Jan 27, 2012 0
I think pages works with scrivener and I know I should be in the cloud with my references. But, yes the juggernaut got underway before the cloud came into its own, so catch up time after the big one is done and dusted.
Other tutorial video with Evernote: Applied Insight: Using Scrivener, EndNote and Evernote for Academic research on the Mac OSX
Dec 3, 2011 0
A riff written for a post-industrial media e-publication in a public google doc which is open for additions.
————
Reflexivity is the norm, rumblings came from the ipad autocorrect feature
This riff is written in the cloud, on a blog, google doc, ipad, powerbook, scribled in a notebook… morning, day and night
Wear amateur shoes, drop the formal training, seek uninhibited creativity
Think everyday technologies, everyday practices, everyday routines, everyday experiences, everyday life, everyday places, everyday languages, vernacular
Making starts in post-production and is stuck in post-production
There is no script. A scoping document, a hunch, a probe perhaps?
The recording device can be a webcam, a mobile phone, a (?)
Sketch with anything that will write, an iphone, ipad, point-in-shoot, DSLR, a video camera
Sketch in the format being used
Develop tactics for recording and making, rather than strategies
A social media tool is a content producing and storytelling device
Systems are the foundation to creation
Interactive systems, content management systems, social media systems, storytelling systems
Make lots of works often to discover something special
Sketch, sample, test, experiment, a prototype
Remix, mash-up, appropriate, reappropriate
Reverse engineer
Riff… @#$%^*&
The in-between counts, accidents are the aim
NOISE, DIRT, GRUNGE
A post-industrial narrative is distributed, fragmented, networked
Designing media elements, story units, micro-narratives, bits
The trick is connecting/reninventing social media services and tools
Reflect, reflect, reflect, material thinking needs to be articulated
Iterative design and production, a progressive process
Production is design, design is production
Artefacts, unfinished soft in a perpetual state of BETA
What do I call the digtial artefacts made? Multimedia, new media, multi-platform, cross-media, networked, integrated. These terms are evolving, shifting, fashionable, unfinished, fly by night, tied to personal preference, the changing context
Roles are undefined, fluid, amorphous
Peer production, collaboration, the collective
There is no director, the auteur is null and void
Coordinator, facilitator seem more apt
The DOP becomes a coder, interaction designer, information architect
Who am I? A screen producer, digital media producer, transmedia producer, social media producer, media artist, new media artist, media designer… cross-dresser
Copyright is not protected, sharing produces a different type of economy
Is crafting code more important than the creative vision?
Is innovation the new cultural capital?
Yes, I have ordered these ramblings into themes, tagging and categorising are part of the repertoire
This is an open document, comments please…
NO END
Bibliography:
Amerika, M 2011, Remixthecontext: The transmedia artist in network culture, State Library of Victoria, Melbourne, Public Lecture.
Buxton, B 2007, Sketching User Experiences, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.
Carter, P 2004, Material thinking: the theory and practice of creative research, Melbourne University Publishing, Carlton, Vic.
Certeau, Md 1984, The practice of everyday life, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Gane, N & Beer, D 2008, New Media: The Key Concepts, Berg, New York.
Maslin, S 2011, Rekindling Venus: Transmedia Practices, School of Media and Communication, RMIT University, Public Lecture.
Moggridge, B 2010, Designing Media, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Moulthrop, S 2011, Make a Better Door: Or, How Does Digital Humanism Humanize?, State Library of Victoria, Public Lecture.
Schon, D 1983, The Reflective Practitioner, Ashgate, London.
————
Sep 21, 2011 0
Inger Mewburn came and did a lecture in networked media on blogging earlier in the semester. I have been meaning to blog some notes from the presentation. There was many good points but here is a few that are relevant to this blog and networking online.
It was interesting here about how the Thesis Whisperer blog had been networked out there into relevant communities using twitter. Bringing up the idea of integrating services to promote a blog and using those services relevant to their affordances. Mewburn described twitter practice as being similar to DJing. Putting out the latest stuff people want to hear and then throwing in your mixing style. (I need to get to grips with DJ practice more to fully grasp this analogy) But, the long and short of it is using twitter to tap into communities discussing/researching a similar area then jumping into that discussion and pulling people across to your own research – blog etc.
While facebook for example was described as being kept ‘light’ – used for different purposes.
Blog writing it was suggested is writing like you talk and you need to put yourself into the writing ‘every so often’…’speak it out aloud’ to as a test…
Another idea that came up was the dinner party concept from (Kamler and Thompson 2006) Seeing yourself as being at a dinner party which has selected guests (like the Q&A show on ABC), who represent a number of different perspectives/sides on a topic. The conversation has some bite but there is also an understood politeness. This analogy was used to think about developing a confidence to talk about ideas and not be ‘terrorised’ by the big hitting theorists. The conversational style is personal but in certain company discussing politics for example you want your ideas (pov) to be taken (reasonably) seriously. The dinner party sets up a situation to discuss something from multiple perspectives in a manner that sits between the informal-formal boundaries. Gets away from the rigid style of the traditional academic approach. ( I do need to find the original source in the book mentioned to get the full grasp of this concept).
Googled it p. 37 Your own writing is the food on the table that your invited guests ‘eat, chew, digest’, the dinner is in your home organised by you – the selected guests are conversing about their ideas/concepts/theories in relation to your own inquiry.
Finally, editing was the other point made working from the book Writing to Learn , by William Zinsser. A editing technique which is used to get rid of the ‘fuzz’. Putting brackets around material to be removed and drawing a comparsion between for example the original paragraph and the edited version.
Another couple of notes Mewburn uses morguefile to have copyright free images working with text in blog entries. (something I neglect in the pace of existence) A blog entry is often ended with a question to prompt readers to comment.
Kamler, B & Thomson, P 2006, Helping doctoral students write pedagogies for supervision, Taylor & Francis Ltd, Hoboken.
May 1, 2011 0
Had a thought the other night. I am writing in Scrivener. In the binder I write a title for each paragraph and each paragraph lives on its own. They can easily be moved around as separate paragraphs. When the writing is printed each title is in bold above each paragraph. This reminds me of the annotation that occurred using the Videodefunct system which uses the back-end of blog. Each shot has a title.
What would happen if this annotation applied to each paragraph is left in the final printed hardcopy exegesis?
What if, this annotation is used to create a blogged exegesis?
I set out with this application, Scrivener, to develop my writing practice similarly to the way I work with video in this research. Each paragraph is treated like a shot. One issue is the tendency to still write ideas, an argument from one paragraph to another. This makes it difficult to treat each paragraph as a separate idea – self-contained like a video shot.
The key here is to remember that they are different formats, that have different properties. For example, Miles talks about shots being able to be broken up easily into multiple parts compared to a sentence that is tied together with grammar. The formats have different properties.
But, can I write those paragraphs to be more self-contained? – i.e. not reliant as much on a group of paragraphs discussing an argument in a particular chronological/linear order. How will annotating help within the blog structure? Using the idea of blog titles, categories and tags to create an informal taxonomy, by annotating each paragraph. This means through the use of annotation and links these paragraphs as individual parts can be made to sit closer together in types of clouds. Even though they are not in a fixed linear order the user will have access to associated paragraphs related to the one that is chosen.
The paragraphs can be written around a theme or topic – i.e quality, immediacy etc – they are written to be self-contained and then are grouped together around that topic. This is happening in the case study approach to a degree.
If time allows I will look into this blog version and also aim to produce a written exegesis that includes the text annotation. One issue is I am not writing in the blogging software.
This reminds me of the writing in the book:
Shaviro, Steven. 2003. Connected, or, What it means to live in the network society, Electronic mediations ; v. 9. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Apr 20, 2011 0
Yesterday, I meet with Linda and discussed where my PhD is at. It was useful to meet with someone who is not directly involved with the research and scope out the whole project just through discussion. The discussion helped me clarify the solution being aimed for in the research. I see the solution as being the framework which consists of two parts that crossover with each other.
A. A production process which is closely aligned with a type of practice approach. This is ways of scripting, recording and editing.
B. A narrative system that facilitates the making of a specific type of documentary.
These together make up the framework that is being looked for to address the research problem. Understanding that the practice/production aspect is potentially equal if not more substantial than the system is really useful. Because this moves the analysis of the artefacts to being more about how my own practice is changing through the process of engaging with the research problem. A good thing as it moves the discussion on from being to technically focused on the development of the system.
I know this seems reasonably obvious, but somehow being too close to the research and Scrivener’s argument on problem-based research and research solutions in those types of projects – made be blind to the obvious.
The other thing that was useful in mind-mapping out the discussion is that the solution and knowledge can be seen as being separate but connected if that makes sense. The knowledge goes beyond the solution which connects with the idea of separating the knowledge away from the artefact and being able to demonstrate that it more important, from a broader perspective. This frees up being tied to describing the solution so pragmatically – which has been the case recently.
The other thing I realised is that I now know the research pretty well, to a point of talking about it easily and with some confidence. This is a good thing.
Apr 8, 2011 1
The Thesis Whisperer in the post ‘Is your computer domesticating you?’ provides an overview on the writing tool Scrivener, which I have grown to like the more I use it. I could relate to many points mentioned. The other day AM was telling me about how Ted Nelson (the person who came up with the words hypertext and hypermedia) who prints and cuts his writing up and moves it around as part of the editing process using good old fashioned real paper, scissors and paste. This story was really about Ted’s annoyance regarding the use of terms ‘cut’ and ‘paste’ in the menu bar of most applications, which I think he influenced early on in the development of computers. What makes Scrivener a breath of fresh air compared to the indoctrinated MS word is the ability to write in chunks in any order then move them around easily.
Apr 8, 2011 0
On the other hand, the other possible development is that the institution takes a step back and lets the artistic research writing become indistinguishable from what an artist would write in a “free” situation. This development might produce some important, multi-faceted and ambiguous writing, but it brings with it the risk that the rest of the university will increasingly see artistic research as a joke.
Today, I was inspired by this viewpoint on artistic research, which comes from the field of fine arts. It prompted me to try writing in a style that boldly steps away from the expected shackles of academic writing. The trick will be to still maintain an argument and discussion of the research problem. I also followed up the artist – academic Adrian Piper mentioned in the article quoted, who balances both hats of artist and academic.
Svenungsson, Jan. Spring 2009. “The Writing Artist.” Art and Research no. Volume 2. (No. 2. ).
Oct 20, 2010 0
In regards to what we have called the chunky moves task, which is related to an excerpt ‘Chunks, moves and choreography’ from the chapter ‘Choreographing the dissertation’ in the book. I got the book out and got some context around the excerpt in regards to the chapter and book itself. I found the chosen extract and book really useful. In specific relation to the extract I did just kind of list out my exegesis structure with not a lot of consideration towards the argument. This extract changed my approach towards defining the structure.
Particularly in regards to the idea of ‘flow’ presented in the extract. Looking at example in the chapter, I drafted out in a pseudo conversational tone (a mapping of the moves in the argument in reference to the text). A major point that emerged straight away is connecting the argument all the way through the exegesis across chapters. Approaching the structure from this perspective I found to be much more interesting and engaging than writing a simple chapter structure. It is certainly a lot harder.
Reading on to the section on ‘Finessing the argumentative text’ I learnt a lot from the idea of making sure interesting material is built into the exegesis/thesis up front. This is not holding the good stuff until to late into the exegesis as a whole. It even got me brainstorming ideas – like how the research is summarised in the section that lets the reader know what is coming – or even writing a shorter type version of the exegesis (a type of summary of the argument and projects) that is expanded on in the main body of the exegesis. Almost like a succinct presentation of the research in advance. This brainstorming pushed me to even consider other structures apart from the one I have planned to do all along as a way of testing that structure. But, also this started to get confusing as much as it was helpful so I went back to sticking with the structure I started with.
Kamler, B & Thomson, P 2006, Helping doctoral students write pedagogies for supervision, Taylor & Francis Ltd, Hoboken. (extract ‘Chunks, moves and choreography’ p 90-94)
Jun 21, 2010 0
I have been thinking lately about how I could bring writing closer to my documentary practice. Some notes I made in a forum recently on project-based research for my GRC presentation. This is in regards to writing the exegesis.
This week I attended a forum discussion on writing up project-based, research in which Peter Downton described (the exegesis) as potentially being a project. This has got me thinking about how the writing could be developed in terms of it having connections with the practice. One idea is that the themes could become categories and the paragraphs tags were the exegesis is formed in the same way I would construct a multilinear documentary. The writing is seen as being a documentary – a story of my practice and the research inquiry being made through my practice.
So this got me thinking about a few things including what tool I could use to write in a multilinear way. I have been working towards getting to know (tinderbox) lately (and I am only scratching the surface). If I see paragraphs as being like (video shots) each one could be tagged and categorised with the idea to bring the writing together later on under specific conceptual themes. In tinderbox you would use agents to cluster these paragraphs. In tinderbox I need to figure out how to bring the chunks together into a linear document. Of course the writing could be developed in tinderbox then published in a blog.
BM showed me Scrivener which really suits the film and TV writer in terms of thinking about things in shots and sequences. This is useful because the chunks can be assembled at the end into a linear document. It is also works with endnote.
The other idea I had was to go back to wordpress and produce a blog as the exegesis itself. This is interesting because the research blog could be tied into this including the previous reflective writing. Working live online means the work can be really intertextual, with loads of external links to references and other notes etc. The drawback here is assembling the chunks which is covered in Scrivener. This would have to be done manually. The blog could be used to draft the exegesis which is then edited from that draft. Another advantage is that video works could be linked to directly which bears all those tedious pdf images in mac word. Maybe the final exegesis could be a blog instead of a hardcopy pdf? Or it could be both? I need to do some tests. The other consideration is referencing – zotero works nicely online.
Jan 19, 2010 0
Just caught up on few more tips on endnote:
edit – paste special changes a pasted font into the font of the reference a new reference
Amalgamating documents with separate bibliographies:
1. Have one endnote library for all
2. make a back up copy of the documents
3. open all the ones to be brought together
4. unformat from the toolbar all the documents (make sure the cursor in is on a neutral space so that all the references are unformatted)
5. cut n paste the chapters chronologically into a master document
5a. Format bibliography on master doc in toolbar
6. Checks for double references in library (these can be removed in the body of text using reference ‘record no’ added to the library interface) preferences > display field > record no (you trace each individually if needed…
Submitting
A bibliography/style can be edited (customised) i.e. edit > output styles > bibliography > author lists
(a customised version is changed to a copy of the original and needs to be selected as the new style)
note: check evernote on iphone
