Lewis_Table-top Crit Strategy

The following is a list of the work in the order that i would like to present at the Table-top Crit:

 

Dungeness context:

What exists, how it is interpreted. Why is it significant?

Material Quality, Apparent waisted-ness, Ambiguity. Planning conditions.

Who is Derek Jarman?

 

Dungeness and Preservation:

Canvas type, material rich, preservation heavy.

Preservation types: Architecture, Static archive, Living archive.

 

Archival Precedents:

Rem Koolhass’ precedents.

Derek Jarman’s Archives- Garden, Diary. Himself?

 

A new way to treat preservation:

Proposed strategy to re-enact the ‘playfulness’ of a living archive

Propositional

 

Technical Challenge:

Achieving the desired procedural effect

Technical proposition of how this can be achieved.

 

The goal is that at the end I want to focus my energy on having some sort of outcome, and working towards it rather than making more provokations/ speculations. Ive updated my long term list of pages that I would like to do and will focus on the key ones for the crit.

EPSON MFP image

EPSON MFP image

EPSON MFP image
After the crit I will re-evaluate the priorities and fill in gaps

One thought on “Lewis_Table-top Crit Strategy

  1. On Tuesday we talked about arriving at a point where you have a strategy/ set of principles as a step on the way to making a proposal. You have already done the thinking for this so make sue that is where you end. Be sure to introduce the presentation by saying what your research is – how you are approaching the site, and what you are working towards (at this point the strategy/ principles – and an indication that this is then the stepping off point for the proposal), framing this as a critique of preservation is good and be specific about the nature of preservation currently in relation to Dungeness.

    The proposition that Jarman is enacting preservation through the garden and diaries is interesting. I am intrigued by the ‘playful’ ‘living’ archive. How can you work this in to your nature / manmade discussion? I am not quite clear on this from your outline.

    As you know, there is quite a bit of new work to get done here so look at it smartly. The thumbnails seem a sensible order, once you also plan for the intro as mentioned above. Plan the presentation so that every point you make relates to something on the table that the critics are looking at, this might help you create a hierarchy of the most important parts to resolve. (I am unclear on the Le Corbusier precedent so think about where this is in the ‘to do’ hierachy).

    There are some really interesting ideas here, this is the opportunity to get them out of your head and confidently own them by getting them drawn up and presented. Enjoy!

Leave a Reply