I’ve been struggling more than i expected finding interview candidates. Peter Elliott and the Old Melbourne Gaol didn’t respond to my email. Recently I emailed the Architecture faculty asking if they were interested, but so far the only reply I have received suggested I contact Peter Elliott. At this point, I will probably wait for some more replys, hopefully over tomorrow one of the Architecture staff steps up. Otherwise, I will probably visit the Gaol in person to get a direct response, and/ or find another way of contacting Peter Elliott.

I’m not really stressing about this though. The main point of the piece is the collage, and I can organise all of that on my own terms. The interview is sort of the secondary thing. If it comes to the point where i can’t find anyone willing to do an interview and the piece is looking bare, I can easily write out a script myself and just do the recording myself or with a voice actor, since I have done my own research about the history of the architecture. My first preference is the interview though. I think it would ground the piece to have a voice like that, rather than just random history being recited.

I’ve also been thinking about scrapping the video interview idea and just doing an audio interview. The majority of the visuals would be the collage anyway. Perhaps the interview subject doesn’t need to be seen. I am leaning toward doing the interview with perhaps just a H2n now, as I am picturing the piece in my head, and the sound of the voice can be effective as it is to inform the visuals, rather than to act as a forma interview with the collage just being a feature.

From here I need to ensure the collage is executed successfully. I need to think about my materials. I am thinking of mounting it on a sheet of wood or something as i feel the construction and the scraping would be effective. But if I want to make it a large piece, which I do, perhaps another medium would be better. I will do some tests, printing it and testing it on wood, paper, maybe even something like calico? I’ll go shopping over the weekend to see what kind of large surfaces I can find that are relatively inexpensive. I also have tons of printing credit in Building 9, so I’ll start printing things off.

On Friday the 24th or April I pitched my ‘Remnants‘ idea to a panel for feedback. I also decided ‘Remnants’ doesn’t really encapsulate what the piece is about. It’s fine as a working title, but the name suggests the piece is entirely about things that are left over, which is a big part of it, but another big part of the piece is the idea of building on top of things and updating things, so I’ll have to think about another title.

I think the presentation went well and I think I got all of my ideas across clearly. I received some very useful feedback also, which makes me feel much better in giving me good direction.

• What I was most worried about was finding a good interview candidate, but one of the suggestions i got was that the architect doesn’t necessarily have to be someone who worked on the building itself. Which makes a lot of sense really. Even if i just got one of the Architecture people from RMIT, they would no doubt have some good knowledge on the matter, as they are aware of various updates and designs generally seen in architecture.  So I plan to get in contact with the Architecture school.
• It was also suggested that I make the collage enormous. I didn’t put too much thought into the size, i was just picturing an A3 or so thing, but since it was suggested, the idea has really excited me. It was also said in passing the idea of doing it on the big conference table in the courtroom, but as soon as it was said i thought to myself ‘wow that would be a really awesome location!’ If I can get permission to use that space for a day, I would really love to do a huge piece on that table. This would also make it interesting to see me working around the piece in wider shots, as opposed to just close ups of my hands and the work.
• It was also suggested that i don’t rely too much on the interview. While it would be a good guide to inform the collage, the collage is the main event. I could decide how much of the interview I want to include after it is recorded. It may be a lot, it may be barely anything, or it could be something more experimental such as ‘Blight‘ (1996).
• I could also look further into the block of land itself, which I do really want to do. Since my piece is about the space, not the place, learning about the block itself and the space itself would be very relevant.
• Something I was relieved to hear was not to worry about time too much. Especially for this type of project, because it is more experimental, in the editing process, the most effective way of illustrating it may be 4 minutes, but then again it may be 1 minute, or 20 seconds, or 5 hours. Its difficult to say, and personally I think a shorter piece will give me space to be more creative, and I probably wont have to rely on the interview too much. So I was happy to hear that time is flexible.

The feedback I received was all really useful and I appreciated all of their ideas. I feel they have put me on a more stable and direct path to realising this piece that’s in my head.

On Friday the 17th, I went into building 20 with my DSLR to collect some images for my piece. I had a list of images i needed to get, but most of the images I needed were from the courtrooms, which were being used for meetings. I walked around and found other images for a while, but was approached but someone came out from their office and asked whether I was staff. I explained that I had permission, but it still made me feel I was intruding. I went back to the courtroom to find the meeting was still going, but now the door was closed. It probably wasn’t because of me, it may have been, either way I decided to go back another day. Hopefully when less important things are happening and when the spaces are free.

After looking through my images, I saw the only ones I still had to collect were from the courtroom. So I went there on Tuesday the 21st in the early afternoon. Luckily the courtroom was empty and open, so I was able to quickly take the photos I needed as well as getting a good feel for the space and what was in it without disturbing anyone.

On Wednesday I spent the evening creating my mock up compositions on Photoshop. I left all the huge, high quality layers on the composition, even if they had been covered over, just so when I have to print it, I can print all of the individual layers without hunting for my required images. Of course this requires a lot of memory from Photoshop, and with each save more huge files piled up on my laptop. I had to keep watching the memory on my computer to make sure I still had enough space to save. If not, I had to close the program to restore the memory. It wasn’t too painful though, just another thing to monitor. It’s not like the program or my laptop was running slowly at all.

After making up my compositions and editing the images, I found I wasn’t happy with one image. The picture of the RMIT sign. It was on a slight angle and the light wasn’t catching it well, making the rusty, brassy plate look muddy. So on Thursday I went back and took some images of it on my iPhone. The picture looks much nicer and after putting it in Photoshop, the quality appears to hold up against the DSLR images.

So I am quite confident I have all the images I need to do the collage. From here I just need to print the Photoshop layers, gather materials, and build it. Hopefully over the next 2 weeks.

IDEA:

Visually experimental documentary, ~4 minutes.

• It will be driven by an interview with an architect/ historian, and the story will be visualised through the construction of a photo-collage.
• This idea is about exploring the physical elements of the architecture, and the development of the space. What remnants are left behind from the ghosts of the old buildings and old functions? How have we built onto it to suit our needs and uses?

SYNOPSIS:

• The piece will be directed by an interview or monologue with an architect or historian. They will recount the history of the space and the development of the architecture, as a timeline.
• The development and various transformations of the space will be visualised through the physical construction of a photo-collage. Layers of images will be built upon and ripped away to mirror the timeline. Much of the focus will be placed on the construction and destruction of the piece, rather than the images being neatly layered over each other, the story is told through the physical process.
• This will be supplemented with video footage from the interview.

WHY THIS IDEA:

• I was particularly interested in the development of the architecture. As I was researching I discovered the cedar roof in the second courtroom had been recycled from an even older building on the site; the Supreme Court. Then comparing that with the new elements that have been incorporated into the space, I saw a history of the space in the building. I want to explore those remnants, the pieces left over from prior uses, and I wanted to show the development of the space.
• In this way, my piece doesn’t focus on the place of the building, but the space it is on. What was in that space before? What will be in the space after? Are there remnants of this in the space presently? How has the space gradually developed to meet the needs of its users?

INSPIRATION:

• Inspiration came from the patchwork nature of the space’s history itself and how it mirrors the construction of a collage.
• There are many layers to the space’s history and use, and you can find the pieces that remain, like the layers of a collage showing through.

WHAT HAVE I DONE SO FAR:

• I researched the overall timeline of the building, mainly exploring specific elements (such as the cedar roofs) to investigate what aesthetic elements would be of most significance:
• 1842-3: Brick Supreme Court was built on site
• 1853: Wooden extension added to it
• 1910: Buildings demolished
• 1911: current building built
• 1914: opened by lord mayor
• 1997: RMIT bought building
• I have contacted Peter Elliott (The architect for the building) and the Old Melbourne Gaol for interview candidates, and am awaiting their decision. I thought the architect would have good insight into the elements of the building, and the Old Melbourne Gaol conducts tours within building 20, so they would probably know of a historian who has knowledge on the matter.
• I have researched the architectural history of the space, and identified the elements of the building I want to highlight. I gathered images from the State Library collection, but the majority of the images are from my own photography. I then layered them and edited the colours in Photoshop to create the main compositions. The construction will be a fluid process, but the main compositions are the Supreme Court, Magistrates Court, and as a modern RMIT Building.

PRODUCTION TIMELINE:

• Collecting material (photos): 24th April
• Composition and mock up:   24th April
• Interview subject: 27th April- 11th May (Week 8, 9)
• Filming collage construction: 4th May- 11th May (Week 9)
• Editing: 11th May- 29th May (weeks 10, 11, 12)
• Rough cut: 22nd May
• Fine cut: 29th May
• Due: 5th June

WHAT I REQUIRE:

• I can provide: DSLR, Photoshop, Printing, Physical collage materials.
• What I require: Camera (Ex3 or Z7), Tripod, Sound equipment for interview, one or two extra people for interview, Edit suites.
• Special: Access to Building 20. Ideally the interview + collage construction would take place here. This would keep the aesthetic consistent and emphasise the theme of space.

PRESENTATION SLIDES:

Professor Paul Gough talked to us about space, place and history. The discussion about memorials and cultural significance were thought provoking, particularly as the Anzac Day Centenary approaches. The following are my notes from the talk:

• When is the point that a space becomes a place. Connections to human memory.
• Layers of absences in spaces. They used to be many places throughout history.
• Many memorials are in in the place of loss, but must signify the loss.
• During ww1, the bodies could not be returned to Australia, which led to an uproar.
• Supposed to be a focal point for grief
• Becomes an index of memory; eg. The names of those lost are listed on the memorial
• Its an icon in the city. A part of the city.
• It’s a ritual, memorial ceremonies etc.
• Stages in the life cycle of a memorial:
• The creation of public memory
• Becomes institutionalised as part of the ritual calendar
• Successive generations of inhabitants accept and pick up on it.
• There’s the notion among young people that it will never happen again, they also pay their own respects for these events. Eg; young people going to Gallipoli.
• Tension between building memorials and icons, and building practical things after tragedies. Practical buildings.
• Memorialising peace rather than war?? People tend to think of peace as the absence of war. Peace is often represented through gardens and plants, its something you have to tend to, nurture and pay attention to. Celebration of peace is more about interaction.
• Dark tourism, people who seek out these places
• Maybe we should examine our own motives. Why do we go to these places? To vicariously experience it? What about the fixation on time? Why is a 100 year anniversary so important. Why do we keep remembering these things, picking at the wound? Maybe it is best to forget.
• Anxiety of erasure. Nobody wants to be forgotten.
• Politically charged memorials. Eg the police at the 911 memorial
• ‘the poetics of space’  book
• ‘texture of memory’ book
• Australia uses ANZAC as a form of national identity, mateship. New Zealand is part of Anzac too, but is more reflective and doesn’t promote it in the same way.

I was interested in Shelley Hornstein’s definition of existence and memory in this reading. The Eiffel tower exists as a real thing, but because of all of the postcards and memorabilia of it, it exists in many other forms also. Those other forms are physical entities, and thus the Eiffel tower exists in multiple forms. This brings up the issue of memory and experience. We all know what this building looks like, but how many of us have actually been to Paris? Most of us have memories of the tower and and idea of it based of one of the other entities it exists as, rather than experiencing the architecture as it is.

Architecture has an important place in cultural memory. Memorial sites and culturally important buildings are precious to entire communities, and when these places are destroyed, even if nobody was hurt or killed in the process, it can psychologically devastate. Those who have never visited the site can have this connection to it, and have a memory of the place without having spent any time there. Architecture is not merely a space to inhabit, it is as much a part of us and reflection of us as we are of it. The space and places we inhabit shape us.

Something to consider in relation to memory is the idea of memorial sites; places that are constructed in order to evoke a certain memory, of a separate event, time and/ or place. It is almost assimilated to the idea of postcards and memorabilia. It is about transporting someone to this time and place in their mind without actually being there.  Something the reading explains about effective memorial sites is that they focus on encouraging reflection in the present, rather than attempting to reconstruct the past. The memorial sites are about remembering, not trying to create the memory of a place that has gone. The problem with this, however, is that many victims want to forget and move on from the painful memories. This begs the question, why do we insist on remembering some things so much? Is it to learn from the pat, or to make sure those who experienced it aren’t forgotten as an act of thanks and repayment? Some may not appreciate the sentiment as much as others, some being those who the memorial is dedicated to.

I brainstormed some ideas for my individual media piece and wrote them down.

IMPRESSIONISTIC:

• ‘Ghost tour’
• POV of walking around the building. Hearing something coming from one of the rooms, opens the door. While the noises get louder with the door opening, nobody is there visually.
• Primarily and audio piece, no people are seen during the tour, but the sounds of history are heard. They change to represent times in history and what was happening in the space at that time.
• eg: courtroom sounds, people chatting, cases being heard. Entrance sounds, horses, people milling, footsteps.

• Additionally, this could be built on top of, by including visuals. Having the ghosts of the past actually there. Walking past ghost people, somewhat transparent. I don’t like this idea as much as just letting the sound tell the story though.

HISTORICAL:

• Documentary focusing on the architecture.
• Obscure angles and extreme close ups of elements of the architecture. Not highlighting the wide spaces, but the little unique elements, textures, decorations, etc.
• Conventional interview with architect, taking about the architecture and design.

SITE INTERVENTION:

• Photo collage creation.
• Interview with architect recounting the history of the space as a timeline.
• Photo collage is made and destroyed to reflect the timeline.
• Highlights the construction of space.
• Extreme close ups of different elements of the collage construction. Construction to be done within Building 20.
• Visually experimental. Close ups of the collage construction can appear quite abstract. Really about showing of the construction and the physical aspects of it.
• It is almost like the documentation of a performance, that is, the construction of the piece.

At this stage, my favourite idea is the photo collage. I am most excited by it and am continually thinking of ideas and angles and imagery I could use. However, I also really like the ghost tour idea. I feel it could be really effective and communicates the idea of ghosts and history well.

On Friday the 27th or March, the presentations for Brief 2 were given. My presentation wasn’t until Monday, however, due to running out of time on Friday. The topics covered were Mapping, Apps and Wayfinding. I feel the presentation on Wayfinding went well, as we all covered different aspects of it. I thought the coverage of topics relating to non visual wayfinding were particularly interesting. The first thing that comes to mind when thinking of wayfinding is signage, but there is more wayfinding than we realise for visually impaired people. I suggested the group cover it because there is more to wayfinding than just seeing and reading. One of my best friends is blind and was complaining recently how our train station doesn’t have the tactile floor things to illustrate where the platform ends. I realised, in a way, wayfinding for visually impaired or disabled people is probably more important than wayfinding for sighted people because its easier for sighted people to figure out where they are or to ask for directions/ landmarks.

The other presentations covered various ways that mapping and location technologies are used. Such as in mobile phones, where your location is always recorded. This can then be used for multi-player, augmented space based games. I was interested to try out the game where real territories are claimed on the app, and the way to play the game is by interacting with the spaces in the real world as your phone records your location. I thought that was an excellent example of how augmented space, mapping and media all comes together. The other presentation covered apps such as lost on campus, the RMIT app etc. How they are built, who uses them, what they are used for, etc. Apps have always interested me, not necessarily the programming aspect, but the creativity and possibilities about them. The fact that you carry them around everywhere and look at them everyday, anywhere is exciting. I would be interested in exploring apps further, perhaps not in a formal setting, but as a hobby.