Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
Jody, I love your idea of tying our presentation to the conference's 60th anniversary and thinking in terms of 6 ways of looking at the 4Cs (ok, that's too much math). One idea that struck me was to create a timeline/map of all the places that the conference has been held over the past 60 years, zigzagging across the U.S., and perhaps with some interactive elements to explore for each year (like numbers of speakers, keynote title, cost of a hotel room, etc.). It would be a way of contextualizing the conference, visually and interactively. But in addition to taking an historical approach, I'd also like to focus on the current conference--doing the kind of text analysis thing I mentioned earlier with the 2009 program. And the beauty of your 6 ways idea is that it gives us a chance to take different approaches. Including a song and a 3D display would be awesome.
from Jody: six decades, six ways
Again, I love the idea of providing people with opportunities to see, hear, touch, engage with, respond to, etc. the experience of the conference in a variety of ways.
As far as the blog goes, I was going to offer to set something up on Blogger (since I know how to do that) but if there are better options out there, I'm game for those.
As we get closer to crafting a proposal, one idea I had was offering something in keeping with the anniversary theme and along the lines of "Six decades, six ways," (I'd been thinking a bit of Lars von Trier's film The Five Obstructions--) and to propose a session that features six different ways of remediating or re-presenting conference themes or particular sessions over time, whether within or across decades. [I know someone, for instance, who might be willing to write and record a song
based on her interpretations of some of the conference offerings and I'd love to explore the potentials of another 3-D display or maybe a film.]
In this way, I was thinking of connections we might make with the first and (maybe)seventh questions from the proposal: "What have we learned from major waves made by rhetoricians and compositionists in the past 60 years?" "How will we and our students effectively use the airwaves [we could expand things here in keeping with what the various technologies featured in the installation] to create meaning?"
I'd love to get my hands on some old conference programs (ideally, at least one from each decade if that were even possible), so I wrote to Eileen Maley last week to see if NCTE has an archive of CCCC programs. I also contacted Teresa at U of I to see how many old programs are held in the Center for Writing Studies library--she said their collection starts with 1983. They don't have every year since then but they hold a fair number of old programs and she said she'd be willing to send me some of them.
As far as the blog goes, I was going to offer to set something up on Blogger (since I know how to do that) but if there are better options out there, I'm game for those.
As we get closer to crafting a proposal, one idea I had was offering something in keeping with the anniversary theme and along the lines of "Six decades, six ways," (I'd been thinking a bit of Lars von Trier's film The Five Obstructions--) and to propose a session that features six different ways of remediating or re-presenting conference themes or particular sessions over time, whether within or across decades. [I know someone, for instance, who might be willing to write and record a song
based on her interpretations of some of the conference offerings and I'd love to explore the potentials of another 3-D display or maybe a film.]
In this way, I was thinking of connections we might make with the first and (maybe)seventh questions from the proposal: "What have we learned from major waves made by rhetoricians and compositionists in the past 60 years?" "How will we and our students effectively use the airwaves [we could expand things here in keeping with what the various technologies featured in the installation] to create meaning?"
I'd love to get my hands on some old conference programs (ideally, at least one from each decade if that were even possible), so I wrote to Eileen Maley last week to see if NCTE has an archive of CCCC programs. I also contacted Teresa at U of I to see how many old programs are held in the Center for Writing Studies library--she said their collection starts with 1983. They don't have every year since then but they hold a fair number of old programs and she said she'd be willing to send me some of them.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
from Madeleine: visualizing the program
I really like the idea of setting up a blog/wiki for sharing our thoughts, resources, drafts, etc. Who knows what role it might eventually play in our project, but I think it would facilitate our communication at this point a lot more smoothly than doing all our sharing via email (much as I love email and check it 73 times a day).
I'm glad that you're interested in the idea of using the conference as our theme/topic/material, at least to some extent. What I was thinking of doing with the conference program is some kind of visualization that helps people see the conference itself differently. If I could get access to the database that has all of the titles and presentation descriptions (do you know if this is possible, Anne?), then I could set up one or several tools that people could use to explore and engage with the program
in different ways. I'm thinking of text clouds, TAPor tools, treemap or other sorts of visualization methods (there's some cool stuff at neoformix.com)--maybe even something I could create myself if I have time to learn some Processing this summer (lots of wishful thinking here). I think this could all be scaled back for a more standard sort of presentation, or made more interactive and collaborative for an installation.
Anyway, that's what I was thinking of. I realize, though, that it's kind of narrow, and I'm certainly open to other possibilities involving processes and materialities and all that good stuff.
I'm glad that you're interested in the idea of using the conference as our theme/topic/material, at least to some extent. What I was thinking of doing with the conference program is some kind of visualization that helps people see the conference itself differently. If I could get access to the database that has all of the titles and presentation descriptions (do you know if this is possible, Anne?), then I could set up one or several tools that people could use to explore and engage with the program
in different ways. I'm thinking of text clouds, TAPor tools, treemap or other sorts of visualization methods (there's some cool stuff at neoformix.com)--maybe even something I could create myself if I have time to learn some Processing this summer (lots of wishful thinking here). I think this could all be scaled back for a more standard sort of presentation, or made more interactive and collaborative for an installation.
Anyway, that's what I was thinking of. I realize, though, that it's kind of narrow, and I'm certainly open to other possibilities involving processes and materialities and all that good stuff.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
from Jody: the sky
I love the idea of making our focus alternative ways of viewing (doing, having, experiencing) the conference (or conference session) itself. I’m curious though to think and hear more about the idea of using the program as a/the text, theme, or material—I think I really, really love this idea, think it would provide us with a focus and want to hear and think more
about this potential. I’m not sure how far back they go and/or if we could get our hands on old programs [I think when I left University of Illinois we had a pretty good number of them] but we could certainly offer views through time.
In thinking about skies being the limit, I’d love to find a way to have the installation up and running for a couple of days—not sure if we could swing this though. At first I was thinking of a scoring a space in the area where people check in and the book publishers meet. I do like the idea of focusing on the participatory and collaborative aspects of the presentation—having people make or do something (too little of this is happening now). Again, if anything were possible, I’d love to offer people the option of moving things around, adding to the display, over- or re-writing it using many different kinds of materials. In terms of what people would have to interact and/or make things with, we might offer a graffiti/response space (wall), computers, moveable text and images (magnet and/or felt-backed) maybe a Polaroid camera, materials for scrap-booking. (I’m trying to think of technologies that are inexpensive and easily transportable.) Another option would be to provide
participants the option of audio- or videotaping their responses to the questions we pose, folding this into the presentation. Having the display up for more than 75 minutes would allow people to encounter it, and perhaps revisit after having had time to think about how/if they’d like to respond. In short, I like the idea of creating something dynamic, something people would want to revisit to see if/how it has been changed by other participants, to make still other changes. My concern, however,
is that people (having been conditioned to do otherwise at conferences?) might not be inclined to add, respond, alter experience, etc.
Another sky-is-the-limit idea would be to hold the installation/performance/presentation someplace other than in a hotel
conference room—someplace near the hotel but not in the hotel. [I’ll likely be attending MLA too, Anne, so we can scout places together.]
I like the idea of documenting our process for this and was wondering about the idea of setting up a blog or website where the three of us could post ideas, upload photos, sketches, audio or video. . . That site could be featured as part of the installation or we might select, recombine and feature aspects of the process in other ways—a video or scrapbook that focuses on outtakes—detours, ideas proposed, risks imagined but not taken, etc.
about this potential. I’m not sure how far back they go and/or if we could get our hands on old programs [I think when I left University of Illinois we had a pretty good number of them] but we could certainly offer views through time.
In thinking about skies being the limit, I’d love to find a way to have the installation up and running for a couple of days—not sure if we could swing this though. At first I was thinking of a scoring a space in the area where people check in and the book publishers meet. I do like the idea of focusing on the participatory and collaborative aspects of the presentation—having people make or do something (too little of this is happening now). Again, if anything were possible, I’d love to offer people the option of moving things around, adding to the display, over- or re-writing it using many different kinds of materials. In terms of what people would have to interact and/or make things with, we might offer a graffiti/response space (wall), computers, moveable text and images (magnet and/or felt-backed) maybe a Polaroid camera, materials for scrap-booking. (I’m trying to think of technologies that are inexpensive and easily transportable.) Another option would be to provide
participants the option of audio- or videotaping their responses to the questions we pose, folding this into the presentation. Having the display up for more than 75 minutes would allow people to encounter it, and perhaps revisit after having had time to think about how/if they’d like to respond. In short, I like the idea of creating something dynamic, something people would want to revisit to see if/how it has been changed by other participants, to make still other changes. My concern, however,
is that people (having been conditioned to do otherwise at conferences?) might not be inclined to add, respond, alter experience, etc.
Another sky-is-the-limit idea would be to hold the installation/performance/presentation someplace other than in a hotel
conference room—someplace near the hotel but not in the hotel. [I’ll likely be attending MLA too, Anne, so we can scout places together.]
I like the idea of documenting our process for this and was wondering about the idea of setting up a blog or website where the three of us could post ideas, upload photos, sketches, audio or video. . . That site could be featured as part of the installation or we might select, recombine and feature aspects of the process in other ways—a video or scrapbook that focuses on outtakes—detours, ideas proposed, risks imagined but not taken, etc.
Monday, April 14, 2008
from Madeleine: exploring and making
I really like the idea of doing a presentation/installation/project that engages people in a process of exploring and making something. I think it would be neat to have people print something out so as to take something tangible away for individual consumption, so to speak--but ideally the process itself would be collaborative. Our task would be to provide the initial materials and tools, as well as to give some structure to the process. Just at a basic level, we could do something collage-like, maybe with networked computers so that people are interacting with others in the same room, selecting text and image and maybe sound and video. We could project various stages of the project on various walls so that its evolution could be experienced by other people in the room. (It might be kind of fun to try to replicate materials and tools and processes in a
non-computer-based way, too.) So the presentation becomes a process of making. I don't know if this gets at Jody's interest in what's left out of the process, although there may be some way of working rejected alternatives back into the mix or working in some randomizing element that distorts what people think they've chosen (which would reflect back to them an alternative path).
This is all a bit abstract, I know. But I guess basically I want to convey that I'm thinking along the same lines as you are--or at least along what I think are some of the same lines. I love Anne's idea of projecting things on walls in such a way that people have to position themselves differently in order to read/see. And I have to say that I'm still drawn to the idea of taking the conference program as our theme/text/material-- does this interest you? It just strikes me that the conference program is
so overwhelming and there's so much text and so many ideas and so much difficulty making sense of it. An alternative presentation might usefully present alternative ways to view the conference itself.
non-computer-based way, too.) So the presentation becomes a process of making. I don't know if this gets at Jody's interest in what's left out of the process, although there may be some way of working rejected alternatives back into the mix or working in some randomizing element that distorts what people think they've chosen (which would reflect back to them an alternative path).
This is all a bit abstract, I know. But I guess basically I want to convey that I'm thinking along the same lines as you are--or at least along what I think are some of the same lines. I love Anne's idea of projecting things on walls in such a way that people have to position themselves differently in order to read/see. And I have to say that I'm still drawn to the idea of taking the conference program as our theme/text/material-- does this interest you? It just strikes me that the conference program is
so overwhelming and there's so much text and so many ideas and so much difficulty making sense of it. An alternative presentation might usefully present alternative ways to view the conference itself.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
from Anne: Jody asked "If the sky were the limit...?"
If the sky were the limit.... it'd be a full vr/cave environment in which people could experiment with moving words around by hand, words that responded in different ways when touched, "printed" argumentative texts that twitched when touched, that flowed into movies suggesting other connotations or showed specific histories behind the arguments, arguments whose logical structures glowed behind the words, words that morphed into other sorts of visualizations and v/v. Arguments you could climb up like mountains or slide down like Alice, textured arguments. I'd like for words to be touchable/physical at the same time that their histories were attached to them.
Perhaps I'll steal a whole lot of felt letters from a Montessori school and attach photographs of their etymologies and particular historical uses to them.
:-)
But your questions, Jody, make me think that our still semi-concrete, preliminary ideas play off each other, in ways we can kick off from, perhaps: I am interested in visualizing the materiality of words; Madeleine in visualizations in a more general way (I hope this is a fair representation, Madeleine); and you in what we aren't showing by the particular choices we would make as we move toward the more concrete.
I am hoping for some sort of installation where all those questions/tensions play off each other at once. Perhaps there are printed banners of our questions on the walls -- big -- with room for people to write responses to the questions as they are contextualized by whatever we install.
Our roles -- as people in the space responsible for the setup -- seem to me up for grabs. We could set up an installation that "ran itself," so that we were each there just to answer questions. Or we could give short presentations to contextualize our work. Or we could be performing continually. Or...
But I guess I am hoping that we come up with something integrated, where our concerns/questions fold into each other, make some integral experience within the room, an experience that raises the questions we hope but that also gets people thinking more concretely about the issues we've each raised. (So the Montessori reference above might be more appropriate than I thought...) (And there is nothing to preclude us documenting the whole thing in multiple ways, and producing something to go on the NCTE website, which they would love, or into Kairos, something in which we deconstructed our documentation process, to encourage viewers/readers to ask the questions you posed, Jody.)
I'll end this too-late after-too-many-papers-responded-to-today message with the comment that the only truly concrete picture in my head of what I want to do is of some writing projected really small up against a wall so that people have to get up close and bend down or sit on the floor to read it.
PS -- I'll be at MLA in SF at Christmas, so I can scope out the particulars of the Hilton, and so can ask if we could be put into a particular room or space that would be most conducive to our desires.
Perhaps I'll steal a whole lot of felt letters from a Montessori school and attach photographs of their etymologies and particular historical uses to them.
:-)
But your questions, Jody, make me think that our still semi-concrete, preliminary ideas play off each other, in ways we can kick off from, perhaps: I am interested in visualizing the materiality of words; Madeleine in visualizations in a more general way (I hope this is a fair representation, Madeleine); and you in what we aren't showing by the particular choices we would make as we move toward the more concrete.
I am hoping for some sort of installation where all those questions/tensions play off each other at once. Perhaps there are printed banners of our questions on the walls -- big -- with room for people to write responses to the questions as they are contextualized by whatever we install.
Our roles -- as people in the space responsible for the setup -- seem to me up for grabs. We could set up an installation that "ran itself," so that we were each there just to answer questions. Or we could give short presentations to contextualize our work. Or we could be performing continually. Or...
But I guess I am hoping that we come up with something integrated, where our concerns/questions fold into each other, make some integral experience within the room, an experience that raises the questions we hope but that also gets people thinking more concretely about the issues we've each raised. (So the Montessori reference above might be more appropriate than I thought...) (And there is nothing to preclude us documenting the whole thing in multiple ways, and producing something to go on the NCTE website, which they would love, or into Kairos, something in which we deconstructed our documentation process, to encourage viewers/readers to ask the questions you posed, Jody.)
I'll end this too-late after-too-many-papers-responded-to-today message with the comment that the only truly concrete picture in my head of what I want to do is of some writing projected really small up against a wall so that people have to get up close and bend down or sit on the floor to read it.
PS -- I'll be at MLA in SF at Christmas, so I can scope out the particulars of the Hilton, and so can ask if we could be put into a particular room or space that would be most conducive to our desires.
Friday, April 11, 2008
from Jody: what didn’t make the final cut/performance?
Like Anne, I’m excited about and prospect of the three of us working together!
As for my interests, I am most drawn to exploring potentials for documenting process, to experiment with different ways of dealing with (theorizing/showcasing/illustrating/enacting, etc.) the “making of” a specific text, object, event, multi-part performance—I think now of DVD extras or diary room confessionals. In many respects—in keeping with the movie/reality tv comparisons--I’m as (if not more) interested in what didn’t make the final cut/performance (i.e., bloopers, outtakes, detours
encountered, potentials not explored, risks not taken) as in what ended up making the final cut. As I read things (or watch or hear things) I usually end up wondering, “Well okay, that’s that, but what else might this have been? What did we miss? What options weren’t pursued?”
Quickish question: I’m wondering what each of you have in mind in terms of the delivery and/or facilitation of an installation/performance piece? I know we are still in the planning/idea exchange phase of things but if the sky were the limit, if anything were possible, how would each of you envision the ideal installation/performance piece? I guess what I’m asking here is how each of you might envision our roles as presenters/facilitators/performers. . .again this may be way too early to
ask this but I think it would help me better align with your interests, ideas and goals.
. . .Ideally speaking, I’m drawn to the idea of installation as wiki where participants would be encouraged to add, alter, edit, respond to, etc. the original installation but this could be tough to manage if we’re setting up for a 75 minute session.
Again, looking forward to working with the both of you!
As for my interests, I am most drawn to exploring potentials for documenting process, to experiment with different ways of dealing with (theorizing/showcasing/illustrating/enacting, etc.) the “making of” a specific text, object, event, multi-part performance—I think now of DVD extras or diary room confessionals. In many respects—in keeping with the movie/reality tv comparisons--I’m as (if not more) interested in what didn’t make the final cut/performance (i.e., bloopers, outtakes, detours
encountered, potentials not explored, risks not taken) as in what ended up making the final cut. As I read things (or watch or hear things) I usually end up wondering, “Well okay, that’s that, but what else might this have been? What did we miss? What options weren’t pursued?”
Quickish question: I’m wondering what each of you have in mind in terms of the delivery and/or facilitation of an installation/performance piece? I know we are still in the planning/idea exchange phase of things but if the sky were the limit, if anything were possible, how would each of you envision the ideal installation/performance piece? I guess what I’m asking here is how each of you might envision our roles as presenters/facilitators/performers. . .again this may be way too early to
ask this but I think it would help me better align with your interests, ideas and goals.
. . .Ideally speaking, I’m drawn to the idea of installation as wiki where participants would be encouraged to add, alter, edit, respond to, etc. the original installation but this could be tough to manage if we’re setting up for a 75 minute session.
Again, looking forward to working with the both of you!
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
from Anne: shall we dance?
If your dance card isn't already filled, Madeleine Sorapure and I were wondering if you'd like to go on a little venture with us for CCCC 09.
I need to give you a little background, because we're actually going to submit two proposals, probably.
I am on the Executive Committee, and so know that there is a push to come up with "non-talking-head" panel formats in the coming years of the conference. Marilyn Valentino, who is conference chair for next year, is considering how to incorporate some of that for next year, although the call for 09 doesn't specify any alternate proposal formats.
What we're going to do is propose to Marilyn an installation/performance sort of piece. We haven't worked out what, exactly, because we didn't want to do anything until we had a wonderful smart third person on board. So, if you were interested, we'd put our heads together and come up with some sort of topic/argument that got us each interested and excited, and then get creative about how we would use the space and time all together. (Part of what would be included in the proposal is extra time for set-up/take down, as well as some room arrangement that *was not* the usual "all chairs face a raised dias" bit.) But I am contemplating something to do with gender/technology/writing/reading; Madeleine is thinking about visualizations of texts... and you certainly have plenty of interesting ideas to bring to the mix.
Meanwhile, because there's no guarantee that Marilyn would accept such a panel, we're going to go ahead and propose a "regular" panel (but try to push on the format a bit...) just in case the other, more extensive thing ends up not being able to fly. (There's money / time / space issues for the conference in SF, so we'll see.)
But let me know if this is at all interesting to you, if you are still free for a panel, if.....
I need to give you a little background, because we're actually going to submit two proposals, probably.
I am on the Executive Committee, and so know that there is a push to come up with "non-talking-head" panel formats in the coming years of the conference. Marilyn Valentino, who is conference chair for next year, is considering how to incorporate some of that for next year, although the call for 09 doesn't specify any alternate proposal formats.
What we're going to do is propose to Marilyn an installation/performance sort of piece. We haven't worked out what, exactly, because we didn't want to do anything until we had a wonderful smart third person on board. So, if you were interested, we'd put our heads together and come up with some sort of topic/argument that got us each interested and excited, and then get creative about how we would use the space and time all together. (Part of what would be included in the proposal is extra time for set-up/take down, as well as some room arrangement that *was not* the usual "all chairs face a raised dias" bit.) But I am contemplating something to do with gender/technology/writing/reading; Madeleine is thinking about visualizations of texts... and you certainly have plenty of interesting ideas to bring to the mix.
Meanwhile, because there's no guarantee that Marilyn would accept such a panel, we're going to go ahead and propose a "regular" panel (but try to push on the format a bit...) just in case the other, more extensive thing ends up not being able to fly. (There's money / time / space issues for the conference in SF, so we'll see.)
But let me know if this is at all interesting to you, if you are still free for a panel, if.....
from Madeleine
Ok, so two proposals--and hopefully the more interactive and alternative-ish one will be accepted. I'd be delighted to be on any sort of panel with Jody Shipka; I've heard her speak before (at a C&W conference, I think), and I like her CCC multimodal article very much. And she takes some lovely photographs, no?
In terms of a theme for our presentation(s), I'm deeply into infovis these days, so something related to the visualization of text is what's most interesting to me, although I'm certainly open to other possibilities. And text visualization is broad enough to be able to enfold it in other themes, like identity or gender. I have to say, though, that I'm drawn to the reflexivity of working with the conference program (or some elements of it) as the text to be visualized. For the more standard presentation, I could talk, show examples, perhaps do some audience participation things with the computer and projector. For a more interactive and
alternative thing, I'd love to use or create some tools and let folks compose a text visualization of their own that they could print out and take away with them.
As for a gallery of multimedia work by students--I think it's a great idea for the "rethink the presentation" initiative. But I'd be more interested in doing something other than that for our panel. And perhaps Marilyn will get other proposals for this kind of student gallery?
In terms of a theme for our presentation(s), I'm deeply into infovis these days, so something related to the visualization of text is what's most interesting to me, although I'm certainly open to other possibilities. And text visualization is broad enough to be able to enfold it in other themes, like identity or gender. I have to say, though, that I'm drawn to the reflexivity of working with the conference program (or some elements of it) as the text to be visualized. For the more standard presentation, I could talk, show examples, perhaps do some audience participation things with the computer and projector. For a more interactive and
alternative thing, I'd love to use or create some tools and let folks compose a text visualization of their own that they could print out and take away with them.
As for a gallery of multimedia work by students--I think it's a great idea for the "rethink the presentation" initiative. But I'd be more interested in doing something other than that for our panel. And perhaps Marilyn will get other proposals for this kind of student gallery?
Monday, April 7, 2008
from Anne
And then -- CCCC 09, San Francisco? :
Different issues:
1) My sense is that, to be safe, we should come up with two proposals. One is for the "we will do something incredible about writing and technology in a room if you give us an hour set-up time and maybe some technology support" (this proposal would go directly to Marilyn Valentino, the chair for next year) and the other a mix of the first version with the usual proposal format, which we would submit by the deadline of May 9. The issue is that Marilyn probably won't be able to make decisions right away about the first proposal, because she won't be able to, given how much stuff is going to come at her from this "rethink the presentation" initiative -- and so, if we have the "regular" proposal in place, we can fall back on that if Marilyn can't support us; we can also "cancel" the regular proposal if Marilyn accepts the first. (I hope that makes sense.) But I think the second proposal should be a variation of the first, that we should try to come up with something cool and alternative and interactive and installation-ish, within the limitations of the 90 minutes in a room with little set-up time. So we can come up with some brainstorming time.... (but, overall, I would hope that -- whatever we come up with for proposal #1 -- we manage to come as close to recreating with the actual presentation of proposal #2, even if the proposal itself fits the expected framework; there's nothing that says that we can't do an installation even if the proposal implies 3 or 4 20-minute paper presentation...)
2) I think we should have a 3rd or 4th person involved (but no more), so that proposal #1 (the most "innovative/alternative") seems to incorporate as many people as a regular session, so that Marilyn doesn't feel she is losing the number of people who can be on the program. (It's a big deal, to have as many people on the program as possible, so that more people come to the conference....) Having a third/fourth person on the program also would enable us to do a second, more "regular" proposal easily. I'm wondering if Jody Shipka would be cool to include. (Check out her blog http://remediatethis.blogspot.com, especially the category of "composing new media"; also check out http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=758750) I also think about including a grad student from here, Shereen Inyatulla, who has been doing some cool arts-type projects connected with identity. I could tell you more about her, if she sounds interesting to you after you read what follows below.... But are there other people you think should be involved?
3) We need some theme/argument to describe the installation for proposal #1. I had been thinking about something to do with feminism-gender studies / technology / reading (or writing). I think it would be great (for all kinds of reasons) if people could print something, as you suggest. I also very much like the idea of coming up with some uses for TAPoR. I would also like to have writing or video projected on the wall, but very close up and on the floor, as though you were looking into cartoon mouse-holes, to shift how people interact with the space and with the writing. But this is something we could brainstorm. It's got to be something all of us want to make happen....
4) Do we want to include student work in any way? Part of me says no, but another part says that teachers love to see student work. The number of computers we could get would obviously shape how we could do this. So I dunno.
So this is all loose, late at night (for me) rambling. I hope most of it makes sense. Want to talk on the phone in the next few days?
In the meantime, how about you have a revelation about a perfect theme/argument the installation could make, one that would completely enthrall visitors?
Different issues:
1) My sense is that, to be safe, we should come up with two proposals. One is for the "we will do something incredible about writing and technology in a room if you give us an hour set-up time and maybe some technology support" (this proposal would go directly to Marilyn Valentino, the chair for next year) and the other a mix of the first version with the usual proposal format, which we would submit by the deadline of May 9. The issue is that Marilyn probably won't be able to make decisions right away about the first proposal, because she won't be able to, given how much stuff is going to come at her from this "rethink the presentation" initiative -- and so, if we have the "regular" proposal in place, we can fall back on that if Marilyn can't support us; we can also "cancel" the regular proposal if Marilyn accepts the first. (I hope that makes sense.) But I think the second proposal should be a variation of the first, that we should try to come up with something cool and alternative and interactive and installation-ish, within the limitations of the 90 minutes in a room with little set-up time. So we can come up with some brainstorming time.... (but, overall, I would hope that -- whatever we come up with for proposal #1 -- we manage to come as close to recreating with the actual presentation of proposal #2, even if the proposal itself fits the expected framework; there's nothing that says that we can't do an installation even if the proposal implies 3 or 4 20-minute paper presentation...)
2) I think we should have a 3rd or 4th person involved (but no more), so that proposal #1 (the most "innovative/alternative") seems to incorporate as many people as a regular session, so that Marilyn doesn't feel she is losing the number of people who can be on the program. (It's a big deal, to have as many people on the program as possible, so that more people come to the conference....) Having a third/fourth person on the program also would enable us to do a second, more "regular" proposal easily. I'm wondering if Jody Shipka would be cool to include. (Check out her blog http://remediatethis.blogspot.com, especially the category of "composing new media"; also check out http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=758750) I also think about including a grad student from here, Shereen Inyatulla, who has been doing some cool arts-type projects connected with identity. I could tell you more about her, if she sounds interesting to you after you read what follows below.... But are there other people you think should be involved?
3) We need some theme/argument to describe the installation for proposal #1. I had been thinking about something to do with feminism-gender studies / technology / reading (or writing). I think it would be great (for all kinds of reasons) if people could print something, as you suggest. I also very much like the idea of coming up with some uses for TAPoR. I would also like to have writing or video projected on the wall, but very close up and on the floor, as though you were looking into cartoon mouse-holes, to shift how people interact with the space and with the writing. But this is something we could brainstorm. It's got to be something all of us want to make happen....
4) Do we want to include student work in any way? Part of me says no, but another part says that teachers love to see student work. The number of computers we could get would obviously shape how we could do this. So I dunno.
So this is all loose, late at night (for me) rambling. I hope most of it makes sense. Want to talk on the phone in the next few days?
In the meantime, how about you have a revelation about a perfect theme/argument the installation could make, one that would completely enthrall visitors?
from Madeleine
I was thinking it would be kind of fun if people could print something and take it away with them--a postcard, or something that could go inside the 4Cs nametag (or maybe an alternative nametag?). We could offer some images and text and let people create their own collages, maybe with some randomizing elements thrown in to make it interesting.
Another idea is to have people create some kind of collaborative piece that could be projected on a wall. A friend of mind did a project with barcodes and scanners--when you walked in the room you got a barcode and scanning it would cause certain changes to happen to the projected image. I don't know if this is technically feasible, though. One of my great desires this summer is to learn Processing, which is the language this friend used to create the project. But it's often the case that my great summer plans get deferred....
And another possibility is to work with some of the infovis tools that are available on the Web and give folks a chance to play around with them. I'm thinking specifically of some of the tools at TAPor as well as text cloud tools. There might be a way of helping people visualize the conference program, for instance, in order to see the conference in a different way. Maybe this could be incorporated with the first idea of having something people could print out and take away with them.
Anyway, I don't know if these sorts of things are in the ballpark of what you're thinking of. But I'm really excited to be involved in this project--thank you for inviting me! I think it's an excellent idea to have different sorts of sessions and to offer multimedia, interactive experiences for people at the 4Cs. I like the traditional conference paper as much as the next academic person, but heck, there's nothing wrong with one or two alternatives. Let me know if there's anything I can do at this point to get it rolling along.
Another idea is to have people create some kind of collaborative piece that could be projected on a wall. A friend of mind did a project with barcodes and scanners--when you walked in the room you got a barcode and scanning it would cause certain changes to happen to the projected image. I don't know if this is technically feasible, though. One of my great desires this summer is to learn Processing, which is the language this friend used to create the project. But it's often the case that my great summer plans get deferred....
And another possibility is to work with some of the infovis tools that are available on the Web and give folks a chance to play around with them. I'm thinking specifically of some of the tools at TAPor as well as text cloud tools. There might be a way of helping people visualize the conference program, for instance, in order to see the conference in a different way. Maybe this could be incorporated with the first idea of having something people could print out and take away with them.
Anyway, I don't know if these sorts of things are in the ballpark of what you're thinking of. But I'm really excited to be involved in this project--thank you for inviting me! I think it's an excellent idea to have different sorts of sessions and to offer multimedia, interactive experiences for people at the 4Cs. I like the traditional conference paper as much as the next academic person, but heck, there's nothing wrong with one or two alternatives. Let me know if there's anything I can do at this point to get it rolling along.
from Madeleine: initial thoughts
It was delightful seeing you at the conference, and thanks very much for chairing our panel. I hope you're home safe and sound and fully recovered; your schedule looked daunting! I ended up spending most of my time away from the conference hanging out with Sophia, who's turning out to be a little party animal (see attached!).
So I noticed that the deadline for proposals for next year's conference is pretty darned soon (May 9). The interactive exhibit/room/session that you told me about--is it subject to this deadline? And if so, can I help you write up the proposal? I've had some ideas--vague and ill-formed, but ideas nonetheless :)
I was thinking it would be kind of fun if people could print something and take it away with them--a postcard, or something that could go inside the 4Cs nametag (or maybe an alternative nametag?). We could offer some images and text and let people create their own collages, maybe with some randomizing elements thrown in to make it interesting.
Another idea is to have people create some kind of collaborative piece that could be projected on a wall. A friend of mind did a project with barcodes and scanners--when you walked in the room you got a barcode and scanning it would cause certain changes to happen to the projected image. I don't know if this is technically feasible, though. One of my great desires this summer is to learn Processing, which is the language this friend used to create the project. But it's often the case that my
great summer plans get deferred....
And another possibility is to work with some of the infovis tools that are available on the Web and give folks a chance to play around with them. I'm thinking specifically of some of the tools at TAPor as well as text
cloud tools. There might be a way of helping people visualize the
conference program, for instance, in order to see the conference in a
different way. Maybe this could be incorporated with the first idea of
having something people could print out and take away with them.
Anyway, I don't know if these sorts of things are in the ballpark of what
you're thinking of. But I'm really excited to be involved in this
project--thank you for inviting me! I think it's an excellent idea to
have different sorts of sessions and to offer multimedia, interactive
experiences for people at the 4Cs. I like the traditional conference
paper as much as the next academic person, but heck, there's nothing wrong
with one or two alternatives. Let me know if there's anything I can do at
this point to get it rolling along.
So I noticed that the deadline for proposals for next year's conference is pretty darned soon (May 9). The interactive exhibit/room/session that you told me about--is it subject to this deadline? And if so, can I help you write up the proposal? I've had some ideas--vague and ill-formed, but ideas nonetheless :)
I was thinking it would be kind of fun if people could print something and take it away with them--a postcard, or something that could go inside the 4Cs nametag (or maybe an alternative nametag?). We could offer some images and text and let people create their own collages, maybe with some randomizing elements thrown in to make it interesting.
Another idea is to have people create some kind of collaborative piece that could be projected on a wall. A friend of mind did a project with barcodes and scanners--when you walked in the room you got a barcode and scanning it would cause certain changes to happen to the projected image. I don't know if this is technically feasible, though. One of my great desires this summer is to learn Processing, which is the language this friend used to create the project. But it's often the case that my
great summer plans get deferred....
And another possibility is to work with some of the infovis tools that are available on the Web and give folks a chance to play around with them. I'm thinking specifically of some of the tools at TAPor as well as text
cloud tools. There might be a way of helping people visualize the
conference program, for instance, in order to see the conference in a
different way. Maybe this could be incorporated with the first idea of
having something people could print out and take away with them.
Anyway, I don't know if these sorts of things are in the ballpark of what
you're thinking of. But I'm really excited to be involved in this
project--thank you for inviting me! I think it's an excellent idea to
have different sorts of sessions and to offer multimedia, interactive
experiences for people at the 4Cs. I like the traditional conference
paper as much as the next academic person, but heck, there's nothing wrong
with one or two alternatives. Let me know if there's anything I can do at
this point to get it rolling along.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)