May 25th, 2010 - Mechanical Components proposal.
Mechanical components by Stuart Dunbar.
I propose to make a piece of interactive sculpture that produces sound. The concept is to look at the free-will debate through trying to make the work produce sounds by reacting to the viewer’s presence and participation with the piece.
The name “Mechanical Components” comes from a quote from Daniel Dennet’s Elbow Room, asking the question “How do we reconcile our feeling of free will with the idea that we might be mechanical components of a mechanical universe?”
So within this piece of work I want to explore this theme in a way that will hopefully go beyond previously learned experiences and be an intuitively enjoyable and playful object. So by encouraging a certain lack of knowledge and experience, this will hopefully open up some biological principles of play. Through this in a whimsical manner an experiment of the free will debate will be offered to see whether you can create a harmonious result from the modified music boxes known as Kalimba’s or thumb pianos.
“Mechanical Components” stems from ongoing research into the topic of free will. Following on from my previous sculpture called “Bad Faith”, a theory by Jean-Paul Sartre concerned with the nature of freedom of choice and questioning whether previous experiences determine your identity and or future decisions.
I find influence in crafted sculpture from automata artists such as Paul Spooner and Tim Hunkin. I studied their approach to problem solving and fabricating one off mechanisms to arrive at either humorous or often futile conclusions in the case of Arthur Gansons machines.
The work of American folk/ outsider artist Emery Blagdon who recently had some work on display at the museum of everything, is an overriding influence on the aesthetics of the wiry forms I find fascinating. With a mystical belief in the natural properties of metal that if shaped into particular ways they can have a healing effect upon the body.
There are two main areas of production of the project. Firstly I will be studying and trying to replicate the vibrating noises of a Kalimba (thumb piano). This will include experimenting with different types of metal, at the moment I’m thinking sprung steel would be best but also trying different gauges to see what effects I can achieve. Alternately if I find this tricky I’m also considering adapting an existing Kalimba to suite.
The second part of the process is the electronics. I plan to use an Arduino Duemilanove board which is an open-source electronics prototyping platform (for more info check here, http://www.arduino.cc/). In conjunction with this I have a couple of Sharp 2Y0A21 analogue range finding senors (more info @ http://document.sharpsma.com/files/GP2Y0A21YK-DATA-SHEET.PDF). These sensors can detect the distance between you and itself and give a continually changing analogue value allowing, for example a servo to move in relation to the viewer. I am also looking into the Ping ultrasonic sensor, which is another form of distance measurement but using ultrasonic instead of infra-red like the Sharpe. I’m looking at these as an alternative as there seems to be more information and examples of how to use them available.
To use the information from the sensors I’m going to attach them via the Arduino board to servo motors (SuperTec SO3T/2BB/F more info @ http://www.thmodels.co.uk/supertec-so3t2bb-standard-1143-p.asp). These will be attached to arms that will pluck the tongues of the Kalimba. I am not sure how these will be set up yet to achieve the best sound whether each tongue will require a separate servo or if I will be able to construct something that can cover a few different notes with the same servo. I have also considered using stepper motors if I use a separate mo
tor for each individual note.
My vision of the finished piece will be a free standing sculpture consisting of two Kalimba’s Stacked on top of one another, standing on metal legs running through both of them. The Kalimbas will probably be made from wood and the servo motors will be attached to these bases, determined on how the mechanics plan out.
I will be documenting my work as I go by firstly referencing my theoretical research into the likes of Daniel Dennet and influences from artists such as the Tim Hunkin to Ray Lee.
I’ll show a progression of drawings/ designs to demonstrate what I’m considering to make and also take photos of the development of ideas whilst I’m physically experimenting with materials and ideas. I will then carry on taking photos throughout the whole making process, annotating them to explain my footsteps as clearly and concisely as possible. Also I will take screen shots of programming the Arduino, showing how I managed to work out the coding for using the sensors and motors I finally decide upon and why.
Annabeth (Glittermouse) (May 31st, 2010 at 9:59 pm)
Hi Stuart, I’ve just started experimenting with Arduino too so I’ll be very interested to see what you come up with – have you any experience with coding/electronics or is this a bit of a learning curve for you too? I’m straight in at the deep end myself so I’m expecting as many disasters as successes! Hope to upload some documents of these soon… Have fun playing! Annabeth (Glittermouse)
res003 (June 6th, 2010 at 12:35 pm)
Hi Annabeth, thanks for the comment. I have used arduino before but I with little experience of programming, as I’ve just found the coding that I needed online. So I’m very much still learning. I watched your little demonstrations and am also very interested to see what you come up with.
Stuart
Greg J. Smith (June 9th, 2010 at 2:22 pm)
Hi Stuart,
Just to be sure that I’m reading your proposal correctly, is the intent that the object is self-monitoring and continually playing itself based off the proximity of the viewer? It sounds like you’re planning on crafting a feedback loop. My first question would be is the intent it is played as a duet (object/viewer) or a collaborative performance (object/crowd)? I’m curious as to the social life Mechanical Components can take on/facilitate.
res003 (June 12th, 2010 at 4:52 pm)
Hi Greg,
Thanks for your interest. Yes you are right in saying that the object is self-monitoring and continually playing itself based off the proximity of the viewer. Could you elaborate slightly on what you meant by crafting a feedback loop, I’m not sure what you mean exactly or if I am creating this?
I intend Mechanical Components to be able to be played as both a duet between the object and the viewer but it would also be interesting to see what happens when it’s surrounded by a crowd. I think it will take control away from anyone person and would form a collaboration whether the whole group realized what they were involved in or not. This collaboration may lead to more of an honest response to my original objective of creating a way of tracking natural and instinctive movements rather than learned experiences.
Jonathan Munro (June 16th, 2010 at 12:07 pm)
Hi Staurt. Great start to the project and I think you bring up a few interesting questions. I’m particularly interested in your points about free-will. What are your view points on free-will, or more directly how do you personally perceive free-will. Do you consider it a question of weather causal determination is true or not? Also is the piece of work aiming to clarify this question and ultimately take a side or only highlight its existence?
res003 (July 6th, 2010 at 4:36 pm)
Hi Jonathan, Sorry about the delayed response I’ve been without a
computer for a little while. There are many paradoxes in most
arguments I have read even many philosophers seem to acknowledge
this. But generally I think Sartre has some interesting points on
this paradox where your future is determined partly by your
previous experiences but also admits we are ultimately free beings.
He gives a good example of this in his book Being and
Nothingness, where he discusses a young man coming to terms
with his sexuality. He can’t deny that his previous experiences in
some senses do determine who he is but also don’t. Sartre believes
that it is this contradiction that reflects the human condition, by
being non self identical unlike a chair or table that have an
essence (one way of being). This is not right for a human being,
who has no one way that it should be and is somehow empty waiting
for whatever consciousness we put there. So by declaring yourself
to be a homosexual your giving yourself an essence like a chair
which is not right for a person, but on the other hand it is also
undeniable that they have a past history that makes it look like
that is what he is determined to be. In answer to your question
about whether it was a case of if casual determination was true or
not, yes I think that it would answer the debate but it is
something that has been questioned many times and neither
scientists or philosophers have reached an agreement on. And it is
not even known whether it can be known or what the impact of
knowing would have on the human agency. With my piece of work I am
not attempting to answer the question and to take a side but as you
said to highlight it’s existence. This is a subject that hugely
interests me and I think it will continue to evolve with us and
with our advancements in science and technology so will the
argument gain new ground and continue to puzzle.
Pau (June 20th, 2010 at 11:57 am)
Hi, Stuart
Following on Greg’s question, I also wonder if the interaction
will be based on a direct reponse to the input of the viewer (his
or her proximity), so to say in real time, or if you plan to
include the data from previous interactions and add it to the
inputs provided by the viewer.
This reminds me of two really interesting artworks which you may
already know: David Rokeby’s N-cha(n)t
<http://homepage.mac.com/davidrokeby/nchant.html> and Sonia
Cillari’s Se Mi Sei Vicino
<http://www.soniacillari.net/Se_Mi_Sei_Vicino_.htm>. I do
not imply that your project has to be in any sense similar to
these works, but maybe they can bring in some ideas to the
developement of your sculpture.
res003 (June 24th, 2010 at 9:05 pm)
Hi Pau,
Yes my plan is to enable the viewer to have a direct response
with the piece of work, through their proximity with it. I want
the work to highlight the movements and interactions of the
viewer so they can have either a personal or group experience of
their exploration of the work and the space it fills. Though
saying that I find the idea of including data from previous
interactions could lead to some interesting outcomes. I am very
interested in seeing what this could bring to the project but I
am not a very accomplished programmer and a little put off
through my technical deficiency. Hopefully I could find some help
in exploring this further.
The artist’s work you mentioned are fascinating and very relevant
to this project. I especially like David Rokeby’s N-cha(n)t, I
liked the fact that it plays itself on it’s own and when the
viewer approaches and makes a sound the work becomes jumbled and
incomprehensible. Also I find Sonia’s work interesting in the
relationship between viewer and performer. Turning the passive
viewer into an active performer is something I am very keen on,
letting the viewer determine the outcome of the work for
themselves through their physical interactions.