sadia mir

Outcomes versus Expectations. Differences? If so, Why?
I am very satisfied with what Joanne and I were able to accomplish in the nine days: conceptualization of project, call out for participants, coordination and recording of six wedding ceremonies, post-production, creation of promotional material (posters/programs) and installation and exhibit for class critique.

For the most part, we were able to accomplish what we had proposed in our initial proposal with the following modifications: (i) we had initially proposed one two-image projection space but this changed. We filmed our women in profile to simulate for the spectators the experience of being guests to a wedding. We soon realized that we wanted to see the women front addressed to camera (and imagined the spectators would have a similar reaction!). On the spot, we asked the women to address the camera with their name and why they chose to get married that particular day. This became the data for the first of two projections in our piece. Much as Alex commented, these video clips served to contextualize the wedding ceremonies, and in our opinions, brought more depth and meaning to the project. (ii) We managed to coordinate six ceremonies instead of the projected ten. Though we had hoped to meet the numbers, we were satisfied that six demonstrated the overall goal of the project. We didn’t realize the difficulties in finding women to marry, which leads me into my next point … (iii) We ended up revising our terms and definitions of marriage and who could participate. It soon became apparent that these definition of singledom, marriage, etc. were topics for debate. For example, initially, only single woman were allowed to participate – then second day of promotion, a woman who is in a relationship, has chosen not to marry her partner, but wanted to marry herself. As well, part of the critique ended in discussion of just this – what is marriage, who can participate etc. These are contentious issues, which make the project even more engaging, however, we must be clear in our criteria and why – which through the process, we now are. Yes, we are sticking to the term ‘marriage’ (because it is such a loaded term) – and not replacing with affirmation vows (etc.).

The first time we saw our installation (actually the first test with MaxMSP) with the large projections of the brides in profile saying their vows to themselves – was pretty amazing. Beautiful and poignant moments captured.

It is worth noting that part of the success to Joanne and my collaboration is both our commitment to the process. We had first worked together in second term’s film/video production class where we completed a short video. During production, we were very mindful of the collaborative nature of our work. We were also ready to return to the white board to brainstorm and re-assess should our story not seem to flow, or should something arise unexpectedly. As a result, both conception of story and narrative structure remained anything but static. We brought this approach to i ME wed, which proved to be what we needed to shape and move the project from proposal to delivery.

A whole lot of learning
The art of storytelling: This process allowed me to participate actively a new media project – enabling me explore issues discussed in class through actual experience. For me, one of the greatest points of learning revolves simply around how we tell stories – the storytelling experience. When usually I spend a great deal of time in the development and creation of a story and a strong narrative structure, in i ME wed, the process was drastically different. Here, we set a group of parameters for our participants – age, marital status, sex – and put forth a call-out for women wanting to get hitched. That’s it. There was no story arc – no linear narrative (etc.). Instead – what the women brought to the project was most illuminating and served as the data from which multiple narratives derived. To undergo (and be creators of) such a process was extremely valuable as a documentary artist. We had created an empty house from which stories started to reside.

Creating Environments: Through i ME wed we also focused on creating an environment suitable to our project. We created a wedding space, materials (wedding programs/guest book etc.) to support our concept, and also thought of the flow of spectators walking through the space – in this light, we separated what initially started as one projection space to two projection spaces: meeting the women (first, clips of women stating their name and why they decided to get married) and the main space of the wedding ceremonies.

To do differently: (i) Enhance promotion. In our 9 days, we hit facebook, kijiji, craigslist, university women centres, Toronto Women’s Bookstore, women-centered listservs, NOW, Eye Weekly online, and our friends, which proved to be effective. However, we quickly learned that we needed an accompanying marketing strategy to connect with women who do not use online social networking sites to stay informed. I do have a solid network of community contacts (women centres/community groups youth and all-aged inclusive) to which we could promote this project. (ii) Determine clear guidelines of what is and what isn’t permitted during ceremonies (i.e. a friend taking photos of bride even though the flash is visible/heard on camera?) – what parameters do we want to instill that lead to polished media output while providing the space for the bride + party to have a welcoming experience – when their experience is vital to this project. (iii) Have a place designated for photo-taking (we took photos but realized the background was not the most pleasing). Also have a camera set-up for friends to say words of encouragement. As we would like to create a rich experience, these details are necessary to consider (iv) Further develop the MaxMSP patch to correspond to our project requirements. Steve did so much work (thank you!!) to configure the software to our needs. Unfortunately a few glitches and no sleep later, we ended up creating a video of clips to project. Of course we will spend more time on finalizing the software. We invited women to write vows of under two minutes. What we received were vows ranging from 45 seconds to 100 seconds. As a result, there were periods of varying lengths were the women stood in silence. In reflection, it would be ideal to work into the coding of the MaxMSP patch that when one clips audio is completed (at the end of a woman reciting vows), this triggers the advancement to the next clip. This may improve the flow of the projected clips.

And as Steve reiterated at the end of day 1 of the critiques – it’s all about the process and cycles. Get the prototype running as quickly as possible and start the testing / tweaking process. I’ve gathered that this is key in new media installation projects such as i ME wed, and the other projects presented during the critique. Only through testing do things become more clear – everything from technical troubleshooting to observing exactly how spectators will interact with the environment created.

This first run of the project was excellent in bringing these questions to light.

Not necessary to do differently, but to do with funding: (i) a Vegas-inspired chapel to provide spectators who feel inspired to get married on the spot, an opportunity to do so and then their vows get inserted into an ever-evolving and growing i ME wed database (ii) an i ME wed website in which to track the travels of the i ME wed exhibition, and to house the i ME wed community (pages for each bride, photos, video segments etc.). Alex pointed at a good suggestion – to incorporate ALL of the data we collect in an engaging manner to fully contextualize and show the breadth of the issues discussed. For example, we will set up an online discussion forum. (iii) Improved set-up which has first station entry point with first projection screen (big!) leading you into second station (wedding ceremony)

Reflection on new media on my documentary practice: So much. Firstly, a great deal of the work that I am to put into the world derives from a motivation for social change. I am very much interested in participatory media working with community groups and further connecting media and the NGO sector – collaborative media. I see what I have learned enhancing my understanding on the ways in which to actualize these ideals. With participatory practices comes a loosening of linearity, shift of authorships and the potential for user-generated material, for a few examples. I see i ME wed as one prototype that can be adapted, modified and expanded for other subject matter.

For example, another project that I have in initial concept stage is working with a group of women from the South Asian Women Centre and to explore issues of immigration and life in present day Canada – to look whatever issues the women bring to the table – collaborative media is key for this type of project. Many of tools reviewed via this project and in this course are potentially related – i.e. web 2.0, MaxMSP software, motion sensors, data visualization, installation art, and the archive. I have done a decent amount of theoretical research on participatory media, however, it is through the i ME wed experience that I am starting to wrap my mind around what it means to truly create participatory media in both theoretical and practical forms. (I realize that i ME wed is not fully participatory in the sense that the women did not assist in the development of the concept, though, taking this first step in working through this experience has inspired me to take what I have learned and apply to projects such as the one described above.

Lyndall made a good point in her post – did we learn these technologies enough to incorporate them into our practice? My response is divided. Yes for the reasons listed above, and no as I am new to many of these new media technologies presented and we covered a great deal in such a limited time. I did feel that we merely scratched the surface (though admirably so to produce the resulting projects!).

Only six weeks. I can only imagine what would manifest with more time. For me, this course seems to be the epitome of our MFA program: we are encouraged to think in new ways, to incorporate all forms – photography, film/video, new media – together to create innovative documentary media which challenge and rival what currently exists in the doc world.