PARADOXA Visual Essay

“We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities.”

“Full of loneliness and misery and suffering and

unhappiness, and it’s all over much too quickly”

PARADOXA Visual Essay

I think one of the most odd things about learning is the moment where you know enough to realize how much you don’t know

KNOWLEDGEKNOWLEDGE

KNOWLEDGE

KNOWLEDGE

There is a reach to knowledge and skill. You know what

you know, and through time and effort and diligent focus,

you’ve also come to realize a few of the things that you

don’t know. You begin to understand that those unknowns

are within reach if you stretch a bit. That’s learning. And

then the thought occurs to you that puts the fear of God

in your bones: there are things out of your reach, (Impor-

tant things! Crucial things!) that you will never know that

you don’t know. It’s a darkness too dark to pierce.

I think one of the most odd things

about learning is the moment where

you know enough to realize how much

you don’t know.

It feels a bit like walking through a cave with a really crummy

torch. The torch gives enough light to see a couple feet in front

of you. We’re told that’s enough to get out, but I’m always left

wishing I could see a little further into the future, because I’ve

got a pretty good hunch this cave is massive. If only we could

make our torches burn a little brighter. KNOWLEDGEEDGE

KNOWLEDGE

KNOWL

“What the hel l were they doing

with a car on the moon? You’re

on the moon already! Isn’t that

far enough?”

Paradoxes are greater than the sum of their parts. If one and one is three, that last third is the conceptual leap

that connects them. It’s where insight lives, and it’s what causes my delight. It’s why Seinfeld is, and will always

be, funny. It’s why Jennifer Daniel is clever (and funny). It’s why I miss the old Simpsons. It’s about curation,

choosing wisely, and presenting an audience with something new. “Here, look at this thing you didn’t notice.”

“Here, consider this thing in a way you haven’t before.” A good paradox broadens our scope as people. It makes

us question, but I think it also allows us to accept.

Paradox is all around us.

The Absolute is

the concept of an

unconditional reality

which transcends

limited, conditional,

everyday existence.

it is often used as

an alternate term for

“god” or “the divine”,

especially, but by no

means exclusively, by

those who feel that the

term “god” lends itself

too easily to anthro-

pomorphic presump-

tions. the concept of

the absolute may or

may not (depending on

one’s specific d

octrine)

possess discrete will, in-

telligence, awareness or

even a personal nature. It

is sometimes conceived

of as the source through

which all being ema-

nates. It contrasts w

ith

finite things, considered

individually, and known col-

lectively as the relative.

Phenomenology’ comes from the Greek word for ‘to appear’, and the Phenomenology of Mind is

thus the study of how consciousness, or mind, appears to itself. In Hegel’s dynamic system, it is

the study of the successive appearances of the mind to itself, because on examination each one

dissolves into a later, more comprehensive and integrated form or structure of mind.”

I first read about this idea almost

two years ago, and soon after

came up with the concentric cir-

cles graphic, a much simplified

visual interpretation of how I see

Hegel’s theory operating in each

of us. When the opportunity came

to put together this exhibit, I knew

I wanted to explore Hegel’s ideas

further, and the output is simply

that: my own exploration into the

workings of human conscious-

ness, filtered by what I have read

and what I have seen and what I

have experienced, and present-

ed as such. My philosophy of art

making is the same: interpretive,

concept-based, process-oriented,

and having little to do with myself.

It is rare when I don’t think about

what it is that connects us all, though

much more apparent in my every day

is what doesn’t, or more appropriately,

what is uniquely different about each

of us. In the most simplest of things

we can find ways to argue and clash,

and these feelings are only intensified

when paired with things of more per-

sonal importance. It might be easiest

then to describe the unifying factor

in the form of the question ‘why are

we here?’ (and it’s related ideas ‘what

is real?’, ‘what does it mean to exist?’,

etc.) and how we each come to terms

with the impossibility of answering it.

But that is what we are all faced with,

the cause and not the effect. The ef-

fect, or rather, the answer to the ques-

tion, can never be the same for all of

us. Our consciousness won’t allow it.

Could there be some sort of Abso-

lute?* I think so, but it is absurd to

think that everyone will come to the

same realization at once about what it

is, or even more laughable that it will

reveal itself.

To resolve this paradox, Hegel adopts a method whereby the

knowing that is characteristic of a particular stage of conscious-

ness is evaluated using the criterion presupposed by conscious-

ness itself. At each stage, consciousness knows something, and

at the same time distinguishes the object of that knowledge as

different from what it knows. Hegel and his readers will simply

“look on” while consciousness compares its actual knowledge of

the object –what the object is “for consciousness” — with its crite-

rion for what the object must be “in itself”. One would expect that,

when consciousness finds that its knowledge does not agree with

its object, consciousness would adjust its knowledge to conform

to its object. However, in a characteristic reversal, Hegel explains

that under his method, the opposite occurs.

We live inside all experience, but we are permitted to bear witness only to the outside. Such is the riddle of life and the story of the passing of our days.”

-HOWARD THURMAN

“Well, the way of paradoxes is the way of truth. To

test reality we must see it on the tight rope. When

the verities become acrobats, we can judge them.”

—OSCAR WILDE

“I must be cruel to be kind”“I must be cruel to be kind”

However, Hamlet is speaking about his mother,

and how he plans to ultimately slay Claudius in

order to avenge his father’s death. His mother is

now married to Claudius, so of course this will

be a tragedy for her. However, he does not want

his mother to be the lover of his father’s mur-

derer (unbeknownst to her) any longer, and so

he believes the murder will be for her own good. CruelKind

Every game needs rules, and every successful frame-

work for improvisation has lim

itations. These limitations

can be internal to let the creative get to work, but can

also manifest outward to act as rules of engagement for

contributors and participants.

Limitations can be useful to help a creator or contributor

begin working in a general direction, then, use the feed-

back of the process to steer their decision making. This

is how improv theater works. Most sketches begin with a

prompt, then the actors let the momentum of the narra-

tive snowball by working off of the limitation of the prompt

and any rules the improvt game may have.

The utility of restraints is that they give the participants

common-footing, which allows them to get started. Moti-

vation doesn’t disappear, it evaporates, and this seems

crucial when a designer is either trying to get to work, or

is working to ensure their users remain engaged. One

strategy is to create a purposeful set of limitations I lik

e

to call a “pseudo-structure.” Pseudo-structures act as a

framework for creative activity and improvisation. Limita-

tions are the playground of a creative mind. They are a

latticework on which to hang ideas.

Creating these frameworks and building them on the idea of acceptance means

that there will always be an element of ambiguity in the results. But, designers

and users will become more and more accustomed to ambiguity as more of these

platforms are built, because their utility will not be obvious. As the format of con-

tribution proliferates through more of what designers make, more new, powerful

tools, devices, sites and ways to interact will not have a clear value proposition.

They can’t say “this is important because it lets you do this” or “this is the specific

reason this thing exists.”

One of the core beliefs of improv theater is the idea of “Yes, and…” meaning that

each step in an improvisational process is accepting previous contributions and is

additive in nature. Improvisation is more akin to building with clay than sculpting out

of marble: things are added and attached rather than excess being carved away.

The process is not freeing people out of blocks of marble, it is building something

out of nothing. Rejection squelches unforeseen possibilities in the interaction and

cripples participants’ desire to contribute. Frameworks for improvisation must re-

main positive and accepting.

The challenge (and potentially the art) of creating these frameworks is balancing

the inherent incongruency of some ideas that comes with setting limitations versus

trying to create an atmosphere of acceptance that maximizes potential. The art is

having participants understand that anything goes, but not everything.

Ambiguity begins to explain why Twitter is different from Facebook.

The value proposition of Facebook is clear: stay in contact with friends

and share with them. But, what’s the use of Twitter? No one can say

definitively, because there is no right way to use it. For some, it’s a

news feed, for others, it’s a way to communicate with friends, and for

others, it’s a way to keep in contact with brands.

It’s why Twitter fascinates some and beguiles others. Twitter can’t craft

a clear value proposition on their homepage to say what the site is for,

and if you are someone who needs convincing, that’s frustrating, be-

cause everyone is talking about the site. If you are observant, Twitter’s

popularity in spite of its utility ambiguity is a sign that something big is

happening on a larger scale. We are no longer building hammers with

one specific use, or even a swiss army knife that can do many differ-

ent things. What we are building is more akin to two pieces of stone,

from which someone can make their own tool for their own specific

uses: arrowhead or hand axe. The most flexible frameworks for im-

provisation will not only have improvised content, but also improvised

utility. Often times, the utility is the interaction.

When choosing limitations, the designer needs to be careful to not make them too-well-limiting

“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”

Equal

Equal

Equal

Equal

One word’s personal meaning is

rooted in such an elaborate se-

quence, imagine concepts much

more complex, or much more personal

(or better, emotional). There are certainly

going to be common threads shared by any-

one, but the differences in your experience

are staggering. I won’t even go into this effect

on things such as politics, religion, and the

like, but you get the idea.

“The curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, then I can change.”

—Carl R. Rogers

“It is about improvising”

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

GR

AY G

RAY

Design seems to be the same way. It is about improvis-

ing (we can’t boil it down to a hard set of rules to follow).

It’s about meeting messages at a halfway point where

the creators and users overlap. Design is a platform and

cultural vessel prone to hyperbole. And it has a soft value

that is often difficult for outsiders to discern.

The primary trait of both jazz and improvisation is process.

To truly partake in it, you have to visit a place to see it in

progress. Every jazz club or improv comedy theater is a

temple to the process of production. It’s a factory, and the

art is more the assembly than the product. One could say

jazz is more verb than noun.

That makes me think that the most successful of these im-

provisational frameworks we create should be verb-based,

and focus on creating meaningful experiences, interactions

and connections. We’ll use nouns and artifacts to act as fa-

cilitators, but the real point of the exercise is the experience.

Designed frameworks can be platforms for experienc-

es. As our skills in making them mature, the basic trait

for platforms will be interaction and the basic need of

its contributors will be connection. The success of a

framework will be measured in enthusiasm. But, it

should be said that platforms and their frameworks

are not a destination, but an environment: less a

sandcastle and more a sandbox. It has been fre-

quently noted that the tools of our trade have been

democratized and everyone can access them. If we’ve

all a shovel and a pail, the sandboxes we build become

incredibly important. So, time to play.

Amusement is one of the best parts of paradoxes,

but their application is wider and more important. I

think an increased tolerance for paradox is a crucial

requirement for a person to be able to cope with the

world today. Our access to information has created

more paradoxes. We’ve made pieces of conflict-

ing information more accessible than any other

point in time. Unfortunately, we’ve mistaken

cynicism as the tool we need to cope with

this conflict of information. It seems much

more healthy to me to accept that two pieces

of contradicting information can both some

how be true. It removes that default state of

distrust, and displaces it with acknowledge-

ment, respect and insight. Things aren’t black

and white. They are gray.

WE’RE GRAY.

There’s an old joke. Two elderly women are at a Catskills mountain resort, and one of them says: “Boy, the food at this place is really terrible.” The

other one says, “Yeah, I know, and such small portions.”

“We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities.”

Cameron BrownVISC 202 Selby

Fall 2012

PARADOXA Visual Essay