This blog starts in October 2016 and this point can be accessed in the right hand side panel in the Archives section. It details all practice outcomes since the beginning of my MPHil/PhD.
The contents of the Blog is in a constant state of flux, images and texts are detailed or contextualised at different points and sections are edited and added to. The writing responds to the physical acts or moments of practice and encounter. Other (academic) writing is not within the blog. This enables significant processes to be documented with an undertsanding that fuller and theoretcically underpinned writing can take place within or outside of the blog format.
0 Comments
To claim a territory, we need to first feel that it needs to be claimed. The whole day had been about the moment between the exhibited work, the object within the hand and the individual. The seemingly inert forms that they were given at the start of the day had become assertive, the individuals had become assertive, found a voice and activated the work before them in a different way than their familiar approach to the gallery. The held objects had become catalysts for thought and encounter or rather thoughtful encounters. From the start of the day when we sat in the turbine hall as a small cluster and discussed how we could make an impact on this space, the architecture, the work, the experience we were now catapulted into another position. This position was one of importance and of value. The group were now insistant about the appropriateness of their actions. If I reference hermeneutics and particularly the notion of play within learning I am not using play as an aside or passive wandering. I am asserting purposeful play that is full to bursting with intentionality that stops the imaginings being such and moves towards the imaginings as truths. They come into being. Everything during the day had come into being as though now highlighted, underlined and in bold the objects and the individuals were present in the experience. It was their experience and whilst informed and set by my ingredients they now owned the experience. The transformations of meanings, functions and actions had enabled the play to become critical and essential. ‘through such an objectification the player transcends his established world. Produces a new set of possibilities, and in doing so appropriates them as his own.’ ( Gallagher, 1992. P144) The yellow line. We had claimed the territories and become more forceful more vital in the spaces during the day. Our tentative beginnings were now overthrown. In the turbine hall, we unravelled 50 meters of yellow satin ribbon. It ran down the space drawing its silky line straight and fluid. It ran just next to the scar of the Salcedo crack which was zig zagging its way in the concrete. The yellow ribbon followed alongside, a glamourous parking delineation (maybe) as it demarcated 2 different areas of the Turbine Hall. The shibboleth (2007) piece refers to a geographical and cultural exclusion (http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/salcedo-shibboleth-i-p20334). It was a test of belonging. This rupture into the floor was now present as a stain of the action, patched and smoothed over but still visible and very much part of the hall. A fault line. The polite ribbon silently rolled across the floor like it was brushing the surface, stroking it, no rupture and no etch. As it was rolled it sailed along the space claiming its territory but the action of the roll, the stream of yellow was only vital because of the action it enabled. It was as though the group now spread across the turbine hall like the 50 meters were all of us holding hands or tips of fingers stretched across the space. It belonged to us, a temporary capture. It started at the door to the staff entrance of the turbine hall and as people came through the door they walked along the line following its path, not aware of it but following its route. A group of children were suddenly held on one side of the turbine hall by the ribbon as though it could become part of their game or their rules. We had made a car park, a court, a restriction. All day we had talked about what we could do, what we couldn’t do and what we wanted to do. We ended with what the handled objects had enabled us to do., make a mark, touch what was infront of us, assert ourselves and be present within the encounter. Before any session, I try and write what my expectations are, my pre-thoughts. This is a part of what I had written on the way to Tate Inert potent New Materialism - disintegrating dualism - is always paramount, it speaks of an inter disciplinary cross disciplinary position. INTRA - The anchors are where? We need to pivot on an axis or from a base line so that we are not set adrift in a sea of matter without being able to differentiate any- thing. The status can change and dilute, everything could become as relevant as the next. So, we are matter and we can anchor other matter Or other matter anchors us. The objects I have been making feel like a plumb line, a measuring stick of thought or pre-thought re configured. A plumb line will offer a line of truth temporarily, not marking permanently but creating a line in space or the chalk line that lasts for a short period of time. A measurement of depth or a perfect line, a point to attach to. Let’s see the matter, what is the matter with seeing the matter. The plumb line became the ribbon a temporary yellow truth. There is something about this stopping point - of running out. I enjoy the mark coming to an end and the edge where it ends.
The group chose an object from their bags that they wanted to use in the space. I was aware of the impact of the space and choosing Louise Bourgeois rooms felt as though I was challenging the group, to find themselves within the space, locate their objects and use them to extend from and to the exhibited objects. Some had chosen objects before knowing what space they were going to and suddenly changed, altering the object they wanted. I could see that the felt plastacine shape fitted most easily within the space of the gallery. Stitched, soft and intimate the small object was the maybe the obvious fi. But this little grey shape of felt had only been meant as a starting point for conversation at the beginning of the day. It was now so invested in that it was though it was trying to stand up against the work, have its own voice and shout in the space. Was it the object though that wanted to shout or was it the group. They had regained confidence in this space and after the way they had retreated in the Rebecca Horn room this assertion was important. They were testing the objects, looking for something. They walked more freely around the space. 'I knew immediately as I stepped into the space it had to be this object’ she said, ‘it is female stitched and it fits here’. This material connection is clear and I imagined that the stitching and the stitching would automatically correspond to each other but was there anywhere else to go, how could the objects that had found this new heightened status through the day begin to speak in this space? Surrounded by the Bourgeois sculptures that claim the ceiling, the floor and the walls, I felt the space was so inhabited by her that the objects could be meek and timid. I will keep reiterating that these were not the objects I imagined they would be using here - I had thought they would be long and forgotten from earlier conversations and interventions. However, these small forms had found their forms and they had come into being. They were held in the hand and yet were holding their own. She had chosen the small object holding it in her hands, warming it allowing it to space and adjust its form. ‘It had to be on my body’ she said and she showed us how she had placed it in different places on her body, placing it on her neck, next to her skin. It flattened and lay on her skin continuing to stay there warmed through her body. I thought of holding a thermometer against a child’s head counting the seconds to read the amount of heat. What was her object reading, what was being measured? She had taken and placed it on the vitrines and held it up to the objects. This flattened felt disc was pushed against glass as though looking or reading the objects itself. The thermometer I had imagined had now turned into the pad of a stethoscope, listening or searching for something across a surface. The felt pad (that it had become) looked like a blot on the landscape of the work but was acting like a litmus test for something. She was trying to meet the objects that were so full of body, meeting them with the felt that concealed plastacine and that had been warmed by a real body. The felt was both less body and more body. It was aesthetically lowly with little visual potency but was formed from a body. It was a skin, and its layering on the skin was a potent act. It was an intimate, private offering. He had had an epiphany he said smiling. ‘it is all a set up isn’t it, the colour, the shape, the size’. I told him it wasn’t. He told me that after the whole day and all the conversations that the red pebble had found its fit. He led me to the piece telling me how perfect it all was and how it was if everything was answered and there was nothing left to do or say. He lifted the pebble up offering it up to the Bourgeois heads within the cage in front of us. ‘Look’, he said and I could see how perfectly the pebble seemed to be the same shape and size and colour of the open (screaming?) mouth of the heads. He continued to hold it there as though a pull was taking place. It was a visible resonant link between these forms. A particular conversation. ‘I am holding her voice in my hands’ he said nodding. This was at that moment was an absolute truth. The objects completed each other, fitted into each other, were one of the same. This profoundly important sculpture that sits within the Louise Bourgeois room at Tate modern was completed by a small stone or potato shaped object covered in red tight material. This object was acting with force. Where was, who had, or what enabled the agency of this dialogue. Another member of the group came by. The red object still held up in front of the heads; it’s her voice’ he said again. The other individual nodded with force and almost gasped at moment of connection. This was more that an agreement she understood, she knew and agreed. There was a feeling between them that ‘of course this was always meant to be’. As they continued to stand there - object aloft - I felt a shift in my understanding of the red pebble. He had made it a voice, he was holding that voice and I in turn felt the lump of the pebble in my throat. It was like I wanted to swallow it down, digest its dense hard form which was in contrast to the softer sewn heads of the Louise Bourgeois work. The red form in his hands had been propelled to this position. Its status grander than its simple form. An object I didn’t consider we would use that day. It had been an outsider, a dark horse. Being held there now I focussed on the outstretched arm clutching it and the slightly blurred view of the heads in the cage. I could hear all of the objects, I was so aware of my mouth and my throat. When I mentioned all of these feelings to him he was agreeing and agreeing with speed and haste as though energised by his find. It was as though he knew everything I was saying already, he had thought the thoughts already and claimed them himself. I was aware of the significanve of our group and that we were involved in an encounter in and amongst other people in the space but that no one beyond the group would feel the truth of this encounter. It wasn’t the colour and the stitch that made the almost palpable connection, as they were immediate and obvious. It was the combination of touch, the hole of the mouth, the silence of the work (that provides a silent scream), the stopper the pebble provided. The pebble becoming the voice had robbed it from the heads - or at least drawn something away from it. ‘I am holding her voice in my hands’ becomes a position of power. He had her voice which in turn enabled his. The work - the objects - and him became enmeshed with full force in this encounter. This seemingly inert powerless pebble dared to compete in the space and with the work, he dared to allow it to compete, he allowed it to (in his mind) complete the work. He didn’t move from it he was rooted to the spot as though tied into the tug between matter and meaning. A prosthetic extension was pushing and pulling. ‘today was all about this moment, wasn’t it?’, I shook my head. ‘Yeah, yeah you are like Derren Brown’ he said. After he walked away she looked at the cage and the space below the heads. She commented on the dust and fluff gathering on the surface. She held her small squeezed and folded felt plastcine form in her hands as she began to get on to the floor. She looked at the dust more carefully and put her face up to the edge to the cage and began to gently blow. She began to blow the fluff within the Louise Bourgeois cage. It started to move across the surface and her gentle breath allowed the fluff to roll and find form. From a level covering on the bottom of the cage the fluff was becoming something else, not a residue or marker of unattended time but something else. ‘the fluff is becoming the same shape as my object’ she said. It was rolling into shapes that echoed the colour and mirrored the grey of the felt and the undisclosed plastacine beneath. She continued to blow and the shapes moved gathering more matter within the cage. I was aware of her breath the lightness of it, the control over the fluff she couldn’t touch. I thought of the objects above the 3 heads opened mouthed, and how she was using her mouth to push out the breath to push the fluff. Earlier he had grabbed from the mouth of the head and taken or held the voice. These encounters were surrounding the Louise Bourgeois object. Whist strong and unmoving within that space I felt the small interventions were uprooting something within the work, or was this a deeper engagement in the meaning. This was a physical interpretation, making meaning, shaping meaning. All elements both human and non-human were in a state of flux allowing their readings and actions to alter and settle differently. The imposing heads above her head were unable to see her as she knelt underneath them, their silent screams were screaming at others whilst she held the felt, blew the felt whilst unaware of the other visitors around her. She wasn’t hesitant or nervous in her actions, she as asserting something, asserting herself and the objects around her. She had purpose and a understanding that her actions were appropriate.
When everyone returned to their lockers they took out the new objects. They immediately became animated expect one individual who had the brush in paper. She looked at everyone else’s object. They were already playing with the objects holding them up, shouting through the silenced megaphone, playing with the physicality of 3 hands with the gloved artists hand alongside their own. The brush frame was held up against the spaces, framing views and the expanding foam brush like trowel was stroked on the flattened underside. When I asked for their immediate reactions they all responded to the objects saying what they were and how they felt about them. There was a sense that these were their objects and they claimed them almost possessively as though the objects they had within their lockers had been made specifically only for them. This seemed to make them seek a connection as though I had been thinking of them when I made them. They knew however that the lockers were random and that it was chance that this object was theirs. They were already investing in the objects as we sat in the gallery, they knew what their job was and what they were supposed to do with them. The one with the brush said she was a little disappointed with hers in comparison to the vibrancy of the other objects but she played with the paper smoothing it out, ‘maybe it is alright’ she said. It is interesting that their reactions to the objects are stated strongly and my presence as maker made no difference to their acceptance or rejection. They were vocal as they had been when they first encounter the covered plastacine earlier that day. The objects are to blame for themselves, responsible for their own potential. Their material form out performs me. I felt like a bystander to the conversations between the group and their objects. I had chosen to go into the Rebecca Horn room. I had anticipated that this would be difficult and that the performative nature of the work itself may cause a conflict with the actions of the group. I didn’t voice this as I needed to see the effects of the space, but I felt as I was taking them towards an encounter that would be less than – diluted or problematic. The space itself is more formal that the previous space. We head towards vitrines and it is noticeable the amount of information about the work on the walls. I walk into the space ears still on my head and shell on my back, I feel connected in a direct way to the unicorn, the body extensions of horns work but whilst I am comfortable this experience is not comfortable for the group. I sit back within the space and watch them. They look around and start to read the labels, hold the objects low in their hands, flat against their bodies, they are quiet, passive. They have retreated to become viewers in the room. They are slow, they look at the work. I have to let them be but I am very aware of how they are out performed in the space. The playful engagement they had had with the objects before entering the space had stopped. Their physicality (both the individuals and the objects) felt muted. The group no longer interacted they seemed to be inhibited. I knew that the performative presence of the artists through film and image was claiming the space so strongly, the performance was hers. However, it was more than that the investment that they had made with the initial objects had been so strong that this new engagement with the objects from their lockers was had to contemplate. Not a conscious decision on their part but the extension from their hands towards the objects and beyond towards the exhibited work was diminished. I was very aware of my presence in this space and how my ears felt like a beacon on my head, leading the way, showing the way. I wanted to take the group out of the space knowing that a discussion wouldn’t be possible in the environment we were in, particularly as they were silent and slow in the small space. I was about to gather them but I saw one individual the one with the brush and brown paper who had initially been disappointed, she was smoothing and folding the paper, making creases and pleating it like the images of horns work ahead of her. She was close to the work and her actions were more concentrated now and engaged. I left her to fold and unfold for a few minutes before we all exited the space. The group all began to talk as we left the room, they played with their objects again and started to talk through or with them. The bristles within the meaphone had been pulled from a sweeping brush (see earlier blog posts) ,As their objects lifted and became animated again within their hands the groups started to engage with the matter of them differently. Outside of the performance within the gallery they began to perform.
They discussed how I had been appropriately placed in the gallery and echoes my feelings of the links between my costumed state and the appendages made by Horn. But we discussed together how they had lost their power and conviction in that space. This is a complicated set of ingredients that created their traditional and passive position within the gallery and something I am writing about outside of the blog. However, keys points are that the group had already invested. This is fundamental to the change in how effective the encounter can be. The objects in the turbine hall had become really important to them, they had already gone through a process of rejecting them and then embracing them which anchors their belief in the resonance if the objects. They had claimed them and importantly they had activated them and been activated by the them in the space with Otobang Nkanga’s work. This powerful transformative experience was still with them. The new objects had been given to them when they were still connected to their last prosthetic objects, in a sense still fundamentally attached. So, the new objects were playful for them before and after the Horn encounter but they could not invest as they were over invested with the smaller forms. Whilst I had imagined this happening, it was quite powerful to see the limpness of their arms when they held the objects in the space. It was as though they were weighted rather than charged. (refer to the SCVA pilot project when the ship met the ship). The same action happened at the SCVA when the participant links too easily with the form or action of the art work in the gallery. This also relates to my earlier ideas of metaphor and decoy. These objects were seen to be replicating actions they couldn’t have themselves. The power of investment also means that participants need to have power. The status of their thinking is elevated through object connections and equally when this is thwarted or challenged the impact of loss of power is substantial. The text accompanying the images are small elements of much more extended and underpineed observations. Before the space, I asked the group as experienced visitors to galleries to change the way they encountered today if they could. We know how we normally lock, walk around a space, how much time we spend. I asked them to be rooted and anchored in their experiences in the space by the object they chose to hold and use. We had already discussed all of the objects they had, the readymade real grasps, the felt plastacine, the clay grip (of my hand) and the red clay potato/stone/pebble. I had made all objects before knowing that we would enter the tanks. I had not made them in response to any of the work we saw. I told the group that they could choose any of the objects we had used so far, I had given everyone a canvas bag to hold the objects not in use. Most of the time within the tanks we were alone and the group separated and comfortably inhabited the space. 2 people chose the red shape, 1 person the book making instrument, 1 the trigger, 1 the clay grip (of my hands) It was still and the sound of the work through the speakers within the sculptures of Nkangas work filled the space. They started to in differing ways offer up the work to the work. It was only as we discussed their reactions when we left the space that I saw how some people’s connections where physical and some more internal thoughts. They started to take pictures, reach their hands holding the object of their choice in front of them, turn it in their hands. Some sat, or lay on the floor, some started to edge their red clay object nearer to the sculptures pushing them slightly beyond the boundaries. It was as though they were trying to find a meeting point. We were in the space for about 20-30 minutes and decided to talk about how they had felt outside of the space. ‘I stopped thinking verbally as soon as I entered the space with the trigger in my hand’ said one of the group. She had the cram plastic trigger in her hands now and I was so aware that it was the missing part of a megaphone, just like the one in one of the lockers near us. She told us that she had picked up one of the large spheres in the space and placed it on her trigger, she was thinking also imagining a cauliflower on the trigger she told us. The way she explained the sculpture being lifted onto the trigger felt as though she had actually done it, not that she imagined it. She had described her truth of the space and the action of the lift and the completion of the trigger (grasp). What was in charge, which object dominated which her trigger less plastic form or the sculptural sphere, they were 2halves of each other. She stopped the verbal she said and all of the group began to discuss what the verbal of thinking was and this propelled the dialogue towards the different elements of the encounter. They were felt and thought. Another person explained how she had felt integrated into the piece with the red potato/stone, there was something to compare to, they were part of each other. She had taken pictures that showed the crossing of the boundaries and the small encroachments of the exhibited work. One individual discussed how the sculpture in the space were a community, a family the sculptures had felt like people and that holding the clay of the grasp, of the fingers (my hand) had felt like he was able to be one of them, to touch them. His object spoke the same language of the sculptures. Another member of the group interrupted to agree that her object (red stone/potato) had felt like one of the family, she had felt that too. At the start, she had wanted to throw in to the cluster of sculptures so that it could be with them, where it belonged, but then as she had held the object in her hands and had stroked it and clutched it, she felt she had to protect it, she felt sorry for it wanted to keep it. They all started to comment on how the objects had enabled a deeper significance with what they were seeing but kore importantly how they were engaging what they were feeling. I asked what about the artist, what about these new interpretations that the group were bringing. They all spoke at once; the artist had left the work now and that it was public and there’s to experience. ‘If I had chosen any of the objects would it have worked so profoundly’ one person said. We went on to discuss the connections and resonances and how choices impact on the object encounter and its strength or transformative experience. One person took the bookbinding tool that is like a letter opener, or blunted knife and he said, ‘I cut them all free, all the ropes between the spheres, I cut them’. He said this whilst making sweeping sword like actions with his arm. He had freed them, his object enabled that action as had the other object allowed the spheres to be lifted onto the trigger. The space of the tanks now looking back into the space was still but had been momentarily charged by these actions whether visual or imagined. ‘I felt an emotive shift’ he said still with the bookbinding tool in his hand. The gallery offers an interaction with the work a dialogue of two parts rather than the intra action provided within this research where the independent position of the on- looker becomes the participant.. I am seeking the point where each component human non-human, art work, action, and dialogue merge and complete each other in a reciprocal conversation. towards a ‘fundamental encounter’
below are the responses to the same questions asked to the MA students at BCU. Whilst they will all become ithoughts maps they are here in their original sent formats.
Meeting in turbine hall. How do we make impact on this space? How are we listened and how do we count? I spoke to the group about how today meant shifting their normal or default experience of being in a gallery and looking at work. We already knew how to do this, today we would be using objects as our conduits to new thinking and approaches to the gallery and the work. These objects would be prosthetic extensions of us and our thinking. Ears and chair back, were introduced through the idea of the fable and the relevance of belief and potential meaning or moral. The fable allowed a packaged tale, a short articulated moral position, where characters and actions were relatable as metaphors for more generalised perceptions. Ideas were categorized as right or wrong. Good or bad, intelligent or unthinking etc. As I started to discuss the position of the ears and how the small transformation had turned our perception and reading of an object, I tapped the chair back indicating its solid form on my back in relation to the soft and vulnerability of my stomach, all elements I had discussed and written about before when wearing the objects. As I said that the objects indicated a particular position within approaches to learning –I corrected myself and said ‘it’s not really leaning – it is more that than that, it is what comes before, it is thinking.’ One of the participants suddenly spoke out and told the group how two of them had been discussing the questions I had asked about learning experiences and what they felt like, he commented how on the journey that day he had thought it wasn’t learning and that it was thinking. He had thought about saying it to me but had been worried about how I would feel by his shift with the term I had used. He remarked how interesting it was that I myself had said that as almost the first comment that day. I gave them keys and let them go and find locker. It was important that the objects felt like they belonged to them and that the space of the locker allowed the objects a space, the key unlocked their potential, the objects were waiting for the person. By placing the objects in this space of the locker the objects became belongings. The participant’s belongings. One person said that they were happy that even before the box was opened that it was reassuringly heavy. I thought back to working with the group at the SCVA and how the weight had been equalled to importance and value and it seemed relevant again. The group opened the boxes and sniffed, held and played with the 3 things as though trying to juggle what they were physically and intellectually. We had discussed how the plastacine balls now in cased in felt became something else. The group commented that the materials the objects felt as though they were less able to yield than any other time they had encountered objects with me. How could they activate them? This was interesting as the objects did feel more inert and still and all of the groups reflections and those within BCU workshop etc. had talked about the very physical and visceral stuff of learning processes. Tacky and heavy and contradictory. These objects all tight and presented in the box with no mess no visual entanglements but presented and dry. Whilst I knew that this would shift the perception of the objects I was very aware of the way they were investigating the objects and the heightened reactions that they were having. They felt removed from the physicality of the plasticine balls that they and experienced before and the small grey objects that were always meant as the starting point of a session had now changed in status. The group were annoyed and unsettled that the felt had hidden the surface that they had previously been able to manipulate, and they told me that it wasn’t yielding in the same way. The familiar had become unfamiliar and cloaked in another form that denied access to a previous understood encounter. As commented on by Shaun Gallagher as a ‘transcendence’ there is a need to ‘it means risking that familiar ground to allow the unfamiliar to find its place. P139 hermeneutic possibilities. The plastacine ball had taken centre stage by its slightly removed or manipulated identity. The truth of its material and the accompanying process associated with it was not allowed. I discussed the need to have the plastacine present even if in another form and they all agreed but visibly they were rejecting the object. One person threw it down and another said ‘No, I hate it’. These heightened reactions were almost childlike as though a recognised toy had been replaced with something nearly the same. The dismissal of the new toy for daring to replace something so important. However, the object, the small plastacine ball sewed within felt had never been so important as it was now. This repositioning of the object We discussed how other people or onlookers would not understand how this small grey felt sphere was so irritating and had made them feel so strongly. They continued to examine the objects. The red object they named as a stone, or a potato. They gripped it in their hands and one person tapped it repeatedly on the ground, listening to its sound. The clay grip was turned in people’s hands as they tried to find the place for their own fingers their own grip rather than the one formed in the object. “I feel ok with this objects’ said one individual, another found a way for their hand to settle into the form of the grip and said, ‘I am holding someone’s hand, I think it is yours’. Another said, ‘it feels like we have a bit of you today and need to be a bit like you today, a bit `Kimberley’. These remarks evidenced a slightly closer relationship with the objects, they were connecting and connected to it. It was humanised, relatable and whilst formed with my hand they could accept the object and even see it as a gesture of holding a hand. As this nearness and acceptances was voiced it was noticeable that the other objects were being handled again. The grey felt was being squeezed and held by some of the group with two flattening the shape so that the plastacine inside began to fill the felt and create a disc filled to the edges of the felt. One individual said it was like a skimming stone and almost asked permission to skim the surface of the turbine hall with the felted shape. It flew across the floor stroking the surface and they remarked how well it worked. The object sat momentarily on the concrete floor so tiny in the architecture of the space yet weighted now with significance form the group. I felt its presence on the floor and away from us before he went to retrieve it again. Another individual said, ‘I don’t mind it now’ and took the earlier dismissed grey shape into her hands, but remarked how she was worried that the hairs from the felt would have imprinted themselves into the grey plastacine underneath, ruining it slightly. This asserted the material of the plastacine again over the felt covering, when another said ‘I am wondering if it is even grey plastacine now and whether you have changed it without us knowing.’ Meeting the Visitor Experience Team. 9.45 meeting. I showed everyone the objects I would be using and what I was going to be wearing. This was an interesting moment as I felt that it started the process of the object encounters - I lifted the objects up to show them, I pretended to use the brush filled mega phone and placed the ears on my head. This small stage seemed to give license to the actions ahead of me.
|
Kimberley FosterKimberley's practice as an artist is pedagogical, it doesn’t just reference learning, it plays with, embodies and encourages learning at its core. The objects consider ideas of collaboration and authorship, discussions about touch and encounter, and bring into active consideration issues of learning within social and participatory practices. Archives
October 2018
Categories |