I’ve been pondering on the format of my project, how to present it, how to combine the material, and so on, and to make it into a statement regarding my view on how to make a successful project. After considering drawing, video, and (briefly) model, I decided that I want to present all my work primarily in a book. This is because I feel that all important historical (near or far) movements have begun not only with a written account, but also by the physicality of a book. If I want to condense all my efforts this year into one artefact, I want it to be such a book.
Hence, there will be no specific TS book or white book – there will only be one book, one rallying point, one physical testament.
There is another risk here, which has to do with how you present such a thing. I remember a workshop with C.J. Lim we had in Sweden in 2008, where we cut and pasted the story of Romeo & Juliet into a massive tome of 1200 pages. The critics said the project was great, but perhaps not great as a presentation. It was one of those things you had to sit down with, sip on a cup of tea, and turn off the TV for a calm evening in the comfy chair. Perhaps my book will do the same.
I also recall a comment on the OMA book machine at the AA some time ago, where Justin McGuirk called OMA’s books “the residue of a process.” In the same way, my presentation at the tables etc. could be the residue of the book.
At this point the book is split in sections called superlight, Light, Heavy, and SUPERHEAVY. Of course, they hark back to the concepts of gravity and energy, which are still driving the project. Perhaps instead of categorising content according to scale, we do it to weight, mass, gravitational force. Indeed, this fits nicely with my idea of the individual versus the mass.
So far, I’ve put in all the stuff from the recon in these sections. Will add all the rest tonight.
Some thoughts collected yesterday on this idea. (scroll down to “At once fictional and real …”)