Revision of Critical Essay

I revised the critical essay and the final version for assessment is attached.

[the original is in this post]

My key revisions were

(a) adding a reference to Berger & Sontag (1983) To tell a story to elucidate one underpinning concept of the relational dynamic between author-subject/object-viewer

(b) to write through the previously bullet-pointed section that outlines the key changes of the above in the context of the networked image.

(c) to add a further closing sentence to draw back to the role of performativity and the shifting construction of boundaries between public and private in the context of the networked digital image.

I have highlighted the changed sections in a dark red in this new document, here.

 

 

Facebook as research as part of digital identities

This posts spells out the key themes of enquiry I pursued for the digital identities section of this module (i.e. Assignment 4 & 5).

How and for what do I use FB?

Over the almost two years that I have been using FB frequently, and the past 10 months during which it became an explicit research tool for the lines of connection and disconnection between private and public, between biography, confession and fiction, and between various forms of material, media, registers, my use has changed. In part, this was clearly also due to FB’s own changes, notably the integration and disintegration between FB and messenger.

Over that period also messenger, which until then as a DM interface that I generally wouldn’t pay attention to moved decisively to be my DM tool of choice: notably due to its easy integration of GIFs and sticker packs it allows for a form of communication that is quick and media-rich, SMS or Whatsapp moved to much less important roles than they had played in previous years. It also mirrored a change in who would be frequent contacts and the preferred platform between us. So, for all intents and purposes, when I talk about FB here, I will also include the messenger app.

In terms of my own posts, around 50% consists of photos or videos (the latter only perhaps 5% of these posts); 30% are posts that provide links/ repost materials or comment on these, 20% are original writing pieces of myself. The latter almost exclusively only address Close Friends; perhaps half of the image posts goes to all friends, the other to minus acquaintances (also called good friends, which reduces the cohort by c40%); I reckon the reposts have a similar distribution between all friends or minus acquaintances. The boundaries between these last two groups are changeable, only recently I moved a fair number of good friends to acquaintances; while prior to that most art contacts would become good friends, most older, more infrequent or academic contacts would remain acquaintances. In general, good friends are those that I have a form of fairly frequent contact with (either offline or through online interactions).

The remainder of this post consists of four sections:

a. a summary of FB posts
b. FB timeline as sketchbook
c. the role of boundaries and differentiated publics in facebook (the ways of transgressing)
d. anxiety of absence / fear of missing out

 

 

 

 

a. summary of posts

The first foray into the relevance of FB for this module, I set up a collection of posts from my timeline to give a sense of themes and formats of discussion, and how the materials that form the basis for A4 and A5 circulated through FB

Facebook posts relating to this assignment which can sit in this blog’s public (amending as I go along).
A first outline as to some themes relating to online/offline; public/private for this project are in this previous post.

These are collected in this blog post here

currently: 19 Feb – 8 March (possibly some before, some after?); perhaps a total of 7-10 posts.

b. as sketchbook

the section of this post that i am writing last, and yet the most frequently employed use of a FB post for me: i take it to test out thoughts, ideas in a form that push them a couple of steps further from noting in my journal: i do not only type them up but submit them to a limited public. in this sense, my FB timeline, certainly the section in which i limit publicness to  minus acquaintances or even more so, to close friends friends, applies a form of discipline to test what holds up of my thoughts. so, in many ways, one of the most frequent FB uses of mine is actually revisiting my on timeline and re-reading, retracing earlier posts. i don’t tend to alter them, i also don’t tend to hide from the timeline these written posts (while i frequently remove older photos, which after that will only live in their respective albums). what i however often do is that i amend, add, qualify or take further thoughts in earlier posts by adding comments. so, quite a few posts have acquired comments only by myself.

as a sketchbook, the publicness often does not work so much in others commenting online but the post providing a reference point in a face-to-face conversation. about half the people in my close friends list are people i meet often, so, for them (and us) the posting means that there is a topic, a particular perspective to consider, to refer to, to discuss, to amend or alter.

FB is however severely limited in this purpose: it is difficult to export (exporting means losing all comments and all media links embedded in a post), its search function is rather limited (i need to remember a word within the post, even hashtags are not found consistently but only reference a selection of the set that has the hashtag applied).

besides text posts, i use the posting photos (and less videos) functions a lot: even more so, once i had decided that instagram wasn’t working too well for me. so, there are some days in which i rather extensively will map, trace, narrate what i will do and see. i remain ambiguous for whose purposes that is: to assure my own presence, movement to myself? or what in there is also to show off, to affirm, to confirm, and at points confuse as to what it is that i am up to?

c. the role of boundaries and differentiated publics in facebook (the ways of transgressing)

as posted to Close Friends on 9 December 2016:
[altered as to a further name change; alteration of the list of off-topic subjects]

FB circles, in/out groups, confidentiality and off-limit items:

I have in two contexts now discussed in more detail the boundaries of my using my FB timeline as an online sketchbook or notebook.
One discussion involved two who have seen and often engaged with the posts of the past few months (both online and offline); the other one was with two where one of these is not on FB, the other has not been part of the group to which #pondpiecenotes and after posted to.

There are various issues that these two discussions raised for me. The first concern is about in/group out/group through these selective postings (notably: the selective enclosure of the particular audience. I had thought about this as to inclusion as being fairly easily undone on part of the reader: to overlook, to hide or to unfollow; the exclusion is more complex, notably when mutual friends are inside the audience, like posts or comments, which pushes notifications to their own friends’s feeds… which at once pierces my own attempts to bound who gets to see what I write; but also alerts mutual friends that possibly other conversations are going that they are not party too). There is more to this and I will likely return to it.
.
The second concern, which I considered in more detail yesterday, was raised as question if there are themes that are off-topic. My response was in several stages, and in hindsight I realise just how much I veil my responses. I responded as to how I proceed to judge if a post holds or not, so I generally move ahead in a series of steps and then assess my relationship to it and adjust, it’s rather practical and involved. It is also in some way true to my attitude towards a priori lists, which I do not find easy to take serious nor follow. I then also provided a positive inclusion list rather than one of exclusion.
.
However, yesterday I then arrived at my off-topic items, of which there are numerous. By refusing to acknowledge that they exist in the first place, I drew another layer of curtain over them to protect them once further. But, with the recent piercing of this list through the post about R., it may be worthwhile spelling some of these out:
.
Items that I have not written about nor intend to write about in posts:
– anything concerning current desires and involvements with people around the matters that I discuss;
– all posted accounts about my own experiences of (sexualised) violence were fairly contained in the transition between childhood/adolescence. I have not posted about any of my later encounters and relationships in which consent or violence were issues;
– …
– most of the items I write about I write about at a time that they are resolved: hence, even if I use present tense for several notes, they are not contemporary but usually an ex-post reflection.
.
Where these boundaries lie and how they manifest is at points and as I move along somewhat fluid. As for the fourth item about resolution, this became apparent in post #2 from a couple of days ago (R. in my flat and expectations of violence): I posted it initially at a point when I was really caught out by it, it was incredibly present and I didn’t know at the point of posting on how to move with it. I removed the post as it was too unresolved, and moved it into a discussion with a close friend. This had once before occurred in relation to a post after the US election: again, the post was raw in its upset and I felt too exposed with it on my timeline, I removed it and raised it once in a conversation, which was a much better place for it to be held.
.
That I exposed my relationship with R. unsettled me and made me revisit this list of ‘protected relationships, items, concerns’; I can trace the need for exposure around the sense that suddenly the violence seemed to be deposited in my flat and left with me as a secret (or rather: amidst the context of various secrets). It also sits in the line where I respond with my own violence in situations where I perceive myself to be under threat (as in an earlier post between aunt, mother and myself). As such, it sits in the effects of how my experiences of patriarchal violence are more often between women rather than men>woman. There were a couple of occasions where my intent to protect also similarly pierced or transgressed; and this isn’t helped with the setting of a networked form of notebook where transgression and blurring boundaries is pretty much design of the medium and intent.
.
I also realise that the form in which I discuss concerns reflects my intent to conceal and veil existing relationships and concerns: it follows some of the arrangements over anonymity that were in place in the coaching training: ‘you can talk about anything here as far as it affects you, your experience; as soon as you would need to use someone else’s name, you are outside your own experience and should refrain from raising it.’ It was a rule that people applied in different forms and often topic of conversation as to how to proceed. It also means that in consequence I started to talk rather a lot about myself, my own feelings, actions, sensations, signals, perceptions; and I have kept that format. It makes for a self-centred account, one seemingly (actually?) intent on defining, aligning, negotiating, one’s self. And yet, I don’t think I am all that much interested in my self but in the relationships it constructs with the world, how its constitution tells me something about the world, lets me experience the world and others. So, the auto-ethnographic accounting in some ways is a reflection on the need for secrecy and veiling. And I will carry that thought a little longer with me.
.
#digitalsecrets

d. anxiety of absence and fear of missing out

one of the most intriguing and vexing aspects of the FB related activity is a realisation of just how quickly the platform has become affectively effective: it draws me in, it wants me to spend time, to look at my things, at those of my friends. it even is successful in me seeking likes, affective approval, engagement and in my retrospective questioning if i misstepped, misjudged, transgressed unduly.

below is a post that i drafted but never posted after i one tried to exit the platform (rather unsuccessfully) in mid-March:

[undated, possibly first week of April]
[unposted]

[I was reading a post about grief on E.’s timeline: it was about shipwrecks, the love that preceeded each shipwreck and the scars they will leave. it had something also about the 100ft waves that engulf you, that turn 80ft waves, that become more infrequent, that you may discern at a distance about to engulf you.
so, that Friday i saw such a wave coming ahead. it gave me about 12 hours notice. i told A. how i felt tender and triggered again. about the usual stuff. about stuff that i wanted to write about and yet wasn’t sure what the form of writing about was going to be and what site was there to be for writing about.
… a series of observations of the theme of sexual violence that I omit here … These three threads mingled with three incidences in my own life, when I was 17, 27 and 36. They seek attention, if not resolution. And I wasn’t trusting myself in how I was using my timeline or FB more generally at that moment in time.

So I departed, alongside no caffeine, no cigarettes and no food. I had the sense that no FB and no nicotine would be the hardest, but strangely, the cigarettes didn’t concern me, the absence of caffeine gave me a headache a couple of times over the week that I was fasting, a little breakfast tea took care of it. What however didn’t work at all was the FB absence, by Monday morning I was missing the sticker packs, I was missing the photos going back and forth in one conversation. By Tuesday I was beginning to realise that so much of my current work meshes with my FB timeline and my saved links, that I went to look things up. Furthermore, I had on the way to a different office encountered the homeless person who was just found dead outside one of the shop windows; it was one of the few deaths I have come into contact with unexpectedly and it threw the overwhelm that the FB feed sometimes presents me with right next to my body walking through town, so the FB absence seemed to not serve that purpose of distance and detachment.

So, rather than a week or two, I managed to stay away for 36 hours only; FB was still sending me emails over stuff that it was wanting me to look at, notably messages. It was continously stoking my anxiety over missing out, being out of reach. It was curious to see how effectively it would feed that, and I realise that while addiction isn’t too often an issue for me, this was quite hard, harder than I thought. And nonetheless, those 36 hours were long enough for me not too feel those waves crushing down on me quite so hard; by the time I was starting to look at FB again, without posting, the need to expose and proclaim had passed somewhat too. I hadn’t sat down to write about the 3×3 of above in a different format yet.]
<< not posted.

at some point in June FB introduces a new feature in its gamification of posting (as it has done for some time about checking in, reviewing page content etc.), it now congratulated me that i had posted 88 continuous days, and: that my friends were responding. I got mortified: what? had I posted every single day since that 36 hrs departure? it took me about another week for reaching a day of not posting.

 

Tracey Emin’s My Bed (1998)

[first published to Close Friends on FB, 9 February 2017, 18:11]

16601806_10209989113016968_7716816760744637818_o.jpg

the first thing i notice when i eventually enter the room is the scent… smell… hm… no: it stinks. while my eyes register the bed, my nose recoils at some languid humid correlation of it.
i circle around it, again, step back, watch the others who watch it, don’t quite take a straight on stance but peek at it sideways, register the tissues, knickers, vodka bottles, pregnancy test, condoms, rizla, more condoms. the slippers, cuddly toys. more vodka.
.
it’s the piece i travelled for, like parker’s exploded shed, emin’s bed was definitely one for a journey. i hadn’t prepared for its odour nor for my shyness… after all, it’s 18 years old.
.
later on i find the headsets with an audio loop, women with strong local accents talking about how no self-respecting woman should have these things lying about, let alone let anyone – neither lover nor friend, certainly not public – see any of this.
.
that was always how i took this piece: as a radical inversion of what a bed for a reclining nude would be for an art historical public. and that it registered class as much as sexual agency. i had kindly overlooked the vodka bottles.
.
‘In contrast to other women’s beds as represented in the Western artistic tradition—such as that of Titian’s Venus, with its suggestively mussed sheets—Emin’s bed bore the marks of blood, sweat, and, most likely, tears. The bed could certainly be interpreted as having served as a site of pleasure, but it was also suggestive of a psyche steeped in doubt, self-neglect, and shame.’
.
very glad i travelled for it.

Critical Essay: networked image and boundaries between public/private in the work of feminist practitioners

Attached is the critical essay for Assignment 3. The question investigated is a slightly re-focused one to the one originally discussed back in Spring:.

How does the networked image in contemporary visual culture shape the boundaries between public and private? Discuss, notably with reference to earlier performative and analogue works by feminist practitioners.

screen-shot-2016-12-03-at-10-50-30

Link to the PDF: Critical Essay 15 November_web

The narrowing in focus to feminist practitioners who particular worked within analogue means that I am somewhat focusing also on the transition and difference between analogue/networked and am with the main part of the essay tracing existing practices either temporally before networked images or concurrent ones which continue working in analogue form.

The artists I have focused on are Chantal Akerman, Nan Goldin and Sophie Calle, while Trish Morrissey’s work serves as an opening towards the substantive debate. All artist are contemporary with works produced from the 1960s onwards (Chantal Akerman died in late 2015).

This narrowing of focus, or rather: the inclusion of analogue practices in some sense also mirros my own interests and pursuits which from Spring onwards have almost exclusively consisted, in terms of image production, of shooting in film (MF/Bronica and 35mm/Voigtlander), which are then scanned and post-processed digitally.

The essay investigates the boundary constructions in place between public and private and how the artists explored these (often by means of transgression). It is from these boundary considerations that I then enquire into changes taking place in the context of networked image practices. These changes are considered in relation to author/subject/viewer – I call this the relational triangle of the image. I found it a useful heuristic device for my own thinking but also feel I want to investigate a bit further on how that relationship has been discussed and conceptually understood in media studies.

I realise that I tried to conduct some primary research within/alongside this essay: by investigating the artists in detail but also by pursuing a series of images that investigate boundary construction within environmental photography. In this, the limits of the essay seem paramount (in word count and scope), and I realise that I am used to writing far longer research pieces than this essay, which also means that the scope of what I tried to address is too wide. Practically, it leaves the considerations around the networked image practices in shorthand and alluded to rather than actually investigated. I decided to leave this in this form as it presents a useful piece of writing for my own purposes and will be able to act as a bridge/entrance into the final project of the course, where some of the notes around networked image practices will be spelled out and investigated further.

 

 

 

pecha kucha file and discussion (August 2016)

my pecha kucha presentation at last week’s study day includes a first edit of images from my summer project in Aberdeenshire where I visited the same location of a pinewood, an oakwood and surroundings for a number of times (a total of six days over three visits). I have known the site for several years, did in fact do a series of prints, drawings and bookworks from material that originated at the site five, six years ago.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

unlike my previous presentations, this did not have a performative audio track to it but instead a free-style discussion on a series of issues that have come up for me with the photos and the wider project.

these themes concern:

  • familiarity with a location
  • the desire to take all my interior/ familial work of the past two years back to the outside (an environmental context where almost all my prior work had been situated)
  • understanding and working with the possibilities and limitations of the 6×6 square format, notably:
    • edge of frame
    • stasis v movement
    • movement of what: object, frame, viewer, author?
  • relational constructions within the frame itself: objects in relation to others, to the frame, and
  • relational constructions between author, image and viewer

>> in this, there are questions over distance, movement, relationships

>> in this there are also issues relating to public/private, transgression, piercing of boundary constructions (and as such it relates to the still unfinished essay (Assig 3); I felt I wanted to be engage in making a body of work that speaks to public/private (rather than merely reviewing other people’s work)

>> uncertain as to how, I also sense that this series will fold forward into the remaining extended project on digital (!) identities

 

there is a wider question for me in these images and this summer project: it concerns my affective attachment to the photographs. this arises in response to the previous sets of work, notably House/appr0ach as well as the Jerusalem inside/outside images: both bodies of work produced – as far as the feedback goes – highly aesthetic, serene, contemplative images; while my affective state when doing these projects was in fact the opposite: inside House I was mostly in a state of panic and fear; for the Jerusalem images, I was taken by the extent to which violence seeps in and out day-to-day actions, our complicitness therein and much more which remains as yet inarticulate.

with this – or rather without naming my wider affective enquiry for these summer images, I was glad to receive the feedback that I did. It concerned:

  • a recognition that this series is full of visual pleasure: the joy of looking (and as such purely photographic). Hearing this, made me very happy: it was something that I had recognised on my first visit to Drum: that the site was full of joy for me, animated to the extreme with living things and that all the work that has come out of this site has been joyful, brimming with line and colour in various media. I also recognised that most of my photographic work to date did not work off of that emotion: it felt hard, complicated, violent, sad… it wasn’t that the images as such exhibited these states, but my relationship to them was such (and, as e.g., the PK from Spring with the Jerusalem images made clear, I would need a different medium to activate those concerns along the beauty of the images that I made).
    Knowing what subjects I had chosen to work with over the past two years, this doesn’t surprise me; also seeking a medium that speaks to the contemporary state of the world for me, and finding that with lens-based practices, was a deliberate endeavour, and still: the difficulty (and energy required) of that stance and approach was also becoming clearer to me
  • the first image that Wendy went back to was also the one I considered the strongest in the series (#11): the puddle reflection that reveals four layers of reflective surfaces and insights. And the acknowledgement that I was able to focus precisely on what I was after: the sharp lines of the fern are in focus, they delineate clearly and thus allow for the blurring of the rest;
  • from this, she suggested a typology of reflection and to write about it also. This typology in fact already exists to some extent but I have not brought it together as a specific focus. This is a great suggestion and I will follow it up — also, to pursue it further in writing.
  • to look up/ follow up:
    • Susan Derges’s work with exposing film under moonlight; to consider working at night/dawn/dusk (this is a short overview of her work ) > just moving into the right time of year for that
    • Helen Sear’s Venice 2015 video installation, .. the rest is smoke
    • Joan Jonas’s Venice 2015 installation, They come to us without a word
    • Stephen Gill’s Hackney Flowers (again): as chance encounters, messiness and chaos
  • we spent some time discussing technical aspects of image-making: ability to control dof and frame consistently; none of the images are properly post-processed other than dusted, some slight adjustment for highlights, shadows
  • however, I have now worked out a scan work flow that will allow for a consistent transferal between neg and digital file, this has been in place for only half the images included here — so a big Action Point concerns the degree of post-processing + analysis of what I have
  • only 2/3 of the images are available digitally so far (I had only just picked up the negs from the last visit a day before)
  • the one with the daisies needs stronger contrast, #05 (daisies); #17 (moving train) a bit of retouching to remove green highlights at bottom edge.

I enjoy the slowness of the analogue production > digital post-processing work flow; that the images are disappearing, become latent until processing and scanning; that they are handled in many steps until they return back into view; that the MF provides a narrow dof is something I hadn’t realised and am thrilled to see what this does to my images: that the focus is narrow, slicing through a particular distance, becomes unfocused so easily. There is something in it about being ‘wide-open and unfocused’ that also resonates with my own state of being at times (and often at times I find productive, useful and enjoyable).

This write-up possibly also produces a provisional title for this series: ‘These summer images’.

Part 3: Critical essay

For some time I had the plan to make the essay for this module around the delineation between public and private… it has been something that sits at the core of much of my own interests for the past couple of years and I also realise that it animates much of my own engagement with online/digital platforms and communication.

This third section of the course provides a series of projects (largely research and reading-based) and a series of questions. It also offers the possibility to formulate one’s own question.

So, here is my question as I discussed with my tutor at our last tutorial:

“How does the networked image in contemporary visual culture shape the boundaries between public and private? Discuss, drawing on suitable case studies and research.”

He offered D. Rubinstein & K. Sluis (2008) text ‘A life more photographic’ as a starting point. I have also already collated several quotes and sources from the reading that I have done so far.

In some sense, I would like to investigate and reflect on some of my own projects further for this question, in a way to take it as an opportunity to sharpen my own focus on the module so far for the remaining extended project in A4 and A5. — I will keep this in mind, and may run such reflection concurrently (but am a little uncertain as to how appropriate that is for the essay itself).

Two artists I have recently encountered and who speak to me to this question are:

Pilvi Takala, who had a recent show at Glasgow’s CCA as part of Glasgow International. Her (2004) piece ‘An event in Garnethill‘ is a project I knew about for a long time and it’s good to revisit with some explicit questions in mind.

Rasha Kahil’s In your Home (2008-11) and the subsequent Anatomy of a Scandal introduced me to this artist’s work and I am fascinated by the performative and secretive nature of her transgressions but also how their public outing are turned into further work.

 

— I will decide further down the line if the limitation on the networked image is useful (for making me focus down to aspect of circulation) or too restrictive.

 

 

risk and attachment (adventures in analog)

Much of my photography over the past few months involved getting to grips with my new used medium format camera, a light meter and excursions into processing and moving analog to digital (assignment 1: Office at Night was the first project to use a film camera).

Last week I begun to process the film in the local community workshop space. It didn’t go to plan. These facebook posts are an account of risk, attachment and memory in my photography. The events have been really useful in helping me figure out where attachment lies in the images, what a processing flaw may also tell me then about ‘faulty memory’ and the truth claims within a photograph. There is also something in here about ephemerality of the images that I am interested in taking: I was figuring out the ease or lack thereof for restaging, retaking some of these images and realise that the easiest one to re-do involves a 12-months wait until the trees are about to burst again, and hoping that there will be sunny weather during that time.

Gesa Helms 12 May at 19:47 ·

I am discovering that processing my own films is a fairly high risk strategy. After closing the door behind myself and standing in the most complete darkness for the second time ever, and contemplating that well-known fear of the dark and its very temptation, I realise that I must not switch on the light. I also realise that I may not be able to load the film, one after the other, onto the spiral. What if the two films aren’t properly separated, what if my fingertips are greasy, what if I don’t seal the tub properly. I am working calmly until someone starts to knock: are you alright. Yes. Ten minutes later, another knock. Are you alright? Yes I am, and somehow the people outside the dark seem concerned. Maybe I ought not to be alright? The clip disappears. And why do I keep thinking that the film unrolls off the spiral rather than onto it? I had carefully chosen which films to process first: neither California nor Curtains in their entirety, so that if something were to go wrong, I wouldn’t lose all of the images. As I keep working I am thinking back to the images that remain hidden for the time being and that I am winding onto the spiral.

Once I finish I return to the workshop. Someone starts to talk to me, and he keeps talking all the time until I leave another 30+ minutes later. I take him to be the technician whom I haven’t met yet and he is to usher me along as I seem to not know what I am doing. He panics once the beautiful German machine that is to process C41 starts processing straightaway without heating up first, and I realise that there is an entirely new strand of risk coming in the way of images… he keeps talking and I am trying to assess whether this new risk means just a bit of extra time or the loss of four films. Remembering that my hands had been warm at some point, we eventually reconstruct that the chemistry was still so warm as it was freshly mixed for me that Yobo didn’t need further heat.
I learn a lot about the compact travel arrangements of photo agencies in the mid-1980s which would pack such a machine onto their photo assignments (the most compact film processing machine every produced); about the layout and aerial photography of Sennelager, and that this former British army camp is in fact near Paderborn (I heard the name so often when men would tell me that they were in Germany too, but never established where exactly it actually was).
In the end, I have nicely aftershaved four rolls of film drying and taking colour. They have images on them as I can see.

I walk back home through the park and it looks entirely different to the days when I hung out there just 2.5 weeks ago: no more shadow shapes and the skyline is completely different. Just as well that risk remained a statistic for today.

This latency thing is utterly fascinating. It intrigues me almost more than the images. It meshes with memory in a most curious manner.

_____

Risk did manifest itself in more than statistic and I now have a set of what looks like seriously underdeveloped images. Curtains will have turned black, Thomas’s and my face will be absent against a dark sky, and shadows on the pavement in full sun a kind of apocalypse pre-told. It looks like a faulty temperature gauge, and my trust in Vorsprung durch Technik misplaced (or perhaps in its maintenance routine). One response may be to take photos I do not care about. But there will possibly be other responses too. Time is enforcing itself again and it will be Tuesday before the scanner will show me the actual nature of what befell my images. Just as well I didn’t load the remaining two rolls, then all curtains would have been blackened. And, hello, trusted snappy shit who haven’t scratched any of my negs before.
I do not want to take images that I don’t care about. But that means there’s this thing about attachment again.

Okay… dearest four film rolls… I guess he was NOT the technician, and it possibly wasn’t the temperature gauge but the excess water in the bottom of the tank. His instructions on when to close the valve and to run another cleaning cycle with a closed valve were opposite to the ones I was given 40 mins earlier by one whom I know to be a technician and which resonated with the instructions on the wall…

I remember thinking that some tech seems to have a lot of leeway, and how exciting that was. I think it may, but it also has effects (currently borne by myself as to working out whether ephemerality of images that I care for is really what I should be focusing on).

I may have experienced mansplaining and I mistook it. That hasn’t happened very often. But then, when I noticed he wasn’t interested that much in what I was contributing to what I thought was a conversation, I could have attended to that misreading a little more, but in any case: the valve was closed at that point and it wouldn’t have made any difference to the excess dilution of the developer.

There may be a performative story in here.