nonsite

Reading over the transcripts from our Monday class chat, I’m struck by how much time it takes to say very little and the big differences of an online chat environment compared to classroom learning. I appreciate my colleagues humour and their patience. Reading the transcripts, I can see that Andy’s intention was to be certain that we were all clear on the Learning Outcomes of MADA OL1 Introduction/Planning/Research course that was were just beginning. The complication was that were had just been emailed the pdf of the Course Handbook minutes earlier- so we didn’t have much time to read or reflect on the document.

I was interested to read later- 2.10 Research at Camberwell and the reference to the university’s excellence at research level grade 5 in the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. I’m not sure what that really means in terms of funding, but I appreciate that this may lead to opportunities for support. I was also struck by the number of acronyms that were used to name the research projects- SCIRIA, TrAIN, FADE, and MATAR. The Book Arts project seems to be the exception.

I have been looking for a definition of Digital Arts and how Camberwell arrived at this naming of the programme and was pleased to find within 3.1 Rationale for MA Digital Arts On-Line a description of digital technologies for artists and designers and digital art production as part of the Course Rationale, Aims and Objectives.

I look forward to the lecture and seminar outlining the history, context, methods and concepts of digital arts (p. 31) and still not clear when or how that happens. I would still appreciate hearing from the course tutors their ideas around the naming of this field and how and where they locate themselves within it.

I also look forward to further discussing “Action Research” and ideas around practice- reflection- amend practice. That sounds like what artists do with presentation added in at various points.

I did try to direct part of the Monday morning chat towards this and appreciated reading the thoughts of my colleagues as we started the discussion. My concerns are twofold- if the definition is so broad that we get lost within it- then it is meaningless; more worrisome for me is if Digital Arts becomes a subgrouping of art based on techniques and processes- with exhibitions defined by these processes and techniques- like printmaking for example, with international print biennials around the world that begin to define and legitimate their own existence in a parallel universe outside the larger international art world, then I think the naming is problematic. If it is just about some tools we use to make art- then I’m fine with that.

To date I am slightly frustrated at the lack of ideas discussed in the chat sessions, but appreciate that there are a number of start-up details that need to be in place and clarified before really getting rolling.

I don’t really understand yet how we can contact our tutors outside of the chat session. I am curious if there are office hours and how we make appointments for individual tutorials. I was pleased to receive an email from Jonathan Kearney introducing himself- I was wondering why he hadn’t been present in our weekly chats.

I am curious how we will present our work online to the class. I am planning to research ProfCast before next week.