Monday 10/12// Class Notes Dump //
What does this look like as a pedagogical workbook?
- documentation as preface to prompts
- prompts as workbook
Test layouts/models with one day (transcript?)
How do we diagram prompts?
Diagramatic writing >>> http://will-luers.com/DTC/dtc354/diagrammatic_writing.pdf
Library of Babel >>> https://www.google.com/search?gs_ssp=eJzj4tTP1TcwTLLMrjRg9BIpyUhVyMlMKkosqlTIT1NISkxKzQEAqWgKrw&q=the+library+of+babel&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS893US893&oq=the+library+of+bab&aqs=chrome.1.0j46j69i57j0l5.4140j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
?? First passes at content by Monday ??
//Discussion with Casey, Andrew, and Ralph
RC — Interview at same time as masterclass, didn’t think of it as part of it though, wanted to grapple with Laoutr’s immersion in philosophy/philosophy of science rhetoric and rhetorical theory, doesn’t/sohuldn’t have any relation to the master class
AO — pitched in advance to Rhetoric and Philosophy,
RC — constraints of publishing in a journal (page length), edited version that fits into masters class? Interested in stand alone publication (circulated digitally as well as printed?)
AO – Too long, Sections that are relatable to anthropocene (Included in HWW) vs stuff to chop out (It’s publication). How do we edit and get it out there. Up for whatever.
RC — Foreground notion of publication on behalf of Casey and Andrew. Elevate their commentary in relation to the interview. Presence of C and A for publication purposes. Go through recognizable channels in legitimize publication. Juried process.
Haymarket or Verso
How to fill out publication?
- RC — Subject inside the text itself that C and A would jump on and reframe to present a reflection on the interview/what later has been up to in relation to selected subject.
- this model allows A/C to disagree with Latour/project forward
- How many words would a publisher want
- Do we set up our own marketing system
Wednesday 10/14Discussed ways forward, group v independent pub, publishing via university presses as well as distribution with Jack. Were considering merging the new text produced by Casey and Andrew through foot notes or some sort of internal dialectic.
Hey Andrew and Casey,
We’re writing to update you on a few different things for our project! Apologies for the length of the e-mail. Please, let us know if you have any questions, as well, if you’re available to meet again next Monday over Zoom.
Today, we spoke in class on the possibility of moving forward with a separate publication to showcase the Bruno Latour interview, along with new writing from the two of you. During our meeting, our advisor expressed excitement for the collaboration. He mentioned how he believes there is a unique opportunity to create a project that attracts an audience across disciplines in an independent art book form. Additionally, he stated how there are multiple avenues we can pursue to publish this content, either as a standalone publication like we discussed on Monday or along with the group publication for our class (or both).
We are hoping to make the publication of this content as collaborative of a process as possible. To those ends, we created a Google folder that we shared earlier this week. In it you will see an excel spreadsheet that was designed to facilitate asynchronous collaboration and thinking around footnotes, key terms, images, and diagrams. Also included in that shared folder are design models that we are thinking about using as starting points for discussion.
- Amalgam OP.II — model for text and images as footnotes as well as mind map/diagramatic language
- Black Transparency — model for design intervention working alongside, but not within the academic text
- Blueprint for Counter Education — model for diagramatic language (these are large fold out posters that accompanied the text, meant as a learning device)
- The Medium in the Massage — model for publication that is coauthored between author and designer (fully integrating text and design)
We have a few initial thoughts on how this publication can take shape. One thought being that all of your responses/critique/extrapolation of the interview could exist as footnotes. The commentary directly responds to the interview on the same page, creating an internal dialectic within the text. Another thought is that we could intervene as designers by including our own visual footnotes in the form of diagrams/diagramatic language and images or with interstitial pages that visualize or diagram the internal dialectic happening on previous or following pages.
Would the two of you be able to hop on a zoom call this Monday (10/19) between 9am and 11:40am to discuss the content of this email and next steps? We look forward to talking to you guys soon.
Daniel, Oscar and Josh