I was most interested in the forgetting part of memory- how much stays with us over the years, and how much fades away due to its lack of significant effect on us ,or our own lack of rehearsal of the information.

This is the area I decided to look at more closely and create my artefact around. I decided to look at people’s long term memory. I wanted to see even after many years, people can still remember what places used to look like, as the type of things that people pass everyday are usually only shallowly processed and so not memeorised deeply in the mind.

To do this I decided to find images of Coventry from the 50s and 60s, I then went to the same places and took pictures showing what they look like today. I then asked someone who had lived in Coventry during the time of the original pictures, and who still lives in Coventry today to look at the images I took recently and annotate them to say how much of the scenary had changed. By comparing their annotations to the originals, I would be able to tell how much of the world around them back in those days they had remembered, and therefore processed deeply.

I found that the person I asked to annotate these photos could remember the most significant changes between now and then but did not offer any smaller, subtle changes. However this finding is only relevant to the one person I asked. Others may well remember more, less or even different changes that have occurred.

If I was to expand upon this project then I would use a wider selection of people, this would not only add to the artistic value of my piece as there will more images, but also it could be used as a simple psychological experiment about the duration of long term memory/ level at which we process our everyday surroundings. I could also include a sevaral towns and cities, showing variety of people’s memories around the country as well as showing how much different places have changed in the last decades.

I could also improve upon this piece by making it more of an instillation piece- maybe having people describing what used to be there, or even using archive moving images and modern film mixed in with the images; this would give more variety to the piece, as well as allow me to use a whole range of different medias.

During my research I realised how much the media relies on spectacle, and as people become more and more desensitized to what we see, visual medias have to constantly improve the ways they shock and awe us.

I looked at how both television and film rely heavily on special effects with many television programmes now having effects that are on the same scale os blockbuster films: ie ITV’s The Flood when it showed london submerged under water.

This made me think about how people who cannot see these programmes and films would be able to appreciate them. This is what lead me to research Audio Description. I firstly watched a high action film- Die Hard 4.0- with audio descrition turned on. By doing this I managed to pick up on some of the techniques used by audio describers to help those who are visually impaired experience and appreciate the film. I also found myself enjoying the film more with audio description, not only because it allowed me to be able to do other things while not missing any of the action when I wasn’t looking, but also because it provided me with information which I would have otherwised missed if I was watching the film normally.

In order to understand audio description better I decided to interview a professional audio describer so I contacted Di Langford who is the audio describer for all of the Harry Potter films, and has also been involved with other genres such as theatre, radio and galleries. From the interview I was able to understand more about the techniques used to provide audio descritions as well as things I was unaware of such as the difficulties they are having with modern films as the pace increases, and the special effects get more and more intricate and advance.

After looking at audio description I had realised how important sound can be so I looked at other exhibits which rely on sound rather then spectacle such as Bruce Nauman’s exhibit at the Tate Modern a few years ago.

In the end I decided to base my artefact on audio description. I wanted to show how much we rely on spectacle, and to highlight the difficulties people with visual impairments have experiencing and enjoying medias that we take for granted. I decided to film something quite basic, but which relies heavily on being able to see what is going on in order to understand it.

I filmed cheerleaders simply training and practising stunts, I then blurred the footage so you couldn’t make out what was happening and could only hear them counting. I then looped the blurred footage but also added my own audio description. This allowed people to realise how much they rely on visuals in order to see what was going on, and then how important audio description is…

I am pleased with my artefact, although obviously there are elements that need cleaning up. For instance, I would improve the blending between each scene. I would also experiment more with camera angles so I could work that in to the audio descrition as well. The audio levels would also need to be adjusted, I would try to loose more the background noise and focus more on the important sounds such as the coach’s advice and the counts which were being used. This would mean though that i’d have to work in the audio description better as it cannot overlap or drown out any dialogue or important sounds.

I think I’d also create a stronger narrative rather then just filming a succesion of stunts and training exercises and running them one after another.

However despite this I think that overall the artefact does do what I intended it to do. It shows how reliant we are on images, and how we often forget this. Also it shows how important audio description is to those who can’t see, and so can’t fully appreciate, visual medias; and how it can help those who can see understand even more what is happening on screen.

My idea is to show that through the power of word of mouth something small and insignificant and become something far more extreme and dangerous.

This technique has been seen on several occassions from Nazi Germany to the McCarthy Communist Hunt, where rumours and pieces of information have become far more exaggerated and powerful thanks to media perception of the issue, and people’s own interpretations.

To show this exaggeration in my artefact, my idea was to take several photographs, each one more exaggerated then the last, and run them as a slide show so they fade into one another. Underneath these images would be a soundtrack of people talking, with each phrase matching the image above it. The combination will show how the power of word of mouth, like chinese whispers, can bring something entirely out of its original context and become far more powerful; whilst the images will act as a visual representation of the conversation, as well as show how people’s perceptions change accodring to what they hear.

Although I did ideally want to use real people and props for the photographs, I did not have the finances or the time to be able to do this for this artefact. Also I feel my narrative is still quite weak, so I have decided to let this artefact act as a foundation, to show my ideal structure and construction for the piece, whilst I develope a stronger storyline.

In the meantime I have photographed sketches I have done of my current narrative, and recorded a soundtrack to put underneath it. The overall effect I feel does work well, and shows the power of word of mouth as I intended. Obviously with actual people involved the overall strength of the artefact would be increased, but that is something I know I will do to improve this piece if I decide to continue with it at a later date. There are other areas I will improve on also, as I said before I feel that the narrative needs to be stronger, but also I will improve the quality of the audio soundtrack, and edit it much more closely so no speeches are cut off.

But for now, here is my first draft of my power artefact:

I looked at adverts as they have to be visually hard hitting to put their message across in a simple image. Unlike television adverts which have the advantage of using sound and moving image to influence their audiences, print adverts ned to startle people from their mundane reading habits, or make them stop and take a second look as they go past the advert if its on a billboard etc

I looked as well at the artist Santiago Sierra. His art work is designed to create controversy, and works on the same principals as adverts- to change the opinions and ideologies of those who witness it/them. It also means that people are persuaded, even if they are unaware of it, to change certain aspects of their life; whether it is to stop smoking or to simply consider the conditions that others live in and how desperate they must be to accept only $5 to carry heavy rocks all day.

To get an understanding as to why people are persuaded I decided to look into the psychology behind the power of persuation, also known as social influence. I looked as well at how social influence is shown in films, such as minority influence in 12 Angry Men (1957); and the power which exists between a film and its audience, as well as between the characters in Funny Games (1997).

From looking at power from visual medias I started to look at audio sources of power, I looked at how radio commentators are able to bring the excitement of sports events to those who can’t see them, and I looked at how radio can directly influence people’s behaviour by researching the Rwandan genocide in 1994, when a whole race of people were convinced to kill their neighbours based on the speeches of radio presenters.

From this I decided to look at propaganda as a whole to see how visuals and audio working together have the power to persuade and influence people. In particular I looked at World War Two propaganda, and how the German people would/could “allow” the halocaust to take place.

This is what in particular I have decided to concentrate my Power artefact on- how people can be influenced, and how easily this can snowball.

I looked at images such as early Nazi propaganda:

Subtley there is a Star of David on the snakes head suggesting that the snake is Jewish, and as snakes are seen to be evil this suggests that the Jews are evil. And as the sword is piercing the star and head of the snake, the Nazis are seen to be slaying the evil of the Jews.

This is still a subtle poster compared to their later propaganda, during their time in charge of the country the Nazis became far more explicit in their anti-semitic views as public opinion became more used to, and in favour of the anti-jewish opinions the Nazis had. This acceptance of such views could be seen to be due to the power and influence of word of mouth.  Rumors started by party members were no doubt exaggerated upon by normal people, and soon became the accepted truth as to why the country was in trouble, and so giving the Jews and far more extreme and hated identity.

This is the type of idea I am going to use to create my artefact. My plan is to start with a simple, non-emotive image, but the through 14 following stills the image will morph to become something far more extreme. This morphing will follow an accompanying audio track. The audio will be of people describing the orginal image, but each description will become exaggerated and more extreme then its predecessor, showing how word of mouth can influence and have power over people’s perceptions. The final image will be symbolically linked to orginal, however the most obvious interpretation of it will be far more explicit, and if seen by itself could have the power to influence people’s opinions, but not necessarily in a positive way…

It also shows that even as aclaimed and popular certain works are, eg Jorgen Leth’s “Perfect Human”, there are ways to improve upon them. It makes you think about your own work, and how endless the possibilities are to improve upon it, you just have to think outside the box and not be afraid to experiment with things you wouldn’t normally try; for instance when Leth had to refilm “The Perfect Human” using only 12frames the film became more in tune with its resetting in Cuba as it looked less polished and westernised.

Also Trier’s piece makes you think more deeply about ethics, it makes you question about where the line is between exploiting people and when it is your duty as a film-maker to make the audience aware of things going on it the world.

This piece makes you continually think about where the limits of filmmaking are, and if there are any at all.