differance

Qubits and rebuilding my world by Justin Harrison


Uh oh now I’m in trouble, I’d forgotten my interest in Quantum physics - that it also entertains the binary disruption by permitting both to be possible at the same time. And yet why do I separate my art and physics - psychologically I compartmentalise them, yet they are one and the same.

I discovered a short video on programming a Quantum Qubit and how it models the existence of non binary states. I don’t know how much I can get into this as its counter to my preferred ways of thinking - I’m not mathematical or science inclined so it’s a push.

Libby Heaney is an award winning, London based artist with an unusual background. She holds a PhD and worked as a researcher in quantum physics - a discipline Einstein called “spooky” and Penrose said “makes absolutely no sense”.

Now resident at Somerset House Studios in London, Heaney creates sticky entanglements between moving image, performance, installation, sculpture and print, usually combining these with advanced technologies such as machine learning, game engines & quantum computing - a new type of computer that processes information based on the weird laws of quantum physics.

Now this get’s interesting for me because it begins to draw the key areas I’m interested around Derrida - difference, Khora and kinetics out of academic theory into science and the physical world. She discusses removing the emphasis from the individual as modelled in modern western philosophy into a deep interconnectivity. To the point that with entanglement of atoms, photons they become impossibly connected and loose their individuality, so deeply connected - that if you try to remove an individual out it destroys the system.

She says that reality isn’t about individuality but relationality.

Again I feel the sense of the kinetic and the Khora. Somehow there is a remodelling of priorities down to a quantum level. What we count as the logic blocks of our existence are deconstructed and represented.


 

Interstices by Justin Harrison


In the intersticies the edges are blurred , indefined, indistinct. There is no clear demarcation, margin, boundary. Yet the apperature is clearly perceivable.

The liminal represents the free play, the opportunity for change. The change in the angle of vision, the change in space, time, concept. It is the opening up, where deconstruction can operate freely and generate the new. Broader passages of movement.

Hauntology, spectral, third space, void these too are different angles of vision through interstices.

Everything and nothing, liminal and void, inside and outside, interior and exterior. These appear binary terms - where is in between these? Differance?

We fear change. Being in passage. The moments of uncertainty. Movement.

Change - Passage - Is movement.

Again - Differance free play.

Stasis is a little death. Stagnancy.

Do I make ritualised tools of passage?


 

Response to Assessment Feedback by Justin Harrison

The Prayers and Tears of Jacques Derrida. Religion without religion. By John D Caputo


After processing my feedback, I’m attempting to refine my plans for the next year. Have realistic making goals// In parallel my research/conceptual enquiry needs refining, my areas of reading and research, I did receive advice not to get too consumed with existential theory. ( Although saying this I did just start another book on Derrida). But in my defence it’s a very different one from the usual analysis, the writing is almost prose at times and has some beautiful phrases. I know I want the technical insight but I don’t want to depart from the creative either, and I find the prose helpful.

The feedback from the assessment was very encouraging, reminding me to continue with the free documentation of thoughts and ideas through mini deadlines and making multiples that can be edited later.

I am also mindful of questions raised about engaging with 'smaller, quieter and less visible changes, especially in the context of Derrida', - rather than the more noticeable motif of death. I agree and in thinking around this - I am reminded of a line form a song - "Who are you great mountain that you should not bow low?" (“Never Lost'' was written by Catherine Mullins & Rita Springer) some how it re-addresses value systems for me. Micro and macro. Mustard seed and tree. The still small voice that can level mountains.

We look for the dramatic- the grand and the impactful yet miss the same impact that can come from the small. It's not just an inversion though...there is a different understanding of dynamics and binary. Is this where 'differance' can come into view if only for half a moment?

There is a warning again about getting trapped in conceptual theories and the perfectionism of making. I see the truth with both these points and need to carefully consider what ideas I am going to pursue and how they are going to be made. Perhaps I need to identify some common threads that appear and which I connected to creatively.

///////////////////

  • Am tempted to look at:

  • Quick 10 mins sketches in porcelain and black clay?

  • Quick fabrications in cardboard.

  • Drawings made on discarded paper (It stops me getting precious with my drawings)

  • Multiple drawings.

  • Slip casting?

  • Set some hard mini deadlines.