a pause for a pose

I'm glad you introduced a metaphor of the film set, this makes it easier to abandon the mind-numbing dichotomy of performer and audience. The photograph of the heads are indeed working. To extend the metaphor of the film, the head or obscured face becomes part of the 'set'; it absorbs, reflects and mirrors other elements in the set. It is at work also because as Buechler mentions, a role-change takes place. This role-change ideally, is a moment of tension or alternation between immanence and transcendence. Immanent, because the head is part of the set (poured into the space) and transcendent, because of a transferred consciousness, the camera consciousness or perhaps becoming a looking glass oneself.

Freezing, then, isn't about converting an experience into an image, rather a sensibility that transcends into the image. (like a ghost) It is true that, maybe it sound freeky, I (we) use this as method to approach a space or material, to let go of a focus or normative mode of attention in order to act with the material or let the material perform, or yes, maybe less floaty: to create a possible contigency.

I like to stretch the idea of physical presence in performance situation, perhaps we could make a dialogue-script for Transmission and leave it relatively open for Ada (e.g. poster project).

pfff...
wish I had an idea now how this could be actualised.

face time

Although I like the simple idea of a face-to-face situation in front of an audience, I'm still a bit confused about my passive-aggressive role in the performance. It would help if we could discuss the conditions and situation more thoroughly, without getting too philosophical about it. I mean, such encounter implies some sort of primacy of relation; a condition for the beginning of language as dialogue. Our performance is properly speaking not a dialogue (perhaps the text that is read aloud could be written in the form of a dialogue).

The awkward experience me and other participants had during the tour was in my opinion caused by the (unintentional) demand that you make when you speak and look at one person particularly. For example I sometimes had to choose between reciprocating this address and forget about what you had to say or focus on the content of your talk. So even though a face-to-face encounter constitutes the beginning of dialogue, it is necessary to detach oneself from the face's expression; disconnect the voice from the face.

Interesting here is that this non-reciprocal relation of responsibility ('many ways to the notion': 'nodding/clapping/winking/turning one's back to responsibility' (Thesaurus under Special Social Volition)) was an important motive for my gestures in Video Class.

So what happens when we stage this situation? The setup with the table and lamp emphasizes the physical symmetry of the face-to-face opposition. Our presence is completely asymmetrical, it always is, but you speech/talk, have a microphone and I sit and don't speak. What distinguishes me from a bunny or a wall is that I intentionally (volitionally) focus on you. The decision whether you face or back (or leave it open) the audience, will have an effect to the extent in which your amplified voice will be experienced as disconnected from you.

It could be an appointment, but it might be experienced as a game, and is that a good thing? Am I a kind of continuous interruption by not responding verbally? Face time implies some kind of honesty or a confession, do you think we can keep a tension between this implication and alienation? Or do you think that my interruption ridicules me and/or you?

Of course there's the flickering light, but for now I let it stew a bit and see what you think.