I had the privilege of two distinct, yet perfectly complementary interactions – first with Gregory Dorsainville, and then with Tiri Kananuruk.

In both cases my meetings were conversational and relaxed. Perhaps because I felt so at ease, my mind – increasingly over-taught from overthinking and angst – began to unwind. I remembered what excited me so much about my topic to begin with.

By the end of the evening, I was reinvigorated with curiosity and a renewed sense creative courage.

When I entered the first Zoom room, Mr. Dorsainville was mid-bite of, what I assume was his supper sandwich. Slightly abashed, I apologized for interrupting him, but he waved the apology aside,  taking  the lead and asking me about my loRes experience thus far. From there, our discussion organically shifted to my thesis. Beginning with my description of the revelatory impact I seek to create for my users, we discussed elements of  that morning’s episode of  The Daily. We’d both heard it, so it gave us a concrete to talk about “vocal collage” as a shortcut to intimacy, connection, and experiential empathy.

We then exchanged ideas about which combination of contextual ingredients might characterize moments of shared transformation capable of transcending self limiting categories of identity and ideology. We agreed that unusual or unexpected stimulus, emotional arousal, narrative drama, and sensory specificity can function similarly to the ways in which traumatic events create powerful bonds, but without threatening danger/having a deleterious impact on the nervous system. We talked using intensity and attention as tools to hold up a mirror to the user/audience, and touched on the diversity of Marina Abramovic’s work as evidence for the breadth of methods for employing such reflective methods.  He suggested that I play with varied combinations of these ingredients through performance based experiments, trying out as many . We talked about taking advantage of existing interactive technologies like Zoom as a forum for “shaping” moments of meaning.

He said to me, more than once, that “prototyping is freedom”. And indeed, the exploratory, non-judgmental, anything-is-possible, tenor of our talk filled me with liberated exuberance.

Ms.Kananuruk was markedly more soft spoken than Mr. Dorsainville. Consequently, I adopted a more reserved and introspective posture for my second conversation.

Because we have the practice of Buddhism in common,  the concept of “emptiness” did not require explanation. Instead, after I’d shared the objective of my thesis, I asked Ms. Kananuruk how she would deconstruct the idea of emptiness as multiple coexisting truth in her own work, as an exercise in choreography, embodiment, and performance. We spoke about structuring open questions within the framework of rhythm and pace, and within the framework of hierarchical relationships, tension, flow, separation, and recombination – expressed through bodies in space and questions, spoken simply out loud, and repeated over and over again, like a mantra or prayer.

This conversation was like an infusion of new energy while at the same time, serving as affirmation of my earliest instincts. My subsequent experiments have taken me off my screen and back into my own body and voice.

Overall, I realized the ways in which I’ve gotten far too literal and timid, suffocating my imagination with concepts and disembodied striving.

I am not starting over, but I am moving forward fresh.

Play and wonder have to be primary for me before I can seriously consider programming.

I’m comfortable letting this project continue to define and refine itself. In fact,  I think it must.

“Needing to know” exactly what I’m doing has been my biggest obstacle to doing work worth knowing about.