Big Buzz about Apple's new iTouch Tablet

Apparently Apps will eventually replace websites

Before now, I had never heard of Apple's iTouch Tablet, but Jason Schwartz has. He's an investment strategist with a pretty good record on predicting trends in the tech world.

According to Jason, the soon-to-be-released iTouch Tablet -- basically an iPhone that has devoured an Amazon Kindle -- is going to start (yet) another revolution in how we utitilize the World Wide Web.

To wit:

The iTouch Tablet is about to change society as we know it. The demand for this product is going to overwhelm Apple.

(Sigh... and I haven't even started a Twitter account yet...)

Jason provides 4 reasons for his hyperbolic conclusion. The one that interested me most was his prediction that people will start to prefer Web Apps over websites to access the Internet. He says:

We are witnessing a transition in the way the Internet is used. Mobile content requires a tailor made user experience that is not efficiently delivered by the traditional website model. Although we have grown accustomed to navigating the Web by browsing websites on our PC, consumers are showing an affinity for the App Store model...

The trend is in place that shows consumers will desire an app rather than visit a website. Perhaps we will one day see that apps are more popular than actual websites.

You can read Jason's full blog post here.

I have no idea whether he's right or wrong... I can't afford an iPhone, and I'm pretty sure the iTouch Tablet will be waaaayyy out of my league.

Before Apple ignites the Web 3.0 revolution, maybe it can start by addressing issues of affordability first.

---

In a totally unrelated story, a big congratulations over to Jay Bardyla and Happy Harbour Comics in Edmonton for being nominated for the 2009 Will Eisner Spirit of Comics Retailer Award at the San Diego Comic Con. This is a world wide competition, and Happy Harbour has been nominated for this prestigious award twice!

Happy Harbour produced the 2007 production of Superhero LIVE! at the Edmonton Fringe festival, and is a huge community organizer. It's not question of why such a fantastic company has been nominated, but rather of when they're finally going to bring the hardware home.

Congrats guys!

Update on "throttling" hearings

Key points of the CRTC Hearings thus far

Check out this great summary on Michael Geist's blog about six key revelations to come out of the CRTC hearings that I mentioned in my last post.

This one surprised me:

The rate of network traffic growth is slowing.

This one enraged me:

Each day brought new and surprising revelations about how little ISPs tell their customers about their traffic management practices. By far the most egregious was Rogers, which admitted that it charges tiered pricing for faster upload speeds but that all tiers were throttled to the same speed when using P2P. In other words, the Extreme subscriber who pays $59.99 per month and is promised fast upload speeds (1 Mbps) actually gets the same upload speed as the Express subscriber who pays $46.99 per month and is promised upload speeds of 512 kbps.

And this one made me laugh:

The ISPs seemed surprised that the Commission regularly asked about the privacy impact of throttling and deep-packet inspection.

Making Money on the Web

Indie artists, new-media journalism and DPI

Yes, the Internet is changing everything.

Following up on last week's post, my buddy Adrian emailed me to discuss some of the ideas in the post in more depth. He writes:

I think things are also in transition, and the piece speaks to that in a way - the 'answers' have not yet come out... the problems and opportunities in the democratization of the arts via the web. It's kind of exciting to be working at such a turning point; it's tough, but exciting to see the conversations happening, people inventing and creating ... like that indie singer/songwriter who managed to make 19k in 11 hours using Twitter, and basically just being creative. But she ended up making the money on merchandise - shirts mostly. Not selling her music. This seems to be the bottom line - the art is a promotional tool - you have to sell something which is not in endless supply (ie: an mp3). But, these can still be creative products which are an extension of your art.

Is this new arts business model? Selling items that are associated with your art while giving your art away for free? Then, magically, Trent Reznor weighed in on the same topic, in entirely different conversation elsewhere in the blogosphere:

The point is this: music IS free whether you want to believe that or not. Every piece of music you can think of is available free right now a click away. This is a fact - it sucks as the musician BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT IS (for now). So... have the public get what they want FROM YOU instead of a torrent site and garner good will in the process...

What's interesting to me is how everyone is trying to rethink traditional models of monetizing their practice in the age of the Internet... and I'm not just talking about the culture sector.

Case in point: journalism. Rebecca over at The Art of the Business points out an insightful article about the future of arts journalism today by András Szántó. He notes:

Amid the doom and gloom about arts journalism [...] innovations offer a glimmer of hope. There is no going back to the cultural and advertising dominance that newspapers once enjoyed. We should be mindful that the emerging landscape offers asymmetrical odds for art criticism (which can survive by the labour of individual writers) and arts reporting (which requires institutional firepower and protections). Writers will struggle to reclaim the access and influence they achieved with the backing of prestigious journalism brands. Even so, the faint outlines of a new system are starting to emerge.

This is a great article about the future of one sector of journalism. Everyone knows that this industry is under tremendous pressure, and a "new model" needs to be created. Although, nobody is quite sure what that model needs to be. There are various theories -- Jeff Jarvis recently wrote a book about basing all new economic models on Google's business model. In short: focus on networks rather than traditional distribution models and shift to an economy of abundance rather than one of scarcity.

An economy of abundance assumes that you can charge the least amount for a product or service by making it available to a nearly unlimited source of buyers (or users) via the World Wide Web. Very interesting theory. But... what if the access to the Web itself becomes limited?

This brings me to Deep Packet Inspection or DPI, an Internet issue garnering so much attention that the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has dedicated an entire website to it.

What is it? Essentially it's technology that allows Internet Service Providers' (ISPs), or anyone else I suppose, to examine web transmissions to figure out what kind of content is being sent. Today the Big 3 Canadian ISPs (Bell, Rogers & Telus) are defending their positions to the CRTC to use DPI technology. From what I understand, they want to disuade peer-to-peer file sharing. Their arguement is that it allows a small share of users to eat up a disproportionate amount of bandwidth.

Now, privacy issues aside, why would this affect artists', or anybody else's, attempts to monetize their practice on the Web? Well, DPI technology basically allows ISPs to "throttle" users at their own discretion. In other words, if your ISP believes you are using too much Internet, they can and will slow down your connection. And, apparently they can do this even if you bought a package marketed as "unlimited" or if you are using a small indie ISP, like TekSavvy or Execulink. If you want to know more about why and other politics surrounding this issue, check out this cool, informative post on Technology, Thoughts and Trinkets.

And, if you were planning on producing a play that, say, required you to upload a large amount of data to the Web in order for a variety of users to stream the production live... well, you'd be concerned about ISPs limiting users' access to the Internet too.

On the other hand, there are ways around everything, it seems. For you hackers out there, this is a link you might find interesting...

Gig for Christie Digital Inc.

Wanna come check it out?

So this weekend I'm doing a few days of rehearsals and a video shoot for that gig I told you about a while back.

I could tell you more details about the new technology that Christie is developing... but then I'd have to kill you.

Well, actually, I don't know much about it yet (I find out more tomorrow). Basically it's a new video display technology, and the piece involves combining canned video and live performance. I will have to sign a "non-disclosure" agreement tomorrow morning to protect Christie's product until they start showing it off in July. But I can tell you a bit more about who's involved in the project:

The show will be directed by George Brown, Head of the Theatre Arts Department at Bradley University, Peoria, IL., and the video assets used in the show will be shot by James Ferolo, Head of the Multimedia Department at Bradley University. We have two producers from the University of Waterloo: Professor Jill Tomasson-Goodwin is the Principal Investigator (research team leader)and Gerd Hauck, who I believe is the liason between the University and Christie. It stars me and Stephanie Breton (who I will meet tomorrow).

Assuming all goes well over the next four days, there will be 1 day of 4-6 fifteen-minute performances on July 6 at the Lower Ossington Theatre. The initial set of performances on July 6 will be presented to groups of invited theatre entrepreneurs, technicians, and investors. (Christie has expressed an interest in hiring the actors on an ongoing basis for 6-8 trade shows across North America starting September 2009, for dates yet to be determined.)

When I first mentioned this gig, MK left a comment about how to get in on checking out the performance. I asked Gerd about it, and he said: "I suggest you just invite your theatre artist friends to show up at the Lower Ossington on July 6th. I’ll make sure they get in."

So, if you're interested, send me an e-mail and I'll let Gerd know.

Cheers

PS. The photo above is from one of Christie's more recent projects: Unsilent Night.

What to look at?

An example of video projection in a theatrical setting

Well, in a dance setting, to be more specific.

Over the weekend, my wife and I went to check out Danceworks at Harbourfront, to see a double bill: Accidents for Every Occasion and Mischance and Fair Fortune, choreographed by Jenn Goodwin and Susie Burpee (respectively).

It was a lovely evening, and we both really enjoyed two very strong pieces of indie dance.

What was particularly interesting to me was the contrast between the two works: Accidents was a multimedia piece that incorporated projections of pre-recorded video content, while Mischance incorporated more "back-to-basics" theatrical elements (like scrims and fake blood).

Accidents used different techniques to unify the film elements with the rest of the piece: abstract images, slow motion, projections of text that timed perfectly with moments of dialogue, etc. I felt that Goodwin was successful in marrying the different elements in the production. That being said, the video in Accidents still generated the same kind of anxiety that I've felt in every other multimedia theatre piece I've seen: that I'm going to miss something cool.

It's the anxiety of "where to look" that only video-in-theatre can produce. I believe that this is due to a combination of two elements: 1) the projections are usually placed above the performers so that they don't block the pictures, and 2) video/film projections capture your attention more easily than live performance.

This second element can be problematic in a forum where the live performances should be the audience's primary focus. Well... maybe "problematic" isn't quite the right word, but it definately has an alienation effect on the audience. It's hard to get lost in the action when you're constantly wondering where you should look.

Which is not necessarily a bad thing. It's a choice. And that choice was really highlighted for me when watching two different shows that explore similar themes, but use vastly different staging techniques.

And, of course, it brought be back to my project in which I've been planning to incorporate live-feed video projections... but now I'm wondering whether it's necessary.

See, I know I want to broadcast the performance on the internet (via streaming), and I want to have cameras incorporated into each and every scene - as part of the whole spectacle of "lives lived on Reality TV." But... I wonder: if that is the primary spectacle, then does having the added element of video projections add or detract from the experience?

Just because I can let the audience see the cameras' POVs, would they want to? What is the stronger choice?

I realize I'm jumping ahead of myself on this (thinking as a director/producer instead of a writer), but this does have an effect on the writing. If I want to leave myself the choice of whether or not to keep the projections, then I have to make sure that they are not integrated into the story. That the piece could be performed without projections and keep its integrity...

If anyone has any thoughts on this, I'd love to read them.

Day 3

Two different stories for two different audiences

No, I didn't work on my REALITY project over the weekend. Why not? Well, 5 of the 6 boys from my BFA class were in town for a wedding. So we had a mini-reunion, some good food, and way too much to drink.

Plus, my wife and I had to finish our taxes. (We did - YAY!)

Plus, I went to go see the Subway Series, presented by Ghost Jail Theatre and The Sketchersons. And it was fucking awesome.

I realized this weekend, however, that I'm not going to be finished the next draft of my script by the time the first week of my creation process is done. There's just too much that needs to be done. However, I believe that the work that I'm doing now is accomplishing three very important things:

1) I'm creating a detailed enough scaffold to be able to finish a really strong draft in the next couple of weeks.
2) I'm writing with production in mind, so that I can bring my collaborators some really solid material to work with.
3) I'm building momentum which will push me to continue the work when I go back to my 9-5 gig.

The third thing is the most important because, to tell you the honest truth, I've been creatively dry for months now. As tough as the process is, I'm relieved.

Er, yes, "scaffold". It's a term my former AD used to use, for our ETC creative process. Here is a quote:

"Sometimes the work begins from nothing more than an idea, sometimes a rough script (or as we call it, a scaffold) is brought into rehearsals, or existing material is sometimes adapted. From there, exploration, de-construction and general mayhem ensues."
Barbra French – ETC Artistic Director

I guess, in my personal process, it's more of an outline. This is what I'm using for each scene:

Location: I describe the setting here
Date: The year the scene takes place
Media: My ideas for camera feed, projection and online streaming
Description: Plot description
Background: What happens before and after

At this point, I've cut about 1/3 of my existing material, have re-ordered my scenes and am using the above format to help me figure out how much I want to keep and how much needs to be re-written in the next draft.

I'm also considering having two versions of the play for an online audience and an in-person audience. The idea is currently this: the online audience sees what the camera sees via a live-feed stream. The in-person audience can also see the camera feed via projections. However, there are three scenes that take place off-camera. I was thinking before of just videoing the action offstage and nixing the projections. Now I'm wondering if I should shoot some pre-recorded content, and stream alternate scenes for the online audience while the in-person audience watches entirely different material.

Ignoring the technical headaches that this entails, the play is all about perception vs. identity, so I like the idea of having different versions of the story that exist. Especially if the "real" version is more difficult to access - you have go in-person to see the show to access it. Although "real" is not the right word: both versions are "real". Just one reality would be more packaged than the other. (Which imitates the subject matter quite nicely.)

But maybe people would be turned off if they felt like they were missing out on something. I don't know, what do you think?

In the land of the blind...

...the one-eyed man is King

My wife said this to me a couple of weeks ago as we walked by a little food shop advertising the “Best Seafood Schwarma in Toronto.”

(Blek!)

Good laugh, but it also got me thinking about my REALITY project, and my penchant for ‘innovation’ in theatre, in general.

In other words, I got a little scared.

My little bone-chilling thought went like this: what’s the point of experimenting with new technologies in theatre if nobody cares?

I’ve written in past blog posts about the dangers of marketing experimental theatre. And yet, I keep coming back to it. The basic experimental premise of REALITY is how to use multimedia to present the work in two spaces: a physical space and a virtual space. This essentially means that the production requires two designs, and the challenge is ensure that the designs compliment each other, rather than distract from one another.

However, a larger concern should be: “Is there even an audience for that kind of work?”

I’m convinced that digital technology and the web is going to become more and more integrated into theatrical work. Many of the theatre blogs that I follow focus on incorporating social media into marketing plans for productions. A smaller number of them focus on using digital technology to enhance design elements, like lights and sound.

I’ve read very little about integrating the web into actual production… but I think that’s going to change.

Consider the success the New York Metropolitan Opera has had in screening its productions in HD in movie theatres. Canada’s Stratford Festival has also tried doing this with last year’s Caesar and Cleopatra.

Stratford has actually jumped on the internet train by broadcasting web interviews with creators and stars of its productions. (I also heard a rumor that they’re planning to broadcast a couple of rehearsals too, but I can’t confirm if that’s true or not…) Both of these initiatives are remarkably brave considering how terribly theatre can translate onto video or film… (And, moving forward with my project, this is a challenge that is particularly daunting.)

You can call this marketing, or you can call it “alternative revenue streams,” but I’d like to think that it’s also a design trend.

The internet is changing how people work, relax and relate to one another. There’s a lot of fear out there that this is negatively affecting theatre: that the web encourages people to stay at home rather than assemble to witness a live event.

(Well… so does TV.)

The thing is, I don’t think that combining the two platforms is going to give me any kind of competitive edge. A theatre audience will come out to a show – if it’s exciting, fresh, marketed-well, and ultimately good – regardless.

If I’m going to have a second, digital-based platform to share my work, it should be designed specifically for the intended audience: web-heads.

It should be designed for an audience who may not be interested in going out to watch a show, but rather enjoys surfing, watching new You-Tube vids, Facebooking, blogging, downloading, connecting with friends on social media sites, etc.

I don’t necessarily want to broaden the appeal to an existing audience (although, that would be nice, if it happens). I want to expand my work so that it appeals to entirely different audiences.

Consider this: I currently live in Toronto. The bulk of my career was spent in Edmonton. I also lived in Germany for two years, and have friends and family there too. Not to mention, this blog has had comments from people who live all the way on the west coast.

If I get REALITY produced, I could conceivably share my work with all these people who would have no chance of getting to T.O. to check it out. They could share the live experience, and the communal experience, in a virtual way. Online. On a platform designed specifically for them.

That excites me. And so we move forward… shivering with fear, or not.

Creation Design for Virtual Space

Applying a physical background to a multimedia event

A life in the theatre can seem pretty random. Or... it does until you look back on your body of work and see how mechanically every little career choice has led you up to here.

I was recently awarded a little funding from the Ontario Arts Council Theatre Creators' Reserve grant program, selected through Theatre Gargantua. This is my first arts grant from the Ontario gov't., and my first government funding since I moved to Toronto from Edmonton in mid-2007. I won't lie to you, it's been a quiet few months for me.

However, I've been cooking up a concept for a new show in the mean time. My new project is called REALITY. It's about reality TV. I've already been doing some research (... more about that in a later post...).

My show will be a multi-media production. Believe me, I'm not saying that to try to piggyback on any kind of caché that the label "multi-media production" might have. Like I've said before, I instead worry about the baggage that it carries.

But that doesn't mean I'm not interested in the form.

See, to me, theatre is designing a live event for a specific space and a limited audience during a block of time. Words are spoken, actions are taken, the audience absorbs the whole experience. Which is why I've always been fascinated with physical theatre: because the event is designed for a greater portion of the live space. And you need to begin designing that live space from the moment the creative process begins. It's like shaping a play more than writing it.

But when I did my superhero show back in '07, and we broadcast it over the radio at the same time as we performed it, I realized that "designing for a specific space" and "designing for a limited audience" can have a larger and broader meaning than I originally thought.

Designing a live event for virtual space is a very compelling idea to me. So is designing for a virtual audience.

Designing a live event both virtually and physically simultaneously is... just stupidly cool.

So that's where I'm starting. I'm incorporating the form in the early stages of my creation design. I'm going to talk about the process in this blog as I go along. Not only because I want to share, but also because if you have an opinion or a thought about what I'm doing, I'd love to hear it.

I'd also be remiss if I didn't mention that I wrote the first draft in a 24-hr playwriting contest sponsored by Alberta Playwrights Network and the University of Alberta Bookstore in 2006. (Thank you alma-matter -- I'm totally grateful for my education.)

---

Reading this on Facebook? Leave a comment here.

Art for Business…Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. Michael Cowie

Big sale on now for artists who want to get on the web

I’m kinda excited for today’s blog post because I’m finally able to offer something useful to readers, rather than my own silly opinions.

I’d like to introduce you to Michael Cowie, a friend and colleague of mine who I’ve worked with extensively. Among other things, he’s a web designer (that’s how he eats) and, get this, he specializes in websites for theatre companies and artists.

Which companies? Well, there’s the internationally acclaimed (and soon to be featured at Toronto’s Luminato festival) Catalyst Theatre. There’s also Worshop West Theatre which, if you’re an aspiring Canadian playwright, you should become familiar with right quick. And for you West Coasters, there’s also young Jon Lachlan Stewart.

So why would you want to work with Mike? Well, he’s talented, design-savvy (most of the pics on my blog were taken and/or manipulated by him) and has a tonne of tricks up his sleeve. He can do regular HTML sites, and is also proficient with the new Joomla content management system, which is all the rage right now. Why? Because it allows you to update your website yourself without having to pay a designer to do it for you (like Facebook).

Most of all, he respects artists. Check out the opening paragraph from his Art for Business page:

“Every artist is a good businessperson. They have to be – they get their business done on a shoestring budget, and sometimes have to work miracles just to stay afloat. Any small business knows the game of juggling customer relations, business-to-business collaborations and marketing costs, customer development and financial gymnastics. Business and art go hand in hand – and nowhere more than on the web.”

Whether or not you agree, it’s a refreshing attitude to start a business relationship with, don’t you think? And if you’re not ready to bite, he has useful advice on his “I need a website” page. Check it out:

“You don't necessarily need something shiny or fancy to make an impact or to get a lot of functionality – and functionality is key, now that the web is a means of production and not just a means of communication. If you take time to plan a web-design project properly, you can have both - and get a work of genius on a low-fi budget - but you need to make sure it's a foundation you can build-on when your resources and budget increase, and that it's a tool that you can use to its maximum potential.”

Last but not least, he’s having a “recession busting” sale right now, and knocking off a large chunk of dough (up to 500 bucks!) off the price, if you throw down a deposit in advance. But don’t take my word for it. He’s got testimonials peppered around his site, or you can check out his portfolio and see for yourself. (Yes, there are a lot of pictures of me up there; I’m not totally selfless when marketing my friends…).

Those of you a little more technically inclined, take a look at his Hack Notes for useful tips on pimping out your Mac.

Contact him. He’s really cool.

(You’re welcome, Mike.)

An(other) interview w/ Matej Andraž Vogrinčič

PART TWO

This is the second half of my interview with Matej Andraž Vogrinčič, a cool, international visual artist originally from Slovenia. You can check out Part ONE here.

---

Aaron ~ So, Matej, the reason why we're chatting right now is because of a blog post I wrote last year about Run For Love, a cool multimedia/theatrical piece at the 2008 Aurillac International Street Theatre Festival. I was inspired by seeing that production and would love to get some insight on the process.

MAV ~ Okay.

Aaron ~ How did you get involved with Run For Love?

MAV ~ Ja, I first worked with Matjaz Pograjc 17 years ago. We have the same producers in Ljubljana.they've continued to work with Matjaz for all that time and then they also worked with me on my Liverpool biennial boats project in 2006. So they suggested, "how about you two working together again?" So, we had couple of brainstorms.

Aaron ~ How about Ez3kiel? I mean, the music was such a huge part of the project... Was there any prior working relationships there?

MAV ~ I had never heard of Ez3kiel before. But the project was done as a collaboration with a cultural program called Tandem. It's a French project that invites artists from France and another European country to collaborate. So we started to listen to some French bands and this one seemed to fit.

Aaron ~ International cultural collaboration... believe me, we're all very envious back here in Canada! So, did you all collaborate together? Was it one person's vision or did everyone come up with the idea together?

MAV ~ It was more one person's vision of how to put separate works together into a single theatre piece. How to bring a contemporary art piece, a concert and a story all together into a theatre piece. Or an "urban spectacle" as some critics used to call it.

Aaron ~ And, how do you personally communicate your ideas to others?

MAV ~ In most of the cases I just talk about them. Sometimes I do some drawings, but drawings are normally totally different from the end project, so I do not use them as much.

Aaron ~ Does the way you communicate change depending on the country you're working in? I don't mean just language barriers: I mean different cultural histories and attitudes towards art.

MAV ~ The way I communicate has not changed so far. My approach, especially using public space, is really basic. And, at this basic level cultural histories and attitudes in my opinion are not so very different.

Aaron ~ I guess you would know: you've travelled around the world to create site-specific art. BTW, is Ljubljana still home for you?

MAV ~ Hm, I have to think about it. Yes, I guess it is still my home. But I know it is not my only home. Home for me is where my love is. And also where the stove is burning and people are gathered around a freshly cooked meal. Well. I guess those two are connected somehow.

Aaron ~ After working on Run For Love, what would you say the main difference is between an public space installation piece and a public space performance piece (like street theatre)?

MAV ~ Well, in my case, the main difference was the site specific element. The majority of my projects are done just for a single space. Especially for that space and so the piece can not travel. Also, the majority of installations are there for longer. They do not have the same "performance magic" of just couple of hours and then everything is back to normal. But. if I start to think about it, the boundaries become more vague. Depends also on how we define street theatre and installation

Aaron ~ That's probably a can of worms we don't need to open right now. Moving on! Digital media is becoming more accessible (and affordable!) for many artists, and was a big part of Run For Love. Do you plan to use more digital media in your work?

MAV ~ Yes, I do. It is very important for me because it is a document. After a month, an installation is gone and the images are the only remaining document. I must say, for me, they are not just documents - they are pieces of art themselves. I prepare my installations knowing that the main product is not only this installation but also the photography. So far I have not had enough money to make movies about the whole process. but hopefully for my next project, a video or a movie about the installation with all the close ups and beautiful details will be another work of art here to stay longer than just a month.

Aaron ~ Speaking of which, do you have future collaborations coming up?

MAV ~ No, unfortunately not at the moment. I might work with Matjaz on some set designs for his new piece, but no future collaborations with somebody else at the moment.

Aaron ~ Hear that Canada? Opportunity is knocking.Okay, last question - and it's a goofy one, but totally fitting within the context of this blog. Do you read comic books? If so, do you have a favourite?

MAV ~ Uh. I am bad when it comes to comic books. But please tell me which one is your favourite one? I am in London at the moment so I hope they sell it here!

---

If anyone has a comic recommendation for Matej (or has any questions for him that I didn't ask), please let him know by commenting on this post. I know he's watching.

Thank you so much to Matej for taking the time to chat with me and providing the cool pics. I wish him all the best, and look forward to being able to see his next project! (Hopefully in person!)

An interview w/ Matej Andraž Vogrinčič

Part ONE

Last year, I blogged about a cool multimedia/theatrical piece at the Aurillac International Street Theatre Festival called Run For Love.

Not sure if you noticed in the comments section, but Matej Andraž Vogrinčič found my blog through that post. He's the visual artist who was responsible for the set design of Run For Love... including 7,000 Slinkys walking down a two-storey plynth.
("Slinkys?" you say... Check out this video.) And, he offered advice, inspiration and answers for anyone who might have questions about the project.

Gawd, I love the webbernet.

See, Matej Andraž Vogrinčič is an internationally renowned artist who specializes in the creation and design of site specific work for public spaces. His notoriety began in the early nineties when he "dressed" an entire house in his hometown (Ljubljana, Slovenia) with used and donated clothing. He was invited to do a similar project for the Venice Biennale in 1999: Casa Vestita. After that, his career skyrocketed and he has been invited to produce new work around in the world. Places like:
New Haven, Connecticut (US);
Liverpool, England;
Melbourne, Australia;
Christchurch, New Zealand;
And, of course, Aurillac, France.

Check out his bio over at the website for the SCCA - Ljubljana Center for Contemporary Arts. Scroll down for photos and links.

Naturally, I had a few questions for this very cool artist. Check it out...

---

Aaron ~ Thanks for finding me Matej! I've written about your past work above, but is there anything new that you're working on that'd you'd like to share?

MAV ~ Right now I am still working on Slinkys. I took like a million photos so now I have to choose the right ones to make a small series.

At the same time I am also working on a video. Short, not longer than couple of minutes, about Slinkys going down and what is happening to them while they're marching down the slope. It reflects life in a way.

Aaron ~ How do you mean?

MAV ~ Some Slinkys look like they are in love, walking down very close together. and then somebody - a third Slinky - comes and destroys this harmony of two. Some of them look like they are completely drunk. Some are going down on their own way...

And I also want to make a smaller kind of perpetual mobile slope, escalator and ramp for Slinkys so I would be able to put it in a gallery like an installation art piece. which it was anyway, from the start. Or it can also work on a street, but as a street art piece in its own right.

Aaron ~ How about new art projects beyond the wild world of Slinkys?

MAV ~ I am working on dealing with the ski jump. I think we should use it for something else than just for ski jumpers. So I want to do a project using a ski jump. Hey. maybe I should do it in Canada.

Aaron ~ We have a brilliant contemporary art festival in Toronto called Nuit Blanche. Would you ever be interested in participating in something like that?

MAV ~ I would love to come to Canada. Just invite me and I will be on the first plane! I already am interested in participating in something like that! Lectures, exhibitions, contemporary art festivals...I would be very happy to come and participate.

Aaron ~ Wicked. Mind you, I don't think we have any ski jumps here in the T-dot. You'd probably have to come up with something different. Do you have any ideas for an art piece that would work for Bay Street?

MAV ~ I'm also working on how to use a catapult for art purposes.

Aaron ~ Oh yeah, that would work! But, I've read that you do a lot of research about a space ­- the history and the sociology of a site - for inspiration when you're creating a new work.

MAV ~ Well, it is really very different with every project. But normally, if possible, I want to see the space first. That would mean walking around the city or the area and trying to find some space that I like. something that grabs my attention. In most cases I come up with a concept in couple of days.

Aaron ~ That's pretty quick. How does it come to you?

MAV ~ The idea is developed according to the site. Like in Adelaide, I saw "Small Car Members Only" written on a wall. So I just read it literally and put 15,000 toy cars on the wall...

MAV ~ In the desert, I was dealing with the light and the fact of lacking water.

Aaron ~ And so you covered an area the size of a football field with watering cans.



MAV~ Yes. And in Ljubljana and Venice, I was working on old abandoned houses. which brought me to the idea of dressing them.

Aaron ~ So then, what's your dream project? Imagine you have unlimited funds and unlimited time. What would you do?

MAV ~ Well, I do not know. Never thought of it that way. Most of the time I work with almost no budget or very little...

Aaron ~ Tell me about it brother.

MAV ~ ...so everything I have goes to the material costs anyway. But at the moment, I guess it would be connected with ski jumps. Something kinetic. with objects in the air, using everything from artificial wind to helium to lots of beautiful lights to create some kind of visual experience we would never forget.

---

Stay tuned to Tracking Righteousness to catch Part 2 of this interview, where me and Matej chat about Run For Love, digital media, and staying connected to home.

To project or not to project

More random thoughts on multimedia theatre…

Starting with, “What the hell does multimedia theatre mean anyway???”

It’s one of those lovely bits of language that gets used all the time but nobody really has a handle on its actual definition… just more of a sense of the kind of reaction it’ll produce. Like “physical theatre” or “new media.” Or, “group think.”

Let’s do a quick Google search, shall we? According to Whatis.com, when multimedia is used in live situations it can be “the use of a speaker or actors and ‘props’ together with sound, images, and motion video.” Or, if you check out Scala.com, “The term multimedia describes a number of diverse technologies that allow visual and audio media to be combined in new ways for the purpose of communicating.”

A slide show? A film strip? With (gasp!) sound design??? … yah ok. But nowadays, more likely than not, we’re talking computers. The last few shows I’ve been involved in, a good portion of the production was run off of a Mac laptop. Most young indie producers and designers I’ve recently met own a Mac laptop. Which means more and more shows will continue to incorporate multimedia elements, whether they are designed to fall under the umbrella of “multimedia theatre” or not.

Accessibility is wonderful. But just because my sound design is collection of mp3 tracks played during blackouts, I’m not going to label my show a multimedia production. In fact, few artists would describe a piece as multimedia… even if they’ve included digital projections or other elements... because there is a negative perception that persists.

Why?

Maybe we should look at artists who would rather describe their productions as multimedia than not (… and I’m going to grossly over-generalize here, so please bear with me). I’m going to wager that any theatre artist that labels his/her work as “a multimedia production” has either made a huge error in marketing the piece, or is generally much more concerned with form rather than content. Or, (if I’m more charitable) said artist is more willing to experiment with form… but still at the expense of its substance.

This is a problematic approach. I mean, yes, there is a market for experimentation. But it’s a small one. If you’re okay with that, then go hard. But don’t expect the general public to swarm to your show. An audience’s greatest fear in checking out new works of art is to be made to feel stupid. Experimental theatre usually makes a lot of smart people feel stupid.

I believe in experimentation in theatre. However, I don’t believe in experimentation for the sake of experimentation… unless you’re in school or (maybe) if you’re workshopping a piece. The difference lies in approach. Are you asking, “How can I incorporate multimedia into this work?” You should rather be asking, “What do I need to tell this story?”

A cynic would answer, “You don’t need anything except an audience.” Which I suppose is true, in a kind of fundamentalist point of view. But the key to the question lies within the artist who’s asking, “What do I need?” Because any story will speak to each artist differently, and each artist’s approach to communicating an impression to an audience will be just as unique. S/he is only limited by what tools are available for use.

… Am I then saying that some artists are more predisposed than others to incorporate multimedia elements into their productions? Of course I am. Just as some dancers are more predisposed towards contact improv rather than ballet. And some directors are more predisposed to Shakespeare rather than collective creation. And so on.

As much as my career thus far has generally played out on the sunnier side of experimental theatre, I may be more conservative in my approach than one might guess. While performing in Edmonton, I labeled myself as an actor specializing in physical theatre and collective creation. This didn’t necessarily mean I was always looking for a way to incorporate those elements into my work. It was more of a call to likeminded souls who saw the world in similar ways. It meant that the questions were larger than "How do we incorporate physicality into the work?"; rather, the questions revolved around “What do we want to talk about/ what do we want to create?” Content was key. Form -- experimental/ physical/ collective/ whatever -- was intrinsic.

Now, again, our mistake was less about approach (in my humble opinion) but rather in marketing. (… And, to some extent, execution, but that’s another issue altogether…). We advertised under those labels: ‘collective creation,’ ‘physical theatre’ and even ‘experimental’. And, somehow we were shocked when throngs of people weren’t lining up to buy tickets. Go figure.

Anyway, enough about me: I was talking about incorporating multimedia into theatre, and ended up somewhere along the lines of audience stigma and perception. And marketing. Why on earth does every blog entry always end up about getting bums in seats???

My point is this: multimedia will be used in theatre more frequently because it’s easy to use and increasingly accessible. Does it signify a grand shift in theatrical style? Maybe. Will it lead to larger audiences coming to check out theatre? Probably not – but, as with anything else, it depends on the specific production.

… Is it necessary?

It depends. Start here instead: Who are you?

"They blew it"

... is what my wife said to me as the grainy, Youtube quality video of Stephane Dion was broadcast over some national stations. I sighed, and then agreed.

Hard to disagree. While this whole battle for hearts and minds of the Canadian public may not make a whole hooey of difference to what's happening now over at Rideau Hall, but if the GG does grant prorogation to Harper, then this video will haunt the coalition's quest for legitimacy.

Harper's an idiot. While he stokes the fires of his man-made political crisis into a national unity crisis, he would have a helluva an easier time convincing the nation that the coalition is unstable due to incompetence more than anything else.

Mr. Dion, if you want to quell fears that you're not staging a coup d'etat, then it might help if you avoided making your video look like it was filmed by Al Qaida. For goodness sake: you have the ENTIRE CULTURAL COMMUNITY BACKING THIS COALITION... you could've probably gotten one of us to help you.

Well... I should probably calm myself down. All is not lost, of course. As an artist, I know what's like to occasionally fail miserably (scroll down, you'll find me). However, like Andy Field sez, "don't fear failure."

Here's an excerpt:

So what do you do when the dust settles on a show like that? After the polite and slightly pained smiles and thank-yous? What did (Orson)Welles think, standing there in the darkened theatre, after the acrobats and the stagehands and the chorus line had gone home? Did he agonise over what could have worked better, what he could have changed, how he might have worked harder? More likely, he was already charging blindly on to the next project; the songs and the dances and the collapsing scenery already a forgotten memory.

Onward friends. Onward.

War Robots

Yeah, that's right... War Robots

Does this have anything to do with theatre?

Not yet...

There's a play in the making here, my friends. Meanwhile, let's all collectively weep for our future and pray for the coming of John Conner.

Event Movies

On May 25, 1977, Star Wars opened and flipped the film-making industry on its head, 55 days before that, I was born.

There has been a tonne of focus in the media about Star Wars' 30th anniversary because that movie changed... well, everything about movies. The term "Blockbuster" didn't exist before Star Wars, the opening weekend wasn't the litmus test for the film's success, and merchandising was meant to support the movie rather than vice-versa.

There has also been a tonne of lamentation: George Lucas' destruction of the Star Wars franchise through his incessant profit-mongering. The destruction of the film industry itself since the focus has changed from story-telling to special effects and action sequences. There was a quote in the Toronto Star: "The danger is that the public buys into the concept of seeing event movies to the point where people don't want to see anything but event movies."

Well, sure. But isn't that what Hollywood wants too? Why else do they built the huge cinema complexes with digital surround sound and 10 story high definition screens? "Silver-City" was not built for art films from Quebec. Or any other kinds of movies, really. If I'm going to pay $15 bucks for a movie ticket (plus another $30 on a small popcorn), you're damn right I want to see an event.

It IS an event. The experience of seeing an event movie in the (newer) theatres can be awesome (as in awe-inspiring rather than just "cool"). When the story and characters aren't totally ruined by shallow writing... which does happen more often than not with event movies... the experience can be immensely satisfying. And this is not to say that non-event movies don't allow for that same experience. However many people would rather rent those other movies, or catch them on TV a couple years down the road, or download it and watch it on the computer. In my case, I'd rather go to live theatre.

Because what's the point of paying $15 bucks to see a movie that doesn't do the screen it's shown on justice?

I grew up with the Hollywood of today; I can't lament for the past because I don't know what that was. I expect to see trilogies and I expect cool special effects. My expectations are not any lower because I grew up with Star Wars; I get just as disappointed and disgusted when what should be a perfectly good quality franchise gets ruined by "artistic" choices determined by profit rather than creativity.

People usually categorize the event-movie by its mega-budget, its merchandising capability, and its franchising capability. But it's more than that. It's an opportunity for a community to gather. All the "Pirate" nerds, all the "Sci-fi" nerds, all the "Schwarzenegger" nerds, all the "Comics" nerds... they all can get together and identify with one another. "We all belong to this community, we are great in numbers and we are proud of our geek-dom."

I'd like to make event-theatre to be honest. This is a bit of an oxymoron, though, as the experience of seeing theatre is already an event even when you've gone to catch an experimental solo performance with no props. Because the theatre community is by definition a tight-knit local community. And, to be fair, we're mostly made up of former high school drama nerds.

Theatre franchises have yet to be tried... George F. Walker's "Suburban Motel" excepted of course. I'd like to try to create a theatre franchise. If I'm ever successful in doing it, I hope that my artistic choices will always remain artistic.

I hope my audience will hold me to that.