Month: April 2016

Context, Creation, and Conversation in the “Electronic Literature and Its Emerging Forms” Exhibit

“It’s all about challenging conventions . . . We must experiment with ways beyond objects” (Obrist, 148).

Electronic Literature and Its Emerging Forms enjoyed a large in-person audience and online presence, ultimately reaching over 4800 people during the reporting period (20 March 2013 through 12 April 2013). This exhibition showcased “27 works of electronic literature by American authors, relevant printed works from the Library of Congress collections, readings by select authors featured in the exhibit, and hands-on creation stations” (Electronic Literature and Its Emerging Forms).

These impressions however, should be considered as groundbreaking. Not only did the exhibit feature works of e-lit (pieces of art that are not traditionally viewed as art objects), but it also made an effort to contextualize and promote creativity and thought through the designated “Context” and “Creation” stations:

“We’ve designed the physical space to promote flow between literary and cultural ‘Contexts’ and ‘Creation Stations,’ where guests can ‘get their hands dirty’ making art using techniques from e-lit’s present and past” (Berens).

Such a layout is unconventional, experimenting with ways to better understand e-lit and its connections to older forms of art, while, at the same time, infusing the exhibit with further interaction and conversation. As Ulrich Obrist champions, it is advised, if not absolutely necessary, “to ‘complexify’ . . . and to introduce other viable models [of curation], experiment with other circuits . . . ‘routine is the enemy’” (146).

In a way, this “creation, production, realization, and promotion of ephemeral [exhibits]” also helps the act of conversation take place (Obrist, 167). The methodology of deliberately creating “Work,” “Context,” and “Creation” stations promotes an environment ripe for interaction and discussion, so much so that even curators Dene Grigar and Kathi Inman Berens write that they:

“believe the exhibit delivers an experience that the digital alone cannot convey, the serendipity of conversation among guests chief among these things” (Electronic Literature and Its Emerging Forms).

Throughout the experience, diverse visitors conversed with one another, building what Obrist calls “hundreds of pedestrian bridges to hundreds of communities who then converge and create new encounters” (169). With these moments of speech enmeshed throughout the typical viewing experience, visitors received a rich and inherently unique look at the exhibit, stumbling upon authors, teachers, enthusiasts, or others just passing by.

In all, this multi-layered experience — enhanced by creativity and historical context — ultimately developed a new curatorial methodology, delivering interactivity and community to a diverse body of individuals. It is clear that curators must take these ideas into account and further build upon them — doing so will attract, capture, and enlighten visitors, new and old.

Works Cited
Obrist, Hans Ulrich, and April Elizabeth. Lamm. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Curating: But Were Afraid to Ask. Berlin: Sternberg, 2011. Print.

Best Practices and Ideas Exhibited within the New Text Exhibition

The New Text exhibition featured at the International Symposium on Electronic Art (ISEA) in Vancouver, British Columbia, attracted artists far and wide. With submissions from Canada, Australia, and even Sweden, this group of renowned creatives represents a diverse amalgamation of geographies and cities – something that, veteran curator, Hans Ulrich Obrist deems as “necessary” and beneficial for the curatorial process (90). Not only this, but the New Text exhibition paralleled a number of other ideas and practices championed and encouraged by Obrist, in the end reflecting the contemporaneity as well as the ultimate success of the New Text exhibition.

At first glance, these pieces of literary art chosen for the New Text exhibition all grew out of instructions, and as such, many of these works – especially those derived from computer code – reflect the idea that “the instruction, not the object, is the work” (Obrist, 49). In fact, some of these works also represent a shift in artistic practice – the rise of performative works. As Obrist remarks, “art continues to be, for the large part, a story of objects” (49). However, with algorithmic pieces like Johannes Helden and Hakon Johnson’s Encyclopedia and Jody Zellen’s Spine Sonnet – that procedurally change over time – we see an ephemerality almost exactly like words, dance, and/or music. Both of these examples randomly generate new patterns and words upon interaction, revealing an infinite number of possibilities (which are very similar to the dynamic conversations prescribed by Obrist).

The New Text Exhibition Team

The New Text Exhibition Team

On another note, as a docent for the New Text exhibition, I watched as many guests traveled in and out, making sure to be as helpful as possible, without being too controlling. It was essential to let these individuals dictate their experience, allowing them full freedom within the space. Obrist knows this all too well, advocating for “a nonlinear experience” since works “don’t reveal themselves instantly” (92). This ability to return should not be compromised; it should be encouraged and facilitated through helpful dialogue and meaningful conversation.

“It was more important how many hours the visitors spent in the show. It’s better to have a few thousand spend an entire day with the show rather than 300,000 run through it” (Obrist, 48).

In all, the New Text exhibition is very akin to the exhibits described as well as the practices advocated by curator Obrist. It is clear that future exhibitions should take these ideas into account – especially those regarding nonlinearity and diversity – while also innovating in other areas.

Works Cited
Obrist, Hans Ulrich, and April Elizabeth. Lamm. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Curating: But Were Afraid to Ask. Berlin: Sternberg, 2011. Print.