This and That.

It has been a very swift passage of two months. A more 'proper' update is on the way but suffice to say that things are going well in spite of my nose injury and the past three weeks of cold/flu. I seem to be recovering and yes, I do have an appointment to see a GP (although it is predicable that they will simply tell me to do what I am already doing: rest and tea). The most exciting things in my life currently, apart from my research (which is also going well, if slowly, thanks) is that Paul and I are moving in together at the end of the month and I have it on reliable authority that Santa will be bringing me a bike. :)

I won't argue about 'the best' film I've seen recently but will say that my favourite film of the year so far, is the documentary 'Searching for Sugar Man'. (More about that and other topics soon.)

Here is a link to a recent exhibition review for 'Playmakers' at the MAC, posted to The Attic blog:
http://attic-museumstudies.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/the-playmakers-exhibition-celebrating.html

Coming soon: reviews of the 'Summer Sundae Experience, 2012'.

In 'Dry Dock' with Knee Injury . . .

Entrance to 'Dry Dock'.

The past couple of weeks since getting my Nokia have been something of a blur. First of all, I managed to injure my knee on Thursday 26 July, while hastening homeward from a ‘Mapping Place and Faith Conference’ at St. Martin’s House, 9:30AM to 3:30PM. It happened right outside of ‘Very Bazaar’ on Silver Street. I’m not actually sure how it happened. Based upon visual examination of the damage to my shoe, I suspect I tripped upon a loose cobble. Anyway, one moment I was upright and the next I was decelerating a potentially fatal fall to the pavement by dropping my left knee and rolling. Normally I’d come through something like this relatively unscathed; growing up notoriously accident prone, I eventually learned how to take fall and pick myself back up again with the least damage possible.

Snakes and Ladders game outside of 'Dry Dock'.

For whatever reason this particular turn took me entirely off guard. My knee received the brunt of a fall that was probable meant to split my skull. As it happened however my skull was fine while the knee was swollen to twice its size by the time I’d made my way home and I wasn’t able to walk on it for about three days. I was advised to keep off it for a couple of weeks but after resting it for one, the knee seemed much improved. ‘Feeling fine’ I went to Caribbean Carnival (great day out with friends and loved ones)—my knee did 'flare up' a bit (became swollen) the day after. After that little practice effort with Carnival, I let the knee rest and exercised it again after a couple of days.

Inside 'Dry Dock' (quiz night on Wednesdays from 7PM).

I did another walkabout/test excursion with ‘The Family Dunn’. Again the knee again became swollen a bit but certainly not as much as the previous exertion had caused. The gammy knee has been improving steadily ever since. Now, I realise that for the rugby and football players of this world, there is nothing very special about a little scuff to the knee and so, ‘apologies’ to be tedious with the details of my recovery but yes, I am a wimp and yes, I’ve not had a physical injury akin to this since I was about 13! This whole injury process, including the formation of amazingly itch scab-wounds is strange and new (and I hope completely novel).

Many thanks to a passing family and to the shopkeepers of ‘Very Bazaar’—all of whom came rushing over to lend what help they could! I was reminded at that moment what an amazing place to live Leicester is—full of good and caring people.

Of greater interest than my health woes however is that I have a new computer as well as a new phone! For the past week, the majority of my time has been spent troubleshooting the new Mac, learning new versions of Windows office apps, iWork apps, learning about interconnectivity through Social media with mobile phone, discovering the uses of iCloud and Skydrive and more recently discovering how to coordinate between calendars--namely between iCal, Google and Windows Live. I also set up alerts, and sorted home office space.

For the past couple of days I have been reviewing my previous notes from ‘Lines’ by Ingold. I have been reconsidering the concept of display and museum practice in terms of reconstitution of tradition and shared narrative. I updated my training record (which I need to send to the University graduate office soon).

The evenings have been a balance of doing simple, soothing things like laundry, making soup and watching old episodes of Hancock’s Half Hour. I have also been listening to ‘Tame Impala’ and to ‘Opossom’.

Yesterday, Wednesday 8 August was a good day of research and then in the evening, Paul and I had dinner at a place called ‘The Dry Dock’ then went to see ‘Ted’ at the Odeon. Reviewed previous notes from ‘Lines’ by Ingold. Reconsidered the concept of reconstitution in terms of ‘lines’ –as differing interpretations of space—as suggested by Ingold’s discussion of variable approaches to impressing ideas (in writing) onto blank page; Ingold suggests that some of the basic intentionality in the expression of words upon a page may include seeing the blank page as a landscape for a journey, colonization, surface of a body, or (probably almost always a) mirror of a mind.

Oh, one more thing about ‘Dry Dock’—if you go, beware of the gum stuck under the tables. Paul and I found seats on tall stools at a bar-height table under the centre skylight area of ‘the hold’. I had my ‘gammy knee’ propped over my other to leg to elevate it a bit. As it happened, this configuration pushed the top of my leg right up to the underside of the table where a nauseating, humongous glob of gum lie in wait . . . I have since managed to remove most of it but some of it is still stuck to the surface fabric of my skirt, like a strange, polymer haze . . . half inundating the fibers. Any ideas how to launder gum out of cotton-polyester fabric?

What else, what else . . . have I mentioned that Kindle download for Mac is brilliant? Great to be able to get a book immediately, highlight on the screen, add notes, search the document . . . just brilliant! Among other resources, I downloaded/purchased the Kindle version of ‘Lines’ by Ingold –one of the books that I’ve been using to support my thesis argument. Quite useful to be able to start keeping better track all of my research in one general storage arena—all accessible from this one laptop!

Friday 10 August I updated the Orovoco ‘Research Pillow Book’ blog, wrote emails, read articles. 

Weekend: 11 & 12 August Birthday BBQ and housewarming at the Grace family’s new home. Their new place is lovely and everyone seemed to have a great time (so good in fact, that I think many of us were glad of that there was a ‘quiet Sunday’ buffering between the BBQ and Monday).

Nokias, Music Festivals and the Afterlife?

Last night in the café, I dreamed that I was showing my dad my new Nokia (he still thinks I should have gone with an iPhone), when someone (‘Keef’ I think) posted a link to a video of my boyfriend and I, ‘in the afterlife’—in ‘Limbo’ to the exact, having a bit of a set-to.

I was absolutely fuming: “I told you that watching that awful ‘art film’ would kill us, that we would die of boredom and disgust but no, no, you said we had to sit there and finish watching it once we’d started—‘those are the rules’ you said! Now look what your f’n rules have gone and done!” “You have to see the bad ones to appreciate the good ones,” responded Paul patiently. “B-but--WE ARE DEAD NOW PAUL!” I exclaimed. “Yeah, not much use getting all mardy about it now, is it? Done and dusted. Let’s be on our way to Hell . . .” he smiled. “WHAT?!” I cried, “We can’t do that! Most of my family is up in Heaven—or on their way there—we can’t very well just pack up and move off to 'The Infernal Regions', without so much as a ‘hail and a heigh-ho’!” “Text’em.” I stared blankly at Paul, sluggishly stammering and repeating his words back to him like a parrot on Thorazine: “I-Uhhhmm-a-I-I’m--I'm sorry . . . ‘Text them’?” “Yes. ‘Text them’. Send them a nice, friendly little mobile text message now and again—it’ll be fine. Because there is no way I’m going to Heaven. The music is RUBBISH in Heaven—they have far better festivals in Hell . . .”

At some point, I am going to need to post a 'Magnificent Seven' films report for 2011-2012.  'Cabin in the Woods' will probably be on the list . . . (Yes, I did like it and no, did not expect to.)

Social Mediation.

I finally got around to updating my Facebook and Twitter pages, watched Gainsbourg and generally had a lovely, relaxing weekend. Unfortunately, I don't really have time to have had a 'lovely, relaxing weekend'. Ah well. Into every individual existence in a technologically advanced society, a little temporary digital insanity must fall . . . And it (the insanity) is falling away even as I type. Before I depart for the realm of 'due diligence' however, a bit about 'Gainsbourg'. 

Overall I liked it. Surrealist framing was unusual for a biopic genre film but it worked well for Gainsbourg’s story. Lovely sound, cinematography, costuming, editing, staging and settings. I’ve no idea how close the film actually comes to the truth of the man himself or his life but it was certainly very . . . instructive? Well, what I mean is that the film does beg--no, demand--the question: was life/love/society in the 60s really that 'sophisticated' (or rather, that dysfunctional)?

Disciplinarity, Maps of Faith and The Snorgh and the Sailor Book Release

20 April 2012 I attended the ‘Disciplinarity Symposium’, which proved a blend of acknowledgement and debate—acknowledgment of successful programmes that combine the expertise of specialists from diverse disciplines to find solutions to a given research question or questions AND a debate, in the sense that under discussion was the very definition of ‘discipline’ and ‘interdisciplinary’. 

Given the plethora of ideas raised it is difficult to be selective but one that stood out especially (to me) was the supposition that today’s 'academy' believes that the criteria for excellence is that we have ‘better answers to better questions’. I personally do not know how to respond to the concept of ‘better answers to better questions’.  I can somewhat understand the idea of a more or less accurate correlation of one set of information to another set of information but what exactly constitutes a ‘better question’? Better in terms of what?

I do not understand how better or worse enters into things . . . simply new or different questions, or perhaps questions that further understanding--or am I to suppose that is what is meant by better? If so . . . then . . . what might be intended, is that the ‘academy’ or those all working on a particular region of knowledge ask questions and obtain answers to those questions that further a progression toward goals that are perceived to be useful or productive?

Okay. Fine, I suppose. Well no, not entirely fine. I mean, how does one even know that the direction furthered toward isn’t pointless?

You see, to me, that’s the great advantage of the ‘interdisciplinary’ inquiry, or of the collaboration of expertise from different ‘disciplines’—it creates a kind of ‘checks and balances’ dynamic in the construction of knowledge. By sharing differing perspectives and experiences it becomes possible to grasp fuller dimensions of implication, meaning and purpose.

Admittedly I had a TERRIBLE cold/flu that day however and as such was not at my best. I did overall enjoy listening to the differing perspectives. Here is a link to more information about that 'Disciplinarity: Representing Reformation': http://representingreformation.net/get-involved/events/disciplinarity/ 

On 25 Wednesday April I had the opportunity to attend a ‘Mapping Faith’ workshop, which trained attendees in the use of an application called ‘Mediascape’, to create media-imbued, mobile maps. I think it will prove quite useful in the creation of an interactive, hyper-cartographical narratives as ancillary commentary and information support for the thesis case studies I’m currently working on. Here is a link to more information about the 'Mapping Faith and Place' project: http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/archaeology/research/projects/mapping-faith

The Snorgh and the Sailor Book Release Party was on 26 Thursday, April at the ‘Crumblin’ Cookie’. During the gathering, the audience was treated to a ‘story time’ complete with participatory opportunity (the audience provided the sound effects for accompaniment to the story). Here is a lovely link to more information about the book, its author, Will Buckingham and the illustrator, Thomas Docherty: http://www.dmu.ac.uk/dmu-staff/news/the-snorgh-and-the-sailor-book-launch.aspx

Liminalities of the Heart.

On Monday 09 April my mother informed me that my paternal grandfather Eddie James had passed away the previous Friday, 06 April 2012. During the past fourteen months, I have lost my father (February 2011), my 'godmother three' Nancy Hall (November 2011), my paternal grandmother Lucille Smith James (December 2011) and now, my paternal grandfather as well. For the most part, I am doing well . . . but sometimes (or most of the time), I am unable take in the measure of it all--of having to negotiate safe passage through the many changes. Yet I know I'm not alone; that there are so many of us in this life, making our way through the 'heavy weather'. I wish for us all, the strength we need, when and as we need it.

Maps as Mirrors of Mentality

‘Maps as Mirrors of Mentality’: An Interview with Peter Barber.

On 12 Thursday April, I had a wonderful opportunity to converse with Peter Barber, Head of Map Collections, British Library, London. The central focus of our discussion had to do with the disposition of ‘truth’ in relation to maps as a representation of ‘reality’.  The writer/editor of such books as ‘Tales from the Maps Room’, ‘The Map Book’, and ‘Magnificent Maps’ (which was written in support of the ‘Magnificent Maps’ exhibition in 2012), Barber argues that maps mirror the mentality of those that make them--of the politics, propaganda and aesthetic sensibilities of the context from which and for which, maps are created.  It was a fascinating conversation. Recently, Peter Barber contributed to the BBC 4 broadcast discussion of Drake’s Circumnavigation Medal, as part of “Shakespeare’s Restless World’ exhibition preparation. For more about these topics, please visit:

http://www.bl.uk/magnificentmaps/

and

http://www.britishmuseum.org/about_us/news_and_press/press_releases/2012/shakespeare_radio_series.aspx

Sunny Goodge Street.

Meme Post 8: Felgary Times 'Conclusive Evidence' from 2003

Felgary Times: Conclusive Evidence.

From 2003.12.02 05.10

Netherworld Times, Felgary UFN.

After several years of closure for repair, researchers from the Scientific Institute of Nether were allowed to conduct comprehensive tests of the road to Hell, determining that the government sanctioned paving materials currently used are indeed primarily a composite of good intentions.

In spite of the commonly held belief (that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions), the Bureau for Architectural Dalliances has for centuries maintained that paving materials were assuredly made out of the finest rubble of free advice.

Cohort Construction (long standing “provisioneer” of paving composites for all main roadways of Nether and of Felgary Proper) has publicly contended that as far as they are concerned there is very little difference between good intentions and free advice. Spokesperson Devlyn Side is quoted as saying:

"Though generally less durable, good intentions are believed to be better for the environment than free advice but honestly, in application, good intentions and free advice are often difficult to tell apart."

Mr. Side went on to explain that in recent years the quality control department of Cohort had noticed that the raw materials shipments for paving composite had been a little heavy on good intentions and had reported the fact to officials at the Central Processing. Central Processing subsequently released a report stating that based upon popular public interest in environmental issues, that it was all probably for the best.

Though unavailable for comment, it is believed that those officials responsible for approving the use of weak paving materials meant well and had the best interests of the common good at heart. Possible planning for the complete demolition and reconstruction of the road to Hell is currently under consideration.

Next Weeks Special Edition Feature: Chronic Housing Shortage in Purgatory Expected to Worsen.

David Fleming's Review of 'Museums Matter' in March Issue of 'Museums Journal'.

Fascinating quotes from David Fleming's recent review of James Cuno's 'Museums Matter', as the review was published in the March issue of 'Museums Journal':

"Cuno's thesis rests on his belief that the encyclopedic museum is a "cosmopolitan" institution that gathers examples of the world's diverse cultures under a single roof. This enables the consideration of the relationships between them, and allows the encyclopedic museum to dissipate ignorance and superstition and promote tolerance. This is a seductive point of view: the encyclopedic museum as bringer of international peace. My 10-year-old daughter Ruby would sign up for that vision, because she loves museums and she believes in world peace (she also loves babies and puppies too). If only little things such as national, ethnic and cultural self-determination, and geography and noisy, democratically elected foreign politicians, didn't get in the way of this utopian vision . . . This is an interesting, chatty and provocative little book, full of opinion and cultural insight. It may not be very convincing, but it's well worth a read, if only to marvel at Cuno's blend of passion, self-righteousness, disdain and paranoia: attributes no museum director should be without." (p.56)

.

.

.

. . . As pleased as I am to see someone admirably taking a stand and speaking/writing their mind, with an exceedingly entertaining and well-spoken (if scathingly sardonic) argument, I find myself searching the heavens (for the other spiked-soled shoe to drop)!

Oh! And I LOVE the editor's 'understated' introductory subtitle for this piece:

'David Fleming is skeptical about this defence of the encyclopedic museum' . . .

'Scuse, 'skeptical', Maurice? :D

Overall, brilliant reading! I am very much looking forward to the next issue . . .

From 'Theatre of Compliments' (1688)

Two quotes from 'Theatre of Compliments' published in 1688:

An overture excerpt from 'Amourous Expressions of Gentlemen to Ladies, Gentlewomen, Maidens, &c.':

~'Madam, my desires make me as careful to please you, as I am bound by duty and compell'd by inclination to serve you.'

A response excerpt from 'Expressions of Ladies and Gentlewomen to Gentlemen':

~'Sir my appetite is sick, for want of a capacity to digest your favours.'

*Please note in the headings--gentleman were apparently allowed to express their intentions to EVERYONE whereas ladies and gentlewomen were only allowed to reveal their feelings to gentlemen . . . and quite carefully, at that! Still, as I read through some of the conversations in 'TofC' it seemed a wonder (to me) that anyone at that time, was ever able to be certain of what anyone else was actually thinking, based upon conversation alone. 'Theatre of Compliments' provides a fascinating glimpse into 17th century society.

A Question Never to Ask of a Lover When They Leave You.

“Why?”

No-no-no, not that; never that. One must never ask a lover ‘why’ they are leaving (no matter how much you might want to). If one doesn’t know, then that is the answer--or at least, the most important one.

If one needs to ask ‘why’, it means that the reason either has nothing to do with you and therefore it is unlikely that your actions will change the outcome, or it means that the reason has everything to do with you and apparently, you have not even realised that this is the situation.

If this is the case, it doesn’t do to go scrambling after them, cap in hand, because it means that in order to cause one’s beloved to feel ‘beloved’, one would need to change so profoundly that ‘you’ would no longer be ‘you’. If your lover wants you to change THAT MUCH, then they don’t love you any further than you love them. You both love the idea you have of one another, not the person you each (respectively and respectfully) 'are'.

In a way, it should be a relief. But it’s exceedingly cold comfort, isn’t it . . . the understanding that when someone leaves you with no apparent reason, there is nothing to be done for it . . . one of those situations in which the answer to a question does nothing to assuage one’s ignorance, sorrow and self-doubt. One of those ‘answers’ that invariably leads to more questions and more answers in a series of diminishing returns.

“But—but what shall I do with all these feelings I don’t want to have (can’t bear)?” the broken heart asks.

“Grow” says the crocus struggling up from a crack in the street.

“Smile” says the bright sunshine on a cold day.

“Endure” says the ticking of a clock on the sideboard.

“Be grateful” says the setting sun.

“Seek oblivion” says the drunken sky.

“Seek vengeance” says a temperamental wind, tearing the last stubborn, crackling leaves from barren branches.

“Dream” says the empty cup in the small hours.

I have heard them all before, these old friends; their tired and familiar advice encircling the world like a sagacious ozone layer of good intentions, becoming quite thin in places. And so, I am not listening to any of them today.

Of greater interest at the moment, is my neighbour, a raven, balanced on the roof opposite my window. Raven carefully fluffs up and smoothes its feathers, ceremoniously flexing its wings and tamping the dusty stone with its talons, meditatively dislodging bits moss, its sad eyes bright in the dawn, calling out into an ambivalent Sunday: “I am! I am! I am!”

I am. I am. I am.

In Review—‘Bingo’ at the Young Vic.

Bingo is a play about the end of Shakespeare’s life, the title presumably having something to do with the concept of ‘when one’s number is up’. (This last is pure conjecture—no actual evidence to support this.) Whatever the case, I’ve been having a time of it correcting confusion among my friends, when I brightly say: “I had a good time at ‘Bingo’ last night”.

And I did—have lovely time. It was in some ways a little disappointing as well, though. ‘Zounds it makes me mad’—that this could have been a brilliant production but as yet, it isn’t. I say ‘as yet’, because it is, after all, early in the run . . . a short run (six weeks) however leaving little time to ‘get it right’. I've made bold (very bold) of making a few notes/suggestions.

Begin Notes:

This is what ‘Bingo’ at ‘Young Vic’ needs to do:

1. The most BASIC fix, TIMING. Actors! Pick up your cues, please! If you really must indulge in numerous and well-past-the-due-date pregnant pauses, do so AFTER saying the first couple of words of your lines! If the problem is that you can’t remember your lines, run them with someone until you can (remember them in a ‘timely’ fashion).

2. Block the action to encourage ensemble performance—right now, in many of the scenes the actors seem to be delivering their lines like they are little islands of personal angst in a sea of monotonous vocal delivery. We all know that one would not be an actor if they didn’t want to be the centre of attention, but let us see some ‘playing’, ‘eh players? Also, and this is important, more disjunction of physical contact between Judith and Shakespeare is necessary. When she reaches for him, he should be ‘just missing it’ and/or or turning away, and she should be doing the same. Of course, there would need to be more 'reaching out' taking place (than currently is taking place) for this to read well.

3. ‘Mind the Gap’ by making those lovely times of breaching the fourth wall, more definite. Theatre-in-the-round is good and the integration of the set changes is brilliant. But if you intend to have very few or no definite SIGNALS for the audience, communicating that the show/scene has started or ended, you undercut the narrative. The audience might be struggling as it is to recall the historical events/context of the play without having to figure out if the scene has actually started or ended. If the goal behind this ‘innovative’ staging is to create the atmosphere of a genuine Elizabethan theatre experience (which would be fun if perhaps too surreal), why not add intermission entertainers, roving food vendors and a narrative commentator/herald. Oh, and a dog. People love dogs.

4. Vary the tone of delivery throughout the performance. During the second act, the things overall improve greatly but please, remember to regularly vary the tone of delivery. It’s a play, not a lecture. (For that matter, even lecturers have learned from experience that if you never vary the tone and volume of delivery, your audience will fall asleep.)

5. Instead of treating the play as a ‘serious drama’ think if it as a ‘serious comedy’ or better still, a ‘comedic tragedy’.

6. “It’s all a put-up job.” When Shakespeare in Bingo says this, the line is partially referential to one of Shakespeare’s most famous lines, that ‘All the world’s a stage and all the men and women merely players’. All the characters in Bingo, except Shakespeare, should be portraying themselves as a curious blend of ‘fan’ and posturing dramatist/actor, trying desperately to impress ‘The Bard’ (in order to achieve their own personal agenda). All the way through the play it should be this way. Shakespeare is a celebrity and at every moment of his life people are trying to ‘be noticed’ by him and get something from him. He plays along for the most part, in good humour (even though it does get very tiresome at times).

He is at the end of his life and is in crisis. Of what value is his work--in terms of alleviating human suffering in the world? Has he changed anything for anyone, for the better? Lessened injustice and bloodshed? For all of his material success, was he truly successful? It is the sort of self-doubt that transforms Shakespeare from god-like iconic historical figure back into a man—a good man that has made mistakes but overall done the best he can. Shakespeare essentially asks: "Is the world a better place for my having lived in it?" For most of us I suspect it is impossible to answer this sort of question with certainty. It is an excellent problem for thought however; one that hopefully inspires the audience to similar self-examination.

7. Rethink the interpersonal dynamics and character interpretations. As an example, Shakespeare in Bingo describes his wife (my interpretation of his words) as a silly, melodramatic, manipulative, overly emotional, materialistic, comical self-absorbed harpy that does nothing all day but cry. He tells his daughter Judith that she takes after her mother. Yet for the duration of the play previous to this revelation we have seen Judith characterised as a seriously ill-used, contemptuous, unsympathetic, bitter and angry woman--not particularly entertaining and a characterisation very much in conflict with how Shakespeare apparently sees her. What should the audience make of this?

In reality Judith probably is a bitter, angry and put-upon, unloved daughter (ignored by a self-interested mother and distant father). This is probably what the character internally ‘is’—but it should not necessarily be what the character externally does. The portrayal of all those ‘harpy lines’ Judith’s character is burdened with, need to be delivered with as much overtly demonstrative fervour and manipulative theatricality as possible. As another example, in the final scenes of the play, with the mother wailing in the hall and Judith going on about what a terrible man Shakespeare is for locking them out of his room (his death chamber, mind you), while they stand screaming for him to let them in . . . well, the man is DYING and his wife and daughter are laying a guilt trip on him!

Shakespeare says to his housekeeper (who has been allowed in), that it has been thirty years of this (domestic pattern)—of his wife and daughter using emotional outbursts to get money and security out of him. Now, the audience probably are aware that Shakespeare—as an artist/playwright—posits that everyone and everything around him is a performance. Are we to believe that he is right in this assessment of life or deluded? Should we see Shakespeare simply as a man that is paranoid and emotionally unavailable to his family?

We know from the sonnets that the loss of his son was devastating; Shakespeare viewed it not only with the abiding and relentless grief that a parent feels upon the death of a child, in his case his son (Sonnet XVIII), but he also would have seen the death of his son as the death of himself—of his chance to see himself when old, mirrored in the young and handsome face of a succeeding male heir (Sonnet II). The audience would probably prefer to side with Shakespeare--he is the protagonist and a sympathetic historical figure. The audience therefore will probably believe that though somewhat non-demonstrative because of personal and political depression, Shakespeare is essentially right about his family and the world: many people are manipulative, ceremonious and melodramatic, wittingly or unwittingly using sentiment as a political weapon (housed in the best of intentions). For the purposes of ‘Bingo’ such an interpretation would certainly make way for more amusing performances!

At the close of the play, for example instead of explosion of screams better suited to one of the plays from the ‘Oedipus Cycle’, why not wail with obvious melodrama to counter Stewart’s portrayal of a dying Shakespeare, balancing his reaction between ‘here we go again’ against a sense of guilt and responsibility, against just wanting to please die in peace! And after his collapse, with Judith shuffling through his papers to make sure there is no other will than the one he has slid under the door moments before, shouting to her mother not lamentations of her father’s death but indeed, that there is no other will, it would appear that not even in death does the relentless din of expectations end; the rest, for the likes of poor Shakespeare, falls quite short of silence.

BTW: Judith needs a better moment in confrontation with the death of her father. Even if she hated the man (and it isn't entirely clear that she does), it would be the moment when she realises that the war is over; that’s an important moment. I (admittedly and rather boldly) recommend that she ‘connect’ with the corpse somehow (hands on hands, head or chest--what seems 'honest' to the actors), asking: ‘Why didn’t you open the door?’ (or something very like), then compose herself, push herself away and turn to the real (more important from her perspective) task at hand, of sifting through her father's things.

*Update: if Shakespeare's 'last will and testament' ('The Will') is so important, if the whole play is about the disposition of his work and properties, about the relationship between wealth and emotional attachments . . . 'The Will' needs to be introduced as a focal object, contention and symbol--as 'The Will' and the will, if you will--at the BEGINNING of the play as a 'bookending' device for the narrative structure (to give a sense of thematic opening and closure of the story).

End Notes.

The audience should have laughed their way through this play, but left the theatre in tears. I very nearly did myself (leave the theatre in tears)—not for what it was, but for what it could have been. All that said, it was a perfectly fine production. The costumes were lovely. The set design in cooperation with how the changeovers were conducted was somewhat innovative. The lighting was nicely done--the sound design however, had brilliance and finesse.

Though I particularly enjoyed the sterling performances by: Patrick Stewart (Shakespeare), John McEnery (Old Man), Richard McCabe (Ben Jonson), Ellie Haddington (Old Woman), by Michelle Tate (Young Woman) and a young man that kept rather entertainingly flinging his arms about like an orphaned fledgling at one point (Tom Godwin as ‘Wally’ I think), everyone turned in good, solid performances. I was happy to attend and wish for ‘Bingo’ a successful run.

Applied Ethics and Museum Practice: Uneasy Embedding Fellows?

I attended Strategies for Introducing and Embedding a New Museum Ethics in the Museum Sector yesterday with Jocelyn Dodd and Dr. Janet Marstine. It was a wonderful session. It is possible however that their argumentative approach to the project thesis, will be vulnerable to a dismissive reception (on the part of 'those on the front lines' of museum practice). The reality of curatorial practice is that practitioners are already, ‘embedding’ ethics into their daily work—granted, perhaps not the ethics that might be by some considered the most desirable, but ethics, none-the-less, which are thoroughly embedded. Does the project mean to suggest that ‘embedding’ ethics into practice is something new? The conscious recognition that ethics underpins all action may be considered by some to be novel; ethics-as-pervasive however, is not a novel phenomena. To me, transformation of practice is not about ‘initiating’ the embedding of ethics—it is about changing the ethics that are already ‘embedded’ (when and if necessary).

We discussed observations about an objectified version of traditional practice as opposed to what was described as a more desirable, contemporary version of museum practice. I believe that if we are to propose strategy for constructive change, the actual questions for discussion necessarily become:

1. What are the ethics currently embedded?

2. Are the ethics that are currently embedded in keeping with professed institutional or personal objectives for ethical conduct (or more explicitly with ‘self-image’, ‘reputation’ and ‘mission’)?

3. Subsequent to exploration of these two questions, are the professed ‘ethics’ currently embedded, conducive to the ‘integrity’ of museum practice, to collections management and to the display, interpretation and conservation of collections?

How can you transform an embedded ethic if you don’t recognise its profound presence and understand its dynamic characteristics, from the start? It is quite complicated really, because this kind of change is an intensely personal journey that must be traversed by each institution and museum practitioner, as prescribed by the requirements of the a particular collection, particular social priorities and particular display conditions. (I hope it is difficult to miss the emphasis on 'particular' in this last observation.) We can—and must—have laws, general guidelines, political sympathies, alliances (discussions with friends and colleagues)—these are critical to how a healthy society and professional community is maintained.

But when it comes down to it, a curator somewhere, is going to be rummaging in a room, checking to see if what the database says is stored in box 221b is really still in 'box 221b' and to what extent the object has (or has not) been eaten by beetles. Depending upon the character of the person (museum practitioner) themselves and depending upon how well they are feeling, how their personal life is going, their perceived value of and evaluation of the object etc. the museum practitioner will respond to the object differentially, acting out of an ethical basis of what we might term ‘practicality’ or ‘necessity’, out of hedonism, utilitarianism, pragmatism, idealism etc. Consciously or unconsciously, whatever is the current 'embedded ethic' is bound to actualise as ‘Applied Ethics’ in the design and production of Regency Swag as Fashion Legacy or whatever else the next exhibition turns out to be. Curators tend to share what they identify as fascinating and/or valuable.

This then illuminates from my perspective one of the most critical aspects of research and professional ‘networks’. There is I think, no one in the museums sector that I have met, that does not love ‘things’ and is not passionate about protecting the social narrative that objects embody. Indeed, some of us may be introverts or shy, but I haven’t met anyone in museum practices that does not want to share ‘embodied social narrative’ with others. Additionally, I have observed the same enthusiasm in conservators of all mediums, in archivists and in librarians. We are in a sense, ‘The Nation of Narrative’, a culture with sub-cultures, each with its own administrative rituals and devotions. (I apologise that this structure is somewhat ‘Eurocentric’—I was raised in a European education system and am discussing a profession that is founded primarily upon a European paradigm—thus, a ‘Eurocentric’ perspective is currently employed.)

Passion is an essential energy necessary to the sometimes (often?) challenging task of ‘protecting and sharing embodied narrative’. It is the unfortunate case however that this ‘passion’ we all share occasionally works against a healthy balance between conformity and independence. Ultimately accountability for work we do daily falls upon our own shoulders, yet we are expected to be supportive of community/institutional administration and guidelines. It makes sense that everyone has a vested interest in how these 'rules' will impact the decisions that must be made in daily practice and therefore, as a community, it can be difficult to come to an agreement about ‘guidelines’ for practice (that everyone is happy with). The museum community has been known to argue for decades on some subjects (well, let us face it, on some subjects the argument is ongoing and never likely to be settled).

Obviously if contention goes on indefinitely no progress is made (or at the least it seems to be made very slowly). I find it difficult however, to think of anyone in my profession as a true antagonist. I see us all as ‘on the same side’, struggling to make the best decisions we can under any given circumstances—circumstances not always under personal control. I am not entirely comfortable however with this idea that we should form little groups of 'right-minded people' that are all in agreement with each other, and who are strategically placed to 'influence' the rest of the stodgy, 'wrong-minded people'--and then call this approach, an 'innovative' strategy for social change.

Neither do I think that this was was precisely the operative dynamic of the project as reported at the lecture/seminar yesterday. I do however firmly believe that social fractionalisation, fostered with the best of intentions, is a potential hazard in any process of disciplinary 'transformation'. There is always a risk of forgetting to respect each other for our differing perspectives as well as the subjects we agree upon.

I fear the tone of this response is unsupportive and that is assuredly not the intent. The concepts of ‘shared guardianship and authority’, ‘responsive vs. reactive’ planning, of collegiality and the sharing of experiences (often called 'networking') are all very much in keeping with my own personal ‘embedded’ ethic. I enjoyed the session. It was a welcome discussion of a project of tremendous merit. I simply worry that there is a potential for the project to be perceived as defensive and elitist (when that perception couldn’t be further from the truth).

Personal Soapbox: 'Intangible Heritage'?

I am frequently flummoxed by how inadequate language often is to the task of explicating experience. Take for example, UNESCO’s concept of ‘Intangible Heritage’. Now, I think I understand the concept of ‘intangible’ and of ‘heritage’. But UNESCO includes the following cultural expressions as forms of ‘Intangible Heritage’:

a. Oral traditions and expressions (including language as a vehicle of the intangible cultural heritage);

b. Performing arts;

c. Social practices, rituals and festive events;

d. Knowledge and practice about nature and the universe;

e. Traditional craftsmanship.

In what way are any of these expressions of heritage, intangible? One might argue that they are in some way or ways, ‘transient’ expressions of heritage but none are ‘intangible’ at the time they are happening. If experienced ‘second hand’, such events are invariably shared through some form of mediation such as filmic media, audio recording, physical drawing or sculpture. None of these mediations may considered ‘intangible’. Arguably even memory is not ‘intangible’: it is a biochemical and neurological process which becomes a physical ‘object of experience/memory’ stored and filed in an organic database (potentially subject to destruction in the case of physical injury, environmental insult, illness or some other form of trauma).

I know my opinion will count for very little but I think UNESCO might do well to reconsider its choice of words.

Catching up: Some of the Highlights from the Past (OMG) TWO Months!

How can it have been TWO MONTHS since the last time I wrote something here? Well. Here is 'something', such as it is.

7 January: London: Visited V&A, Natural History Museum and Science Museum in London with mum; can’t believe that her month-long visit is already over! She returns to the USA tomorrow. In other news, my birthday today has been ‘upstaged’ by the next generation (really as it should be). Beyonce gave birth to a beautiful baby girl today. :) ‘Merry Christmas’ to all the Eastern Orthodox Ukrainians of the world!

*Authorial Note: I did do quite a lot between 7 January and 26 January but it was mostly 'the dailies'--reading, research, report. Oh, and the monitor data admin. I did have a lovely if brief conversation with Janet Berry that led to my joining-up with a conservators news group! Very grateful for that connection.

Thursday 26 January: London: Natural History Museum Seminar, Dr. Chris Lyal on Nagoya Protocol, Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) and also: British Library research day.

NHM seminar with Lyal was a very informative session. The main interests from my perspective were that the legalities involved currently, require a much more friendly-if-formal, personable (if you will) building of relationships and an international infrastructure for researchers in collection, in the field. Had lovely conversation with Chris Lyal afterwards about the overlap between Nagoya and UNESCO priorities regards ‘Traditional Knowledge’.

Friday 27 January: Nottingham: Nottingham Contemporary –the Demand Opening.
Brilliant opening, well-attended. Under-whelmed by Demand. ‘The Wall’ DJ duo were a bit too loud volume wise, to be the ‘chill’ ambient music they were billed to be. Additionally, they were, at the start using signal waveforms designed to modify the audiences brainwaves patterns . . . to create a kind of experiential ‘tabla rasa’ in audience consciousness, before applying their own, inoculation of music/image patterning (it was a bit heavy handed, imho; please see soapbox below). The ‘arts community’ of Nottingham appeared to have turned out ‘in force’ and as mental lapse would have it, I forgot my camera! Memory image that remains in my mind: mother and 2 or 3 year-old child looking down into the ‘black box’ concert lecture theatre, child in wonder at the scene below, mother in wonder at the child.

Authorial note/soapbox about ‘The Walls’:
I liked them very much, but I don’t approve of using light, image and sound to profoundly manipulate/hypnotise unwary people, and yes, such ‘hypnosis’/entrainment CAN be done—it pretty much happens quite naturally—and yes, more and more artists are ‘experimenting’ with sonorous ‘mood control’ that they don’t really understand, to the potential detriment of the audience. Using light, image and sound to mess about with the brainwave patterns of the audience, when you DO NOT know what you are doing (are perhaps just ‘curious to see what will happen’) is a little like the difference between giving the uninitiated a brandied chocolate and giving them a shot of heroine, while not actually knowing for certain which substance you are administering to said uninitiated! It is a bit irresponsible. Such artistic practice is a particularly unforgivable application of a/v spectacle, when some of the ‘uninitiated’ are children! And there WERE children present! As for myself, fortunately, I had my earplugs with me, tied myself to my sturdy sense-of-self mast and transited the dangerous aesthetic waters relatively unscathed. Again, overall it was a brilliant opening. I continue to be very impressed with Nottingham Contemporary and their active engagement of the community.

Wednesday 1 February, London:

I completed my Reader Registration Process at the British Library, researched renaissance ballads regarding objects and ceremony (or tried to) and visited the Transport Museum—including their film event ‘Future Cities’. Interesting, not perhaps what the audience was expecting. Well attended, but audience did not seem to understand that there was a discussion with the artists available after the viewing. Still, admirable start to the new community dialogue direction the Transport Museum appears interested in.

I asked the artists about how, once they have completed a long session of working, their perceptions of the world are—or are not—altered. They had various responses, everything ranging from:

“The management of the studio building think I’m homeless because I never seem to leave my work station for more than a, uh, ‘tea break’”

to

“After a long session at the computer, I have a little difficulty actually talking to you know, friends, family . . . my producer/employer (who wants to know why what I proposed is so different from what I have actually created)”,

to

“Wait, are you saying that this situation, here and now is, like, ‘real’? Are you sure?” :)

My three favourite moments at the Transport Muse: the elevator time machine, the audio rivalry between the two separate braces of horses and sitting up-top one of the early double-deckers (with the signs in the back clearly stating that ‘spitting is prohibited’).

Thursday 2 February 2012: Leicester: Worked on paper. Updated CV. Discovered that I need to transfer my Mobile Me website to . . . ‘someplace else’. All very bothersome. I booked for an open study day at the British Library for 10 February. I worked on my current paper; I’m afraid that at the rate things are going, it will not be very polished, nor well-cited.


3 February overnight to 4 February: London

London British Library Research Day, followed by evening lecture Sublime Words, Ridiculous Images; Visual Humour in the Royal Manuscript Collection with Dr. Alixe Bovey. Self-explanatory, but focussed again on relationship between objects and agency as well as 19th and 20th century engagement traditions and marriage-as-contract. Dr. Bovey’s lecture was delightful! I do think it difficult however for us to separate the reality of the Middle Ages from the Post-Victorian ‘cultural lenses/filters’ that even today, influence popular notions about the past. Is it possible that the people of the Middle Ages were actually more ‘self-aware’ of their own ‘humanity’ than we are today (in these supposedly ‘enlightened’ times)?

I also visited the Foundling Museum. It was not at all what I imagined, based upon the website. More than this, I am ill-prepared to say for now.


Today marks the one-year anniversary of my father’s death. My thoughts have been with him, and how he would have enjoyed seeing London, how he would have marvelled at the wonderful books I have access to, the lectures I attend, the places I have the opportunity to go to, the trains I travel on and architectural beauty all around me. He would have loved the architecture of St. Pancras Station and the Natural History Museum. In all of his life, he never lost his sense of ‘wonderment’ nor ceased to take pleasure in the world. I miss him, his thoughts, his company. He gave the very best hugs in the known universe. (Actually, I suspect them to be the best hugs in the unknown universe as well but that leads to a certain difficulty—the minute that I prove the fact, the unknown becomes the known, yes?)

They say it will snow this weekend but really, how often are those ‘weather-folk’ right? I mean, it is quite cold but the sky is clear and the sun is shining!

Weekend: It snowed on Saturday. :) Papa would have liked that. I sent a draft copy of my current paper to Sandra on Sunday. Other than that, simply worked on monitor admin and made appointments for next week. I feel as though I have been asleep since the end of November (Thanksgiving, USA 2011) and am slowly rousting very unsteadily from my slumbers.