spring planting - 2009 proposal

planning to apply for a 2009 commission, hope you'll look at my proposal and let me know what you think.

http://www.eriksanner.com/2008_for_blog/080322_spring_planting.pdf

would appreciate any questions/comments/suggestions. will try to respond clearly. thanks a lot.

- erik

Comments

, judsoN

i like erik's stuff. it's like he's updating traditional media (painting and video) for the modern computerized environment.


erik,

i think the planting piece could turn out a lot more engaging than the description. My guess is it (like the chess piece) operates on a level we aren't thinking about.

for the proposal - i'd guess you'd wanna have one really cool graphic up front. A diagram or a screen shot of a test or … but something that just says "i can grab your attention. look=, isn't this gorgeous!" even if it isn't 100% accurate or illustrative. serves both to get people interested enough to look at page 2, and to prove you do great looking stuff all you want. - if you have the energy, time, patience etc., something like that can really pay off.

i would even guess that someone who creates "wow" could make an engaging piece out of a mediocre idea. But a person who creates no "wow" but has great ideas to work with, never gets their attention in the first place to see what great ideas they have.

That's just to say, no matter your idea, put it aside for a sec, start with creating the "wow", and then people will be more receptive to following the complicated description. also have a one sentence summary up front. Of all the details, what's this all boil down to. "I want to compare plant growth with networking behavior." (That's not really what you want to do, but something that simple.

Of course, I hardly can follow my own advice. But seems like you could use one cool graphic up front.

would it make sense for you to use real plants instead of algorithms? Either the plant/masks photographed every morning or taped live for 1 year or video one for an hour and use the frames. You can do it like a mask in most gfx programs or i can show you how to read the pixels.

i like the idea that this is like a garden, blooming with art. seems it would be most effective if the garden were very natural looking.

, erik sanner

hey judson,

this is really helpful and i really appreciate the thought you put into it.

i can see that my proposal isn't that clear yet because yes, i am talking about using real plants, not algorithms, as you suggest. i was trying to do simple sketches but maybe that just ended up being more confusing than clarifying.

and i'll try to put an accessible end-state summary (with a super-cool really compelling graphic) right up front, too.

thanks a lot.

- erik

, MANIK

IF YOU HAVE THE ENERGY,TIME,PATIENCE ETC.,SOMETHING LIKE THAT CAN REALLY PAY OFF.

MANIK,MARCH 2008.

, erik sanner

okey-dokey, recurring theme, make it look better.

had thought of doing a proof-of-concept mockup, but was hoping to spread a lot of the work over a year or so.

one issue is that i don't like knowing what something will look like before i make the piece. i want it to look like something i've never seen before, so if i press to hard on showing what-it-will-look-like, the explorative aspect, which is crucial to why i want to make any art in the first place, can get lost a little bit. i end up feeling more like a daylaborer or technician instead of staying creative as the work evolves.

another thing i'm wrestling with a little bit is that i really want people to experience the piece as a large scale installation, in a big indoor space. one will be able to have a way of interacting and viewing spring planting online, but i hope people will be able to make it to a physical location and encounter it there.

anyway, will try to get something more visually stimulating ready over the next few days, even if it's bogus-simulation-not-actively-functional.

whatever i think it's going to look like, it probably won't look like that. so i'll go head and try to make it look like something, something that i think it might actually end up looking like, without saying all i have to say.

thanks, manik.

- erik

, judsoN

i really agree. and i hope this is helpful in general. you kinda have to look at it anti-idealistically for this whole thing to work. afterwards, once everybody gets what they want, we can all smile and dance.


deciding what art is going to look like in theory and what it tuns out like is so anti-creative. part of the interesting process is the surprise. where it takes you and where you take it is a cool dance.the whole art proposal scheme seems very geared toward articulating the conscious plan, that would be far more effective if it was never articulated or conscious. surely michaelangelo would never get funded now with "i carve marble. it turns out really good." a concept is so entirely beside the point much of the time. but that's what can be shown on paper and breathtaking skill at wielding the tools can't.

that said, it's also a good help to look at it from the funders' view. they have this tax-exempt money and need to give the pencil pushers a rational excuse as to why they doled it out as they did. in the simplest cases, the judges just need more to go on than "i'm gonna play until something neat comes out of it!" which may be entirely the way great work comes, but if a judge is involved, maybe great work just isn't part of this. they have to have a little concrete evidence that you are a decent bet. even if yiou turn out lousy work, at least they can point to the proposal and say "but it was such a good idea." forget for a second there is so much more to doing this than good ideas.

it's a bit pessimistic, but bear with me. how things really are (maybe some funded works actually are ok?) and how to approach this in a way that might be useful to you, can be two different things. pretend this work gets your foot in the door. eventually, you won't need these judgments and your name alone will carry enough weight to get funding. but for now, we make these ridiculous proposals about work that only dimly resembles art to us. but in the end, these things are really only another line on the resume. in years to come, the quality of the work (or lack thereof) isn't going to make the slightest difference. all that will remain is that you got funding. that's what adds up.


i don't honestly think we should all do bad work now. i just think if it helps in your case (and mine) to see the proposal as not exactly related to what you do, but maybe a necessary step. if we don't get this part down and don't win the lottery, we have to keep your day job. the system is (unconsciously) set up to thwart you, so it's easy to give up on it, and thus make the judges job easier. Instead, put the art on the back burner for a sec so you can use the system and make everyone happy.


so making the proposal is a skill itself. market it. to9tally make it look hot. make em feel like they just have to choose you. just use the art as a springboard so you have something to advertise. but it's just a springboard. if you didn't need to mention the art at all, it'd probably be easier. look at the art as an opportunity to include cool graphics or profound ideas. without the art, the proposal would be generic. but the proposal is the main thing, and for now, we can just forget the art. or at least only think of it insofar as it helps make an amazing proposal.

, judsoN

oh - about the on-line aspect.
for this venue, i think that's a central concern, though seems a bit tangental given what you said about hoping people view this in person. what if the light, water, fertilizer, air, etc were regulated by web traffic? or think about the painting(s) in terms of nodes and connections. what happens when we see the abstract netyworking on a applied to the world of the painting(s)?

, erik sanner

this sounds very "judson." what i really want to do is make "paintings" - i mean the art which has always been with us since pre-human times, in caves, then in pompei, in midtown manhattan apartments - but i don't want to make "paintings" because we grew up in an age of film and television and now we have this amazing typing-each-other-at-night and so on - so, anyway, it's a "painting" of a "garden" which is also a garden - and the only connections are the gardeners, the seeds, the actual physical nature of the plants . . . i don't think i want to get into irrigation concepts and where the seeds come from - but it something to think about - it just sounds like it comes more from "judson" than from "erik" - maybe we can talk about this more -

, erik sanner

hey judson, have been thinking about this a little bit. lack of resources is just one more constraint - all those binds come together to define what you're doing as art. no point in painting an ocean if you can just create an actual ocean right? paradoxically, limits provide us with opportunity. so, maybe that's an "optimistic" way of looking at what we're doing right now - finding hospitable habitat for artmaking, one of scarcity rather than abundance, one where we have to do what we can with what is available.

there's one thing i actually enjoy about the being-forced-to-think-through-the-proposal step, instead of just starting on a project. it makes you stop and say "is this really want i want to do? what if i don't get the [grant or whatever], am i still going to want to do it? is there something i want to do more? is there value in this to me? to other people? to the borg, when we become the borg?" that kind of thinking can end up filling you with conviction that whatever the project is, no matter how ambitious or obscure or trivial or ridiculous or whatever it might seem, it's exactly what you want to be doing. since we can't do everything all at once all the time, that's a super-valuable belief to have, that you're making the art you want to be making.

another easy way to deal with making proposals as opposed to actual work - we both know everything changes. it might be possible for artists to behave like civil engineers and make everything to some kind of original specifications - but i can't see either of us doing that.

despite thinking about it, i still haven't refined my proposal. i decided to some time working on another project:
http://www.eriksanner.com/2008_for_blog/080327_color_study_v5.pdf
http://eriksanner.blogspot.com/2008/03/blue-and-yellow.html

and may focus tomorrow and friday on making the spring planting proposal clearer. was a bit conflicted because some people gave advice (like you) either "make it gorgeous" or "i don't get this" - but other people, including two artworld professionals who sit on panels and things, said "keep it just the way it is, don't change a thing, i look at this stuff all the time and it was very easy to read and i would want to fund you." so there was some reinforcement to my inclination not to change anything. anyway, will try to make it better. probably won't gorgeousify, but hopefully will communicate lucidly.

today finally did get the spring planting webpage-way-to-submit-the-application up:
http://www.eriksanner.com/applications/spring_planting_rh.html

i always get nervous before deadlines. what is it, sixty-something hours? maybe i'll grow out of that eventually?

hope yours is going well.

- erik

, MANIK

[size=200]WOW![/size]
MANIK,MARCH 2008.

, MANIK

[size=200]POW![/size]
MANIK,MARCH 24…2008.

, MANIK

[size=150]CRACK![/size]
MANIK,MARCH 24,2008.

, MANIK

[size=200]BOMB[/size]
[size=150]MANIK,24.MART 1999-24.MART 2008.[/size]

, MANIK

[size=200]~~~~~~~~~~~[/size]