From what I’ve come to know of Althea Thauberger’s work through reading Vey Duke’s article and searching her on the internet, I can see similarities between her work and mine, maybe more with the specific ways Vey Duke defines and describes her work. I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the photography project I discussed with you wherein I photographed memories that people wrote out for me. There is one statement made by Vey Duke that reminded me of my motivations in this project. She writes, “Thauberger’s work, likewise, is constructed specifically so that those who use it (both her subjects and her audience) can take from it what they want, according to their needs.” When I first read this, it seemed as if this were a statement that encompassed how people perceive all artwork. I know that I always interpret art in the way that I wish to see it, based on my current position in life, what is going on around me, and my mood at the time. This is why I connect differently with different art, and why I can think differently about the same art at different times in my life (so far). Vey Duke must be trying to iterate though that Thauberger’s art is presented foremost in the structure of being what it is perceived to be by the audience. Maybe it is cloudy as to the reason for her artistic choices, or the structure of her work is very fluid, but without seeing the three video pieces Vey Duke discusses it is hard for me to know. With my memory project, I presented it in a way that forced the viewer’s construction of it, as well as relied upon it. In choosing not to place the written memory with the photograph it correlates to, and the photograph I took of the memory. The audience was forced to make connections between the separate pieces themselves, as well as come to an understanding, of their own creation, as to what the “big picture” was, or the reasoning behind my work. I really enjoyed watching my photography class question the connections, and make connections between memories and photographs that weren’t the original connections. When you looked at it, you could make a connection between almost anything if you really wanted to. I wish that I had documentation of its presentation, as I only presented it the once, and couldn’t say what I did with it. I do have the digital photographs that I took, which were my interpretations of the written memories. Here is my favorite one, which is of my roommate Dan: 

You are now the first person to see this photo out of context, and I’m curious as to what you think the memory was. Maybe if I presented those photos I took as being from memories, without actually presenting the memories, it would push even further the idea of the audience taking from it what they want, according to their own needs.

            There was another statement by Vey Duke that reminded me of another one of my video works, which I think you must have seen as part of my application portfolio. She writes, in discussion of Thauberger’s characters that, “She doesn’t author them per se – she facilitates their self-authorship.” I felt that I was acting in the same sort of position when I was creating my documentary on a dance studio, Bobbidy Boo. I acted very non-invasive during my shooting process, occasionally pretending as though the camera wasn’t taping when it was, and when I was looking through the lens, I attempted to make it seem as though I were filming simply the room and not the dancers in it. I did this so as to try to make the children more comfortable with my presence there, as well as with the camera, so that there could be some moments where they didn’t become aware of it, or maybe forgot it was there. When going through my footage and editing, I noticed how much the camera became a separate eye from mine due to this process. There was one girl in particular whom I didn’t pay much attention to while I was there, or who didn’t stand out from the others to me, but when I looked at the footage through the camera’s eyes, she had become the main character within my film. It was as if her knowledge of the presence of the camera, whether or not she knew it was on at all times, transformed her into a performance of herself, though very subtly. In this way, I felt that I had indeed facilitated her own self-authorship. The process of creating that documentary was an amazing experience for me in that I was able to see firsthand the autonomy that those being filmed can have. I felt like I myself as Laura had become one with the camera, and that I was simply the medium through which this young girl, as well as the other dancers, portrayed themselves. They really were the makers of the work for me. All I did was present it. It still is so unreal to me how much the camera saw that I didn’t while I was there in the moment.

            I don’t have a screenshot that I have already made of the girl I am talking about, but I have a screenshot from one of the times when I had turned my camera on and pretended as if it weren’t recording. I think it’s a good example though of what I mean by the girls self-authoring themselves through their relationship with and knowledge of the camera: