Initial thoughts - the news, impenetrable language and us.

I have begun this research by looking generally at the news before beginning to delve into conspiracies. I came into this project with the belief that the news and agents of control have adopted techniques to appear to the public (at face value) that they are being truthful and informative but is being secretive by using “impenetrable language” that is (perhaps a bit too conservative) not widely understood by the general public. I was reading an article on BBC News (by Nick Triggle - health correspondent) entitled  “NHS confusing public by using gobbledygook”. 

I was drawn to this article through this introduction:

“Imagine the scene. Up and down the country, local NHS leaders are crowded into meetings rooms discussing information transfers and ambulatory care, when someone jumps up and shouts out “I’ve had enough of sticky toffee puddings”. 

The article goes on to say that the language being used by the health service is simply “gobbledygook” (The Plain English Campaign/ PEC). The PEC spokesman, Steve Jenner of the PEC believes (cue the first conspiracy) the NHS is using confusing and impenetrable language deliberately, stating “If you use impenetrable language, it means the public has no clue whats going on. I can’t help thinking this suits the NHS sometimes”.

Personally, I believe that all agents of control have their own private lexicons and speak in impenetrable language. I often find myself able to follow various parts of the news, though when it comes to political conversations, the language begins to become harder to follow and I find myself (sometimes) using my own common sense to interpret and “translate” what I am listening to, in attempt to “stay in the loop”. 

Though in all honesty, are any of us “in the loop”?  Or will we understand only what the agents of control want us to understand and have a false-sense of security, so much so that we remain passive and do not challenge them?

I feel that conspiracy theory has come about due to our lack of truthful information, those of us that do not necessarily believe all that we hear might resort to thinking up alternate theories to bring ourselves closer to the truth, I am interested in this. Though society has conditioned people to scoff at those with less “mainstream” views , often forcing conspiracy theorists into silence. To me, the conspiracy theory and the ability to think that there could be “more to the story” weakens the power of agents of control.

At this stage, I am looking at the agents of control and news reports in detail as these are the most “reputable” sources for information. Everything is executed with such precision, from the women tightly zipped into dresses straight off the “trendy work-wear” rails and men in the monotonous suits…there are moments when the reporter jolts to action, reading the news quickly without a trace of emotion, pausing on cue - they are essentially puppets on the world stage. 

Side note - I stumbled across a conspiracy theory video on youtube which showed celebrity “Cardi B” on the red carpet appearing to be acting strange/hypnotised and snapping out of this abruptly, this conspiracist claimed that “Cardi B” is a puppet of the rich and powerful Illuminati who has traded her independence in for a quick rise to fame.

What happens when we resort to other “news” reporters, for instance youtube reporters sat casually discussing the news with less formality? Scroll down and you will find lots of spam comments about the appearance of the reporters, the latest show on netflix and doubtful comments discrediting the channels. Sure, the news might be false, but perhaps the mainstream news is even less truthful? I find it interesting when I hear people saying “the BBC is full of shit” or “Don’t believe what you hear on that TV”, though those same people tune in every morning like clockwork to watch the news…it leads me to think, maybe we are conditioned to not want the truth, or to have no desire to seek it beyond making doubtful comments.

 I visited the English National Opera house Midsummer night's dream which was a contemporary response to the original work by Shakespeare.I had been drawn to this as a key component of my research will be miscommunication/the circulation of false information - with an interest in what we believe and why. I recall my work in English Literature and how a Midsummer nights dream had many elements of miscommunication and deception through it's plot with a complicated love triangle and magic being used to manipulate protagonists.

The production was excellent but I actually found myself more interested in the visual components and how the set itself opened up as a large bed with huge pillows,I really got the sense of false reality through the way that the set had been put together. I liked the way that the humungous emerald green sheets of the bed were used in place of the green forest.

Sunday night - Tonight I was quite excited to have stumbled across a new documentary which I began to watch with Raph, "The Space in between" (Marina Abramovic in Brazil)...but am now mildly horrified. I suppose I drew the line when a man started extracting part of another man's brain through his nasal passage. When a man started removing another man's eye, neither of us could stare at the screen for long enough to turn the show off, so naturally we darted for the mains and turned off all the electricity which did the trick. I had high hopes for this programme as I am always drawn to performative artists despite the fact that I am yet to perform a piece myself. I have realised that I take inspiration from theatrical practice and try to integrate the features I like through my moving image work. I wondered if the documentary style of this video would inform my work in a way...but alas - no.

My hologram pyramid worked effectively ,but proved to be too flimsy to use over and over again for experimentation. So I have opted to purchase an inexpensive acrylic pyramid of a similar size to use for further experimentation due to its durability. I am pleased that the small model I made as an initial experiment worked though.

When I first tested the hologram projector on my phone (as I had seen in videos), I will admit I was not impressed by the scale of the reflected objects. As I am not in possession of a flat screen, I have been placing the screen of my MacBook down flat, with the keypad as the backdrop so that I am able to reflect from a larger surface and create bigger reflections.

The above (two videos) are further hologram experiments. I have sourced the moving image via the gif website and reflected using the hologram pyramid and a flat screen. I was lucky enough to be able to borrow my sister's laptop which has a larger screen, it can bend to appear like an iPad which gave me the opportunity to reflect the hologram without my keyboard in the way as a background.

The motivations of these two experiments were to try and create a set-up where the hologram reflections were clearer and of a better quality so that I could determine whether the hologram is really the best way to present my work in this project. 

It was a vast improvement without the keyboard on full display and the second gif selected to see whether text would be legible worked, I feel that the small hologram pyramid would not be suitable for anything more than a brief gif or a static image. I see my development taking form in video format and I don't think the hologram projector will do this justice. My developed moving image will need to be presented in a way that I can guarantee it is completely clear and can be viewed properly.

Even the gifs appear to be too pixelated at times. I am glad that I experimented with the hologram as it has enabled me to think critically about what will be best for the presentation of work to an audience. Though I know it is time to move forward from the hologram now.

Observation:

Orwell's 1984 movie, at 26:03 the public chant "hate! hate! hate!" repeatedly. Today when watching episode 2 of Netflix's A series of unfortunate events (Episode 2) the evil Count Olaf visits the boarding school posing as a "motivational fitness instructor" and forces the crowd of children to chant "Remember you will die!" repeatedly.

I have noticed that chanting in unison immediately makes me think of brainwashing and indoctrination. It is interesting how after hearing something in one specific way, you can no longer associate it with something else. Chanting is now a sound that has too many negative connotations for me.

I have identified my biggest interest in this project to be conspiracies and theories which hint towards the future/advancement. For example conspiracy theories around Space or the future construct of our society. I  am not set on focusing on just one of these elements but I am confident through experimentation with both of these areas I will be able to determine which I would like to progress with and go into detail for the remainder of this project. 

I was drawn to Orwell as he discusses the future through his eyes, not through outer space but through politics and advancement in technology to aid the totalitarian government but this is still the future. On the other hand, I have the option to explore the future through literal Space conspiracies,UFO’s and strange modern occurrences.

I will take some time tonight to reflect and decide on which element of the above I want to continue working on. 

I decided that after having already touched on Orwell's "1984" conspiracy about our future "space", I am interested in looking further into conspiracies about Space and UFO's. My decision was mostly made up when I thought about a book I read about techniques of persuasion in sales and it mentioned that personal touches make something more persuasive. Since I am not able to speak to anybody claiming to have experienced what Orwell is describing, I am confident I will be able to source personal accounts about space and UFO sightings which will present these "persuasive" elements that I have read about. The biggest motivation of the entire project is to determine why people believe things? what makes something believable? I think rather than resorting to the mainstream news, at this point I will turn my focus to what makes people generally believe each other? What makes an account believable?  Space and UFO's is an interesting area as there is not a real way to prove or disprove this visually, since we are equipped with many photographic and video editing softwares we are led to making a decision based more on what is said and the person telling the account as we know that anything could be visually fabricated.

At the start of the project I was looking at news presenters and how they are selected to indoctrinate on a large scale. Now I am looking at the people. How do we determine if we believe a stranger claiming to have an account? Do we only believe things that are expressed through mainstream news? Are there ways in which we can be persuaded?

I have been searching for UFO accounts on youtube to think about how these are being delivered. My favourite by far is a woman in Colorado's account. A conversation (below) with my friend Robyn made it more apparent to me why I like this account the most. We were discussing the pattern of seeing so many conspiracy videos with a "motionless"/"generic" male voice-over.  The Colorado account is different, it is an older woman speaking about her experiences, not the generic emotionless voice, I have heard over and over again.

My chat with Robyn highlighted another theory about why we believe people - are we more inclined to believe a Western young male? Do we associate that voice with knowledge and credibility?

 With this new question in mind, I am more motivated to seek out "convincing" accounts about UFO's/conspiracies from people that do not fit into the "generic" emotionless Western young male category. I am currently interested in accounts that show emotion and differ from mainstream news.

Out of all of the account (UFO) videos I have come across via youtube, my favourite is one given by the Lady from Colorado that tells the story of setting up a UFO watch tower as a spur of the moment decision when she had to sell her cows. She begins the account with a shaky feeling of scepticism towards the subject, but as the account progresses you start to notice  the Lady is actually a believer. She passionately bursts a recollection  of a time when a woman that attended the watch tower, sited aliens and burst out  screaming "do you see em'? do you see em'?". I am drawn to the emotive delivery of the message, the tones and changes in the voice. The account in a way aims to persuade,

 I have decided to enter live chat rooms to first observe some conversations and then to share the email for account and conspiracy theory submissions. To my dismay, there were many chatrooms that had great potential, but were left empty with the occasional "hi" and no response. I suppose with Facebook UFO fan pages and communities existing, the early "2000's" style of chatroom has been a little overlooked. However I finally came across (after hours of nothing) https://inceptionradionetwork.com/chat/. As I had suspected, the majority of the contributors to conversations, if not all of the members live in the USA. I entered the chatroom during the day, to be the only person online. I knew I had to adopt a new technique to enter the chatroom when it was buzzing with members, so I have decided to wait until 1/2 AM for the last few days and check the chatroom. I am quite tired if I'm honest, but the results have been worth it.

On night 2 (out of three) I came across a member "Rhino" that called upon the group to offer him advice, he described having seen some menacing entities/aliens, claiming that instead of being helped, he is being laughed at by people. Another member ,"Nick" suggested that he should document his encounters so that people will take the issue seriously. As I had initially suspected, people that try to discuss unusual accounts and their conspiracy theories are made to feel stupid and and as a result are being pressured to "prove it". I think this is why I haven't seen many members go into detailed personal accounts. Throughout my time in the chatroom, members were keen on sharing sightings that had been found on different UFO news stations but rarely discussing personal encounters.

I think it will be difficult to hear personal encounters as people fear the reactions and rejection of others.

I would like to keep researching personal accounts and conspiracy theories as I would like to use these to develop my next piece in the project.  So I will keep looking into these.

I have spent countless hours on the internet trying to track down people with claims to UFO accounts and conspiracies around this area with limited success. Everything seems to be handled in a secretive way. The people that are followers of many UFO sighting pages are not responsive to the project thus far. And when I do receive a little bit of information, it is limited, quick and unspecific.

I wonder whether having to mail me using their own email/contacting me using their personal profiles on Facebook is proving to be too daunting/ off-putting...so I have taken a different approach.  I decided to take to the anonymous chatroom, Omegle where I filtered the conversation to "UFO's", "Conspiracy" and "accounts", I sat and waited for several minutes to be connected with somebody that had filtered the conversation with the same interests. To my surprise (at this point) I was connected to "Josh" (58) from the USA that claimed to have sighted a UFO. I did not have a great deal of success in finding out his individual sighting details, he wanted to discuss the released clips of US Navy Ufo encounters from 2004 and 2015, he described these briefly when I said that I was not familiar with these sightings...as for his own sightings, he dismissed them as "passive sightings" . I tried to ask him for more information about his own accounts, though he disappeared quickly after discussing the Navy UFO encounters. 

I have been thinking a lot into this brief chance encounter... "Josh" seemed to be enthusiastic and provide a significant amount of detail into a publicised account by a powerful organisation (the Navy) but dismissed his own accounts as "passive sightings"...perhaps he feels that his own account is insignificant as he is not deemed as a "mainstream influencer". Perhaps if "Josh" had heard an account similar to his own in the news, he would gain the "verification" he needs to truly believe in what he has seen. Do we as humans need to wait for something more powerful than us to tell us what we already think, to be sure that what we think is valid?

Will we always seek validation? Is everybody keeping their accounts to themselves for fear that they could be "wrong"? maybe a part of them doesn't believe in their own findings as they have not been discussed before?

The theatre is one of my favourite places to go to seek inspiration from layouts and presentation to the delivery of messages and story-telling. Today I went to see an adaptation of one of my favourite stories (Coraline). Coraline is a dystopia tale. The protagonist (Coraline) moves to a brand-new house  where she becomes very bored with the "regular" life she is leading with work-a-holic parents. She discovers a small unusual door that is filled with bricks during the day. Coraline becomes obsessed with this little door...though she hears many voices of warning "don't go through the door, Coraline", she dismisses this warning (from ghosts) and at night she travels through the little door which is no longer bricked. Coraline enters an alternate realm which appears to be exactly the same as her home, though her parents have buttons sewn into their eyes and appear to be fun and spoil her with gifts and games (these are her "other" parents). Though she is unaware of this, Coraline is in great danger. The grass is not greener on the other side as she believes it is. The place she has grown to love, with her "other parents" is a dystopic trap. She encounters three ghost children that warn Coraline not to have buttons sewn into her eyes as the other mother wants her to.

What I find so interesting about the story is the fact that Coraline puts herself in danger repeatedly, no matter how many times she has heard verbal warnings, she does not believe them. Until she sees the ghosts physically and they warn her AGAIN...she finally believes this time. This presents the idea that you need to "see to believe". This has given me something to think about in the way of my own work.

What if I decided to take an account video, that had originally had somebody sat in front of a camera directly addressing the audience with their story and isolated the audio from the visual component... though the person is still heard telling the account (ufo conspiracy) they are no longer seen - does this make their account less credible? do we still believe? will they still have power over us?

Out of all of the account (UFO) videos I have come across via youtube, my favourite is one given by the Lady from Colorado that tells the story of setting up a UFO watch tower as a spur of the moment decision when she had to sell her cows. She begins the account with a shaky feeling of scepticism towards the subject, but as the account progresses you start to notice  the Lady is actually a believer. She passionately bursts a recollection  of a time when a woman that attended the watch tower, sited aliens and burst out  screaming "do you see em'? do you see em'?". I am drawn to the emotive delivery of the message, the tones and changes in the voice. The account in a way aims to persuade, a book I read recently by Robert Levine called "The power of persuasion" discusses some subliminal ways in which sales people employ certain techniques in order to persuade and build a credible image. One of the ways in which Levine said this could be done is to mention something "personable" , for example to incorporate your family or a pet etc into your sales pitch. The woman in the UFO account began her persuasive account mentioning her husband and how they moved house together, describing a stereotypically "normal" life building up to the section where she begins to persuade the listener that UFOs exist and she has seen them.

I wonder if an account would still be persuasive and effective without seeing the person delivering the account. I feel that in person, a technique of persuading might be sustained eye contact or warm expression...but video makes the ability to personally persuade more complicated.  

Constructing "Do you see em?"

I am taking my favourite account from Colorado and working with it on Adobe Premier Cut Pro.

After watching the video through a few times more, I decided that the lady speaking in the video would not be shown at all, I liked the empty spaces and shots of the roads and sky that the documentary had in them, so I kept these.

(See 43 for details about this video)

When I was watching the account, I thought about all of the empty spaces (everything excluding the shots of the woman’s face). The poem “Ozymandias” sprung to mind. I decided to play with this poem for the next video experiment. When I first heard the poem I thought of empty abandoned places with the heat beating down. When I remove the scenes where the woman is seen speaking, I am left with these exact spaces that mirror the poem to me mentally.   I decided to incorporate a few lines from this poem into the next experimental video as an opening. I searched via youtube to find somebody recording themselves saying it, but I found something I think is better. A scene from the "Alien covenant" video where a character (David) recites a few of the words, my favourite part "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings. Look on my works ye mighty and despair!"

When searching for why Ozymandias appears in Alien covenant, I came across the explanation "humans became more powerful who eventually kill the engineers laying waste to them as time laid waste to Ozymandias". I admire the way the poetry can be used to add to the narrative. I will use the poem based on the way I feel that the derelict spaces look in the video at the beginning . 

I received this email anonymously from Portugal. I know that google translate does not always translate 100% efficiently,but this is a risk I had to take in order to translate the message for myself. I soon discovered that the message was headed with the subject, "They want contact" .

The message itself is quite intense, it differs from the one I had received from Guillaume in Canada. It begins "this message comes from our extraterrestrial brethren" (I had never heard the world "brethren" being used before, so I googled this and it had two of the following definitions: "archaic plural of brother"/"fellow Christians or members of a male religious order"/"people belonging to a particular group").  The person describes the message that follows as "an initial step towards the golden future of humanity".  Unlike Guillaume (from Canada) who had written his account to me as an outsider/somebody that has seen something , the person that contacted me next (from Portugal) has written to me as if they are a vessel for extraterrestrial life themselves. 

After reading this email, I felt differently to the way I felt reading the previous email. Guillaume had told his story in an approachable and friendly manner, I was able to email him back with ease...maybe this is the kind of person I would believe.

In comparison, I am hesitant to believe in this message, I do not have any information about the person that has sent me the message (no name), upon attempting to send a response to this email, I received a postmaster failure response, perhaps the sender block responses?

The argument for people that appear to be more "approachable"/"personable" is strengthening for me personally.

Translation:

Stephanie (acted in my Gardenless video) will play all three characters. I will transform her doing her hair, makeup and set styling to create three separate fictional accounts.

After coming across this terminology when looking at Bonnie Champlain, I have discovered that what I am exploring is technically called “consensus reality”—what we take for being real and credible and what we disavow .

  I am pleased to have come across this new terminology as I have been actively exploring consensus reality through my own work, struggling to find the term that corresponds to this action.

Character one

Character one is a very financially comfortable “housewife”, she sits upright quite rigidly on her sofa wearing a Pink roll-neck, pearls and a black skirt. She gives the account in a conservative manner, but there is a sense of sarcasm/scepticism in her tone. She is slightly inconsiderate and takes bites of cake and breaks to drink between sentences, leaving the (imaginary) camera crew to wait for her to be ready to respond.

*I am aware that the account has sections where the woman describes having to sell her cows due to financial difficulty, I have decided that this character will be the polar opposite to the original lady so that I am able to create a diverse range of characters telling the account. This will make the end result - a poll about who is most believable far more interesting.

Set

This character will be filmed in a living room on a rich red Sofa with leopard print cushions, an ornate framed painting takes centre-stage behind the character. On the table is a glistening silver tray with a slice of cake and a glass of sparkling water.

Filming the three accounts went well. I am pleased with the way this has gone but I know that I will face a difficult job editing as they have been filmed in lots of tiny takes. This is due to the actress having to memorise one line or two at a time and repeat them until confident, shoot the line/s on camera and repeat. The only issues we encountered during filming were the occasionally challenging section needing to be shot again a few times, sometimes because of stumbling over the words, other times because the actress appears to be too focuses on remembering the lines. All of the issues took place during filming the first account. By filming the second account, we had read the lines so many times that we knew them and only needed one take or two. In an ideal scenario, I would have liked to film paragraphs at a time so that the edit would be more seamless, though I know in this situation it wasn't really possible. I ended up with approx 60 small videos for each account that I need to edit together now. I will try to solve the issue I feel that I will face with the video seeming fragmented by cutting any sharp noises at the beginning and end of each shot so that they will flow as smoothly as possible. I suspect there are sounds of me rustling paper by accident in some shots which will need to be removed also. Tomorrow I am going on a long car trip and intend to get editing done during that time. I am setting myself the goal to have completed one edit by the time I arrive at my destination and one on the way back.

Did I achieve my goal of editing a video on the way? Yes (despite my mum's need to drive down every hill she could find from the moment I got onto Adobe Premier Pro). One video edited and two to go. I am actually pleased with the way it has come out. I know I didn't take enough screenshots to properly document the editing process, so to combat this issue I have devised a table that I will be sticking in my sketchbook detailing each decision I have made,the cuts I have made at certain points and the duration of each clip (I recorded voice memos on my mobile to jog my memory). Now that I have reached my location, I will ensure that this table is filled out in detail so that I don't have to panic about it later. I have divided the sections of the transcript up by numbers and have recorded this on the table, so when I stick all of the stills in my sketchbook, it will show which still corresponds to which section of the transcript and the decisions I made for each part of the edit.

 (Above: Account 1)

This is the first account filmed, it took about 1hr45 mins for an end result of approx 2.5mins of footage to be kept. I feel that the time taken for this was actually pretty good considering we had not been able to memorise all the words on the transcript and were vocalising these for the first time. I have noticed towards the ends of the many of the clips there are rustling sounds which need removing. I want each take to flow into the next as seamlessly as possible so that the editing does not ruin/distract from the account and the words. 

(Above: Account 2)

Filming this account took far less time, after knowing how the lighting needs to be and the ISO setting adjustments so that the image will be clear any tweaks to the visuals of the video did not take long at all. The transcript reading was smoother, though there were still parts where we stumbled over the words. We tried to focus and repeat the lines several times so that Stephanie did not appear to be nervous/overly concentrated in the film. This proved to be effective. By repeating the lines a few times more before recording, we reduced the stumbling over words. Though I will admit to being disappointed at times that some rehearsal takes far better in the moment than recorded bits, this could not be replicated directly as they were candid/improvised. We did a couple takes of Stephanie clutching a healing crystal (as all characters have some form of prop in the footage), but this felt too distracting and gimmicky. We were also cautious not to offend those that use these Crystals and take them seriously. So we decided on not going with that footage and instead using the takes without the Crystal.

 (Above: Account 3)

After discussing the accounts and the process, we both agreed that this was the best account to film. By this point we both felt much more comfortable with the transcript and the takes flowed quite well. We were breaking much less between takes and managed to do this one in about 40 minutes tops.

Did you achieve what you set out to do?

Honestly, not everything that  I "set out" to do the minute I began this project, but I feel I am achieving successful outcomes as the project is naturally progressing. I am making sure to consider all the elements of my PPP when developing and moving from one idea to the next.

How can you make better use of your studio time?

I have been giving myself an itinery daily in attempt to get as much done to the best of my ability and I feel that I have been working quite well whilst in "class". But I definitely feel I am creating better work in my own space at the moment, I find the video editing is very difficult to do in noisy spaces.

What do you intend to achieve/how?

I intend to continue to edit the videos I am creating so that I am able to determine how I would like to progress towards a final piece based on evaluating the finished pieces I have created throughout the project.

During a group crit, I was introduced to the work of Trevor Paglen which I have incorporated into my research component as I feel this is highly relevant to my work. I asked the group about what conspiracies they are familiar with and their opinions. We ended up discussing a conspiracy theory that I've never come across before, apparently a big conspiracy is that Australia does not exist. I have never come across this one before but it just goes to show how many conspiracy theories there are and how easy it is to introduce and circulate a new conspiracy theory. As suspected, everybody joked about the Australia conspiracy theory and it was shrugged off as nonsense. It was only a matter of time when the word conspiracy was linked to the 9-11 incidents. I feel that there are so many conspiracies surrounding the atrocity that it has become potentially the most famous conspiracy theory of all.

Frozen is definitely one of the most impactful things I have seen. I am glad I got to see this during this projects. The play follows a serial killer and pedophile, a criminal psychologist and the mother of  a victim (a child that is killed and sexually abused). It was a deeply disturbing yet effective production. I was drawn to this as I knew the play would be heavily based on monologues and accounts from the characters. The thing that stood out to me the most was the way that through the criminal's description of accounts, he made the audience question the judgement that he was facing, almost pitying him. He had moments where he expressed his vulnerability and said things like "I never wanted to hurt her", but then in different sections he would spiral out of control, allowing the audience to change their minds and feel angered by him. I like the way this play toys with belief, at some points you begin to believe that the criminal is not responsible for the crimes he is committing, that he has a chemical/scientific imbalance (as suggested by the Criminal psychologist). However, towards the end, the play shifts completely and the audience are lead away from the belief that the murder is not his fault. The criminal psychologists gives up on the concept that the criminal is not responsible for the crimes and concludes that he is simply evil and is responsible entirely for all of the crimes he has committed. The whole play was a rollercoaster of belief, disbelief and confusion as to whether you were right or wrong to believe a certain side of the argument. I found this highly relevant for my research about what makes us believe.

Action plan:

• Arrive by 8:30
• Visit Loan store for collection - slot is 10:30, try to collect earlier (at opening time)
• Bring gear back from Loan Store to Archway in time for 11:30
• Install outcome by lunch
• Make final adjustments to presentation as we see fit - lunchtime
• 2pm document the work

All went well in the action plan - in the end. We had to avert a minor crisis today with our sound pieces. The cables that I had spent hours googling to ensure I got a match for my motion detector and acrylic mp3 tile went wrong. I had managed to quickly amend the problem with the Motion detector by placing a last minute additional order via the loan store for a micro chip adaptor. However for the other device (acrylic tile) we had to revert back to the manual for another way to load sound onto it. We ended up searching the campus for a quiet space to record onto the device by playing sound and placing the device near my laptop speaker...the only quiet spot to be found was a toilet cubicle...gross but we managed to get the sound onto the tile without compromising the audio quality. In 5 takes, we were ready to get set up.

When adding the final touches to the set-up of our installation, we decided we no longer wanted the button on a table and the projector needed to be boosted higher. We ended up quickly sourcing a hammer and some nails to fix the button to the wall. We did this at general eye-level to entice visitors to press the button and to experience the interactive element of the work. We were also fortunate enough to source a wooden plinth for the projector, tall enough so that the video would be projected in line with the button to keep the space clear and concise. Had we not managed to get hold of the plinth, we feel the presentation of the video would have suffered a great deal as the height of the projection would have been extremely low - forcing us to move the button far below eye-level.

We learnt a thing or two about being resourceful today when we downloaded a spirit level measuring app to aid us with the presentation of our installation.

Notes on final piece:

Final piece, "Tell it to someone that believes you" is a collaboration with Raphael Delbono. 

We have taken a Colorado UFO account apart and reworked it into something quite different. The video you see is a series of shots taken from the sections of the account that feature empty spaces. The speaker on the ground plays continuous white noise. The black button on the wall - when pressed plays the compilation of music and sounds from the account found between the speech. The MIR Motion detector, attached discretely to the edge of our installation section plays the words "Do you see them? Do you see them" when people are in close proximity (sensitivity stretches four metres). We decided to strategically place the motion detector in a spot that would trigger the sound as soon as a person enters into our installation space. By being present, the viewer is able to build as much of the narrative as they wish to do so, through the amount interacting they are willing to do.