Wednesday, December 5, 2007

Wiki 2stars2stars

I was researching last night and stumbled upon an old housemate's wikipedia page. We need ones of those. Since we are beginning to propagate our presence through the digital sphere a wiki page would be an interesting way to propagate our own mythological presence.

Also what I was researching has some interesting ties to us, funny how that happens. Flaming Lotus Girls are developing new ideas for upcoming projects and the one I am working on has some interesting connections to the digital world. The piece is tentatively called "Seed" and was inspired by the real life story of how the Norwegian government has laid out plans to build a subterranean vault to hold samples of the world’s seeds. When completed, it will hold 3 million seeds that are being preserved to continue the world’s agricultural diversity.

Well we were imagining if these seeds were left to their own devices what would evolve in the dark. Here is a bit from the text I'm writing up:
These seeds move kinetically together exposing viewers to the ineffable quality of life in a simple seed, whose properties are so real to us yet so elusive. The Seed is a basic self-organizing unit of life. Cultured in a closed dark space, abstracted from the life it will never know, it is transformed into an embodiment of the life processes and replication. The evolving life we see in Seed is effected our excess, an excess of our freedom to cross boundaries between definitions and taxonomies, just like the limitless tagging, wiki-ing, cross-referencing, and social networking we do in the digital world. These impulses from our world cross the boundary effecting the evolution of Seed. What will grown? How will it grow? Will it be biological, machine or an evolution of both?

I see a bit of alliance with the idea of 2stars evolving via the digital world, we are the activators, but how do our characters evolve/ travel/ interact in the digital world, where there is no dark no light only information/ imagination? How will we evolve?

And I was playing on youtube as well. They have an interesting video editing feature but it isn't working for me.

7 comments:

felecia said...

There's an artist in Australia and I have to look over some old stuff to remember his name, but he got famous for experimenting with how plants could be in the future. Maybe you know him. He's created billboard type displays that image new species that were designed through programming and exercises in probability and chance. It's really amazing work. I hate that I cant' remember names very well. But I can remember concepts and that's good. He programmed software that mapped out evolution in a wierd interactive way. it's good work...! Later, I'll remember it.

felecia said...

So do we focus on maybe the definition of us? in the mythological sense? as if we are writing our own history there? ooohhh ilike that..

JessH said...

The historical evolution of two stars. Seems like we could start developing our own taxonomy around 2 stars, searchable tags to discover us by, very Flickr of us.

felecia said...

ok, like the viewer is the astronomer, and the screen is the telescope? Maybe the piece is like a map of the stars?

Let's infiltrate wikipedia.

Since we can add stuff to any definition of anything, maybe we do that to anything that might refer to us or make links to our own page on all kinds of other sites and maybe that's how we start.

We make a page as a piece, but maybe make very calculated changes to other pages and maybe that maps something concrete? dunno...Do you want me to start our page? Maybe we start with something else besides ourselves, and make a discreet piece with text, links, images, etc...

If wikipedia is about defining something, then what could we define?

JessH said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist

We could start referencing ourselves among the other definitions. Create our own page, and divide it up into sections.

I will start the page and we can play with it together. Maybe this is sort of our origin. We first define ourselves then we propagate?

felecia said...

How about we limit our communication to links from the main page to other pages and instead of using our own words to talk about something we use other people's definitions of those words and the main page is like ground zero? Maybe each of those words has a link back to the origin...the main page?

The definitions of the words become our words and the vocabulary we use to communicate. It's kind of genius, right? It makes our conversations abstract maps and it turns wikipedia into a wierd virtual meeting place. A chatroom where language is built on language and not identities and internet colloquialisms(sp?)

It's also appropriated language that the viewer can interact and participate with. What if someone figured it out one day and started engaging us with the same kind of dialogue that we invented, talking to us through wikipedia?

felecia said...

maybe the main page is simply titled "the main page"