It’s that time of year. We are half way through the semester and I’ve decided to refocus all of my research.
What drives in human beings the need to be remembered? Why is it sometimes crucial to leave a mark behind? Why do people want to communicate that they were here or there? We can see this along history… from cave drawings, to the Pyramids of Giza, to royal paintings, to photographic portraits, to bathroom stalls, to contemporary social networks as facebook and myspace. Other people want me to know something about them, and they want to be sure that I remember it for a long time.
As I begin to focus on this idea, I have teamed up with Gretchen Rinnert, Marty Lane (and, unofficially, with Bryan Rinnert) to explore the idea of light writing. Light writing has been done before. It will be done again. Picasso probably has one of the most recognizable series of photographs using this technique. Basically, it is not a new thing.
Why then focus on this? When I examinate it within the context of people and marks, I am curious about the drive behind such creations. Lightwriting creates ephemeral marks. These last for some seconds. There is no sense of permanence. Even while being created, one can’t make out the end product. (We require an external time capturing device to be able to pull this puzzle together.) Why do them then? Is there more to this medium that has been explored so far? Could light writing become the next graffitti but without having to clutter the visual landscape of our cities?
This is still in diapers, still superficial, but I as I begin this exploration of technique, medium, form and meaning, more questions arise.
Last night, alongside Gretchen Rinnert and Bryan Rinnert, an experimentation was carried out to understand the implications of our technological limitations. We want to understand these implications before we move into the philosophical realm of understanding and creation.