//general thoughts|what I want to do|random thinkings

{The language computation introduces acts like a palimpsest embodying our development in the digital space. To what extent is computation a completely stiff and inhumane existence is always something that lingers on in my mind. I am always striving to transgress the binary presets and create, in Haraway’s words, the hybrid “cyborg” rejecting rigid boundaries. With my experience back in design and visual language to computation, hacking the presumed rigidness of computation is one of my biggest aims that I want to pursuit in this program. Does computation itself bears beauty and creativity? What is the interchangeable relationship between coding and other field of knowledge and how to embody them in my works? These are the major concepts that I want to further explore this semester.

For instance, recently I’ve been reading (or trying to read) Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logical Philosophiculus which he states todays language is not a representation of the reality but rather only shares the logical form of the fact. By saying so, he claims all metaphysical discussions as invalid, for they lose meaning in its “bad grammar”. The ideal language he pursuits should be free from the natural language and simple and specific in their syntax. How does coding language, like the one we just learnt this week, correspond to this pursuit? If I understand it right, the coding has exact unique and direct syntax which draws instructions based on factual and logical statements. Wittgenstein later on objects to his previous ideas made in Tractatus, beginning to assert that the function of language is like different tools inside the toolbox which is all varied. When something is declared through the code, the computer then follows such instruction.  Following rules, or to say, compliance, is the essential point in Wittgenstein’s philosophy: it is the supporting frame of all languages. Coding provides a new set of language of compliance not only for human but also for the machines based on the current language games human civilization has already accumulates. But to what extent is coding a new future language for our world which is fluid as life itself: by saying it, it not only declares facts, but also bears traces of life? This is something that I will always trying to bear in mind when making works relating to computation.

I am imagining that the works I produce this term will always have certain theoretical supports and will not only be a representation of theories but also involve the contemplation on computation’s nature. In other words, I want to use computation to reflect on computation itself. It is like the Library of Babel Borges conceptualizes: with repetitions of certain atomic facts it forms an infinite reservoir of matters that is malleable to astronomical sizes. In a word, I want to build a total library based on the total-library feature computation has in its nature. The works will involves not only digital space, but also physical space engaging and inviting human body movements. This is because our bodies are the ultimate site where our intelligence rests upon and relies on. Therefore the works I produce, I’m envisioning them not only being logically developed but also emotionally and bodily relatable creating intersubjective resonances with the audience.}

//responding to the ICM inspiration page

{In terms of the engagement of body in works, I am really touched by the Text Rain Installation made by Camille Utterback. To me it blurs the boundary in all aspects: the presumed stiff line between between the physical and the digital, the machine and humans, the artists’ ownership of the work and its audiences, etc. Furthermore, with the participation of audience from a varied range of backgrounds, its fluid agency is constantly relocating and reforming with constant replenishments of new energies and impetus.}