4.2.3 Connecting and recontextualising, the processpatching method
Processpatching is the intrinsic electronic art method. I’ve choosen to use the term ‘method’, which refers to a particular way of doing something, and as a provocation in relation to the vagueness that surrounds the artistic research and development practice. The artist as processpatcher patches together expertise and methods from different disciplines and knowledge fields. Processpatching is in the first place a poetic word with associations and references to the process as a series of actions, changes or functions bringing about a result, or a series of operations performed in the making or treatment of something. The term as such refers to the artistic iterative research and development process. Process refers in this context also to the (social) interaction process as a crucial part of the interactive electronic artwork, and has a strong association with experience design, rather than exclusively to ‘product’ design. The term processpatching links to a range of meanings and associations, such as patches in software, patch cords, telephone patches, fixes for a software program and the process as a cycle of events, social interaction and actions. This practice of stitching and patching things together works according to a network topology, such as rhizomes. Deleuze and Guattari see a direct parallel between rhizomes and the associative artistic practice of connecting things, in a non-linear way, which contrasts the tree-like linear structure, the latter attributed by them to science research methodologies (2.2.5.).
Processpatching refers to combining and repurposing knowledge, methods, and materials with a strong emphasis on aesthetic innovation, knowledge generation and the renewal or development of mediated artistic expression. Processpatching stands for mixing and re-interpreting a plurality of methods into the artistic method. It builds on the Fluxus tradition (2.2.5.1., 2.2.6.1.), as well as on other artistic, technological and non-technical disciplines and traditions. The processpatching method shows parallels with Weibel’s theory of art as method, where he uses the definition of method as being the experiment at large (Weibel 2.2.5.1.). Although reasoned from the opposite direction, Feyerabend’s ‘Anything Goes’ credo comes close to the artistic blend of methods and techniques (Feyerabend 2.2.5.3.), although this might read as a contradiction, as Feyerabend argues against methodology. The proposed electronic art method and Feyerabend share the objective of breaking the disciplinary paradigm to achieve significant growth of knowledge, innovation and renewal. This research proposes processpatching as the artistic method to break with the prevailing romantic and mysterious paradigm of art making. On a conceptual level, the ‘Anything Goes’ route and the processpatching route could intersect in a Third Space or the transvergence zone between the disciplines.
The artist as processpatcher between different disciplines is also referred to by authors from emerging fields, where the artist plays the role of bridge builder or associative mediator in the field of interactive storytelling and media art and technology (Vesna, Crawford, 2.2.6.6.). The artist as processpatcher refers to the role of bridge-builder, one who is working, with his/her collaborators in the space between disciplines, according to Marcos Novak’s concept of transvergence (2.2.5.2.).
In practice, the case studies ‘whisper’ (3.1.2.) and ‘Kurort’ (3.1.3.) showed that the processpatching method brings forward a range of complications inherent to these re-mixed scenarios.
For the processpatching approach, a range of design and technical methods was studied, all of which are somehow related to Human Computer Interaction that was identified as the key research and development area. The aesthetics of processpatching relate to several movements and disciplines in 20th century art and design, such as collage (Dada 2.2.5.1.), improvisation (various branches of performing arts 2.2.6.2.), bricolage (structuralism 2.2.5.) and re-mixing (new media 2.2.6.2.). The processpatching approach (2.2.5.) captures a heterogeneous and changing composition of techniques and methods, which create a new dynamic aesthetics and the related discourse (Quinz 2.2.5.).
The combined technological and non-technological approaches in processpatching turn out to be relevant for obtaining more knowledge and ideas to solve the tension between computer understandable concepts and human intuition, or symbolic and natural communication.
In particular in knowledge representation practice, a correlation between the type of research and processpatching is manifested. Processpatching is often used to compensate for the shortcomings of today’s machine languages. (2.2.7.2.) The ‘whisper’ (3.1.2) and ‘Kurort’ (3.1.3.) case studies, and the themes of the Wearable Turbulence seminar (3.2.3) showed that artist-led processpatching approaches include a variety of methods, techniques (digital and analogue) and technology approaches. ‘Kurort’ (3.1.3.) by Oei and Vanouden used techniques from performing arts, visual arts, dramaturgy, stage design, cognitive science and experimental psychology. An overview of the methods in the ‘whisper’ project listed by Schiphorst (3.1.2.) include performance methods, choreography, improvisation, first person methodologies, somatics, participatory design and many more. This non-linear improvised and collage-like approach is preferred for working around the limitations of the formal approach. Although, machine language and software design have also been identified as key techniques for processpatching (Cramer et all 2.2.6.3.) the inclusion of non-technological and informal aspects is also of major importance for the artistic method. Moreover, this approach introduces interesting new ideas for developing machine learning and overcoming the current limitations of computer languages. It is difficult to express typical human emotions or experiences with today’s computers and machine languages. This is, in part, an ongoing research theme in Human Computer Interaction that stems from bi-directional interaction patterns between humans and machines. The shifting human-machine interaction pattern blurs the borderlines between human and machines and brings us to cybernetics and research into embodiment, experience design and new forms of intelligent design as an answer to first generation cybernetics (Nigten, Hayles, Sengers 2.2.7.2) Where artists bring in new research perspectives and techniques from somatics, performing arts and theatre. (‘whisper’ 3.1.2. , ‘Kurort’ 3.1.3.)
