“Static Movement”, Youssef Hani, 2014

This work represents the contradiction that can exist in mobile states. Indeed, the whole idea I had was to juxtapose movement to a static state. In this picture, we have several components that allude to this idea.

First of all, the image is a photographic one. By essence, this medium captures a moment, or a movement if you will, and renders it immobile. This notion of the static state is paralleled to the allusion to movement, since the picture was taken in an elevator, which moves vertically (I chose to not hide the buttons, in order to be able to contextualize).

Second, we have the idea of movement that is transcribed with the use of the pointillism and the stripes: On the one hand, pointillism can refer back atoms since, like the latter, the former constitutes the whole image. In that sense, because atoms are in a constant movement, the picture, static by definition, becomes mobile. On the other hand, the stripes make the eye move vertically (and horizontally for that matter) on the picture surface. That is because the stripes are vertical – (hence the vertical movement) – but they also spread horizontally, which explains the horizontal movement of the eye across the picture.

Finally, there is a chromatic aspect to this juxtaposition of the static and mobile states. I chose the blue color for the picture for it is a cold color. In that sense, this color refers to a frozen state, and therefore to the still aspect of the picture. However, I also purposely put the strips in red. Originally a picture of a gold leaf, changing its color gave a frosted aspect that contradicts the warm red color. In addition, those two color choices, namely red and blue, are not anodyne. Red, like I said prior, refers to warmth, and by extension, to movement. Opposed to that notion of movement, we have the blue color which refers to the frozen state, and therefore to stillness.

Because of all the choices that I have explained above, I decided to name the work “Static Movement”, which is an oxymoron that gives an idea of the existing contradiction in the picture.

After reading Paul’s “Digital Technologies as Tools”, I was thinking of what is considered “new”. In other words, I started thinking about the value of time, and how it can be relative.

One would say that the “new” is whatever is not “old”. However, what is “old”? What might seem old to one could be perceived as new to another. In that sense, I suppose that the “new” is something that creates an evolution, an improvement if you will.

With this idea of improvement comes the idea of a move from something that is becoming somehow obsolete. In a sense, the concept of time that is inherent to the idea of the “new” is paired with a concept of movement. Let’s think about it a little further: The idea of time as we perceive it has been defined with units such as a minute, an hour, a day, a month, and so on. But what defines a day? It is the period of time that Earth takes to spin around itself. Same with a year: it is the period of time that Earth takes to revolve around the sun. The use of the word revolve is not a mere coincidence. It happens to have the same roots as “evolve”, and by extension, is linked to the idea of evolution.

There you have it. We have gone full circle, and spent some time covering this topic (very briefly I must add). So I am wondering: using the definition that was used above, could this post be already “old”, or obsolete? This is a never ending loop, which is what give beauty to time: it is static and enables you to live in the present, but also constantly in movement for collection of all the present moments make the past, and are bound the make the future as well. In other words, one can say that “The present was yesterday, and will be tomorrow”.

As I reflect about the lecture that took place last Wednesday, I cannot help but think that having a space like the New Media Artspace in the library is a fantastic opportunity. Indeed, I felt that the curatorial choice is very appropriate, for all the rooms are vertically aligned, which sends one back to the drilling process.

Also, it opened my eyes to see how selfish we can be. What I mean by that is that we usually use plastic bottles with materials such as plastic that took millions of years to create, and we throw it after a couple of hours.

Another thing that I thought about after the lecture was finished is the way we waste other materials in a manner that could be compared to plastics. For instance, if we think of paper, or cardboard, we use it for a very brief period of time, when a tree takes decades to grow, if not more. It is not a mere coincidence that more businesses are switching to digital. Indeed, more and more magazines are offering a cheaper digital version of their issues, more and more people read books on tablets, et cetera. I am not naïve to think that those institutions are doing this solely because of their love of nature. Instead, this switch is made for economic reasons. It is however a good thing.

In addition, as I was leaving the lecture, I couldn’t help but think of a French lullaby that is about a man who builds a house using paper. In that sense, I suppose that creating houses using recycled materials could be something that could extend the life of the materials that I wrote about in this post.

In McLuhan’s The Medium Is the Massage, I have noticed that McLuhan says that: “Electric circuitry profoundly involves men with one another” (31). To that statement, I would both agree, and somehow disagree. Let me explain myself, and start by stating why I would agree, to then say why I would disagree.

I would agree that electric circuitry has connected people, and we see that every day. Indeed, one can instantaneously read about news happening at the other corner of the world, bypass time constraints and send emails that will be received in no time, meet with people online, and the list goes on and on.

However, I feel that this connectivity that McLuhan is talking about is not a physical one, and is rather virtual. That constitutes the main reason why I would disagree with McLuhan when he says that “electric circuitry profoundly involves men with one another” (31). As far as I am concerned, I think that this kind of electric circuitry does not completely involve men with one another. For instance, the notion of time is altered by this very connectivity, for we tend to want things instantly, and become impatient when things take longer than we are used to. In other words, fast has become the new norm, which could explain partially why we do not take time to socialize “physically” anymore, but do so rather via social networks, in a very brief and superficial fashion.

This isn’t a test text. This isn’t the beach. Neither is it a Magritte