The Concept
Ketjak, is a multifaceted installation which plays upon the audience’s understanding of both organic and inorganic systems, with the objective of provoking discourse regarding the role of the individuals within said system and the resulting structure as a whole. A large matrix of motors, positioned in five by five rows, drive a set of simple pulleys that each raise and lower a straight steel spoke, on top of which have been placed small plastic domes. Across this bed of domed-spokes are draped two semi-transparent white sheets of fabric that visualize the collective landscape created by the separate movements of the motors. The result of this assembly is a delicate yet malleable upper layer supported by a collection of rigid and industrious constructs that click and whirr as they drive their spokes incessantly, occasionally dropping them resulting in a loud metallic clatter. This cacophony is only amplified when the audience invades the system’s environment, as they activate a movement sensor that increases the motors’ speed. This agitation generates a sense of engagement with the audience as they are now directly responsible for the disruption of the piece’s originally noisy yet meditative performance.
Though there are many parallels to be drawn from Ketjak, there is an insistence, as previously suggested, on the micro in relation to the macro. Just as the audience is responsible for the behavior of each motor, in turn, the motors are responsible for the topography of the fabric that they support. The recognition of these links suggests causality within the environment, but the audience can only understands this relationship after the fact. As their participation is initially involuntary, there is a sense of anxiety due to the disruptive nature of their role. But regardless of whether or not this realization is truly discomforting, the participant is now fully aware of their engagement with the ecology of the installation. Despite retaining individual agency, the motors and the audience form a single entity represented via the fabric, which in turn manipulates the nearby environment bringing to question the whole matter of the interdependency of an system.
Production Photos
Ecosophic Turn
The French anthropologist of science Bruno Latour describes the difference between matters of fact and matters of concern. Matters of fact are objects or ideas that are “out there,” unquestionable, mastered, known and divorced from their “attachments:” the connections, links, interrelationships and networks that make them neither only natural nor cultural, born or made, social or scientific. Matters of concern are things and events that force people to assemble around what they disagree about and what they nevertheless have in common.
Funding
Funded in part by Fasa
Contact Us
David Silveira: email@davidsilveira.com
Nina Bouchard: nina.bouchard@gmail.com
Brent Burelle: b.h.burelle@gmail.com
Tina Salameh: tina.salameh@gmail.com
