really pleases me is Twitter, and that’s about metadata for (possibly) fascinating stuff. It’s as though we need loads of good quality learning artifacts – all surrounded in Twitter like metadata. Guess we have this to some extent? Almost like a Turkish Bazaar, full of spices and shinny things