2.2.5.4. Connecting approach: conclusion
| Artistic aim, objective | Method | Characteristics | Theoretical context / Matching approach(es) | Type of aRt&D, type of collaboration, application domain |
| re-contextualising technology, creating new connections | Processpatching | (re-)mixing and re-appropriating methods from scientific fields and (non) technologies, aesthetic driven | Post- Modernism critical theory, Fluxus, includes humanities, computer science, arts, | Fundamental / basic research and experiments in social science, Multi and interdisciplinary collaboration, art as method. blend of techniques and methods, anything goes, bricolage |
(fig. 9. aRt&D Matrix processpatching method)
Processpatching is an informal, intuitive artistic research and development approach for interactive electronic art, where all kinds of ephemeral digital parts and (analogue and digital) materials are stitched together in an intuitive way. It has a strong emphasis on aesthetics, the social aspects in the process of creation and it is user centered. Processpatching is a rhizomatic, bottom-up approach, and distinguishes itself from science which has a tree-like structure. Processpatching bears reference to electronics, software development, feminism, interaction processes and ‘bricolage’.
The (recent) interactive electronic art tradition (2.2.5.1. and 2.5.5.1.1.) provides us links to other interpretations of work from related fields, and examples were given where concepts, objects and technology were re-contextualised or re-purposed. This habit of re-contextualisation relates to re-mixing or knitting together different fields of research and development, which all bring along their own approaches and methods. The interactive electronic artist as art innovator (2.2.5.1.1.) is someone who explores technique and mixes methods and objectives to renew or innovate artistic practice, which in turn could also bring along a refreshment of the other involved disciplines. However, here the main objective is to expand or renew the art practice, which can collide when combined with technical innovation. Although there usually is a component of a material study embedded in interactive electronic art innovation, its main motive is the search for new aesthetics (generated through specific use of the medium). I used the concept of transvergence by Marcos Novak (2.2.5.2.) which refers to a space between the disciplines, as a separate entity, to define the work arena for processpatching in the interdisciplinary context. Here methods and concepts from other disciplines, tech and non-tech, can be re-contextualised and patched together in unexpected ways. The electronic artists act as mediators between the disciplines without necessarily migrating to these remote disciplines.
Ridley’s plurality of methods to counterbalance the search for a unifying theory relates directly to the concept of Processpatching.
There were indications (2.2.5.3.) that Feyerabend’s theory, calling for the scientific community to move away from methods, and the suggested artistic methods in this research could meet each other in a Third Space or Transvergence zone between the disciplines. In the next part of this section, the most common approaches, methods and concepts that are used, tagged together or remixed are investigated. The flexibility, improvisation and focus on the process also gives some new directions for investigation of processpatching as an artistic method.
