I've been thinking about this all morning and wondering about how it is useful. I'm now collaborating with Richard Steadman -Jones on writing a book and although I've been working with him for a couple of years this feels really different and a bit exciting. I'm not sure why he wants to collaborate with me as he is very clever but I get the feeling he thinks it will be generative - push his thinking in different directions - almost like he sees himself as to situated within his discipline /profession and this new collaboration will liberate a new way of working. He writes a lot with his friend Jess Dubow who is in geography and he described this writing process as - "Truly collaborative we sit together and write each word." I found this really interesting because I'd hope that this is what me and you can do now. We have lots of conflict and difference but we navigate this to get to a point of synergy which we both value. I was thinking about this in terms of "Form" I said this word when I was talking to Tim a couple of weeks ago and in typical Tim fashion he told me I was obsessed with the idea of "Form" - I'd not noticed this but perhaps I am - or at least the breakdown of Form as part of post modernity.
To understand this new collaboration I thought about the way we work together - are we like Jess and Richard who "write every word together" or do we bounce things about between us. I think we value that we have different skills and this makes us interesting- complement each other. Jess and Richard are a good example as they both write within their own fields of English and Geography independently so I suppose like us they have an individual and a collaborative practice.
So in terms of our collaboration I think we have a thing about been in the same space when we have ideas. This means that the ideas go into the melting pot very early - they are adapted and shaped together - I think if I want to sound clever which I occasionally do I'll call them "Becomings" which is a bit Deleurzian which I think is shorthand for "A load of complicated bollocks."
All the work In Parson X "made for you" was like this we walked around - we went into shops together - we were in the world we shared out tasks - we tacitly agreed what was the "Rite thing to do" in the space - in-fact the whole work was very spacial.
I think things are more difficult when we have an idea which is allowed to have a "Form" before we get our teeth into it. For example I really like the idea of the" flower press" for force of nature. I found it and still find it difficult to see it as "Our collaborative idea." I see it as your idea which I'm happy with - I'm adding thoughts to it like the idea of using slate and stone but this feels like 'Part of the form" rather than development of the form itself. I'm sure that the idea to turn off the escalator is a similar thing. This to me feels different to the Parson cross made for you work in it feels like we are defaulting to our personal practice position and feeling like we are generously sharing this with each other. I don't think there is anything wrong with this and I like both ideas very much I also think that in the same way the second edition of work for made for you was "Something we had to do" trying to work our way between these two possible pieces of work is possibly "Where the work is."
So I was going to write down a long list of ideas my over active mind has had for the Ruskin studio but as they are now only really 'Becomings." I'm not sure writing them down is a good idea. We need a day to sit together and struggle- to metaphorically cook a giant pot of soap to add and take out ingredients. It feels like we should be able to do this via emails or on a Blog but perhaps this is not the way we should work as we are talkers and batters abouters and although we can both right and you can spell this is not perhaps the way to kick things off.
I think perhaps we should start with a journey to Brantwood. Not see anybody- a pilgrimage into the world- to Ruskins house- talk in the car have a thousand ideas and discard 1001 perhaps this is the "Form" of our collaboration - perhaps Tim was correct. ( because I havn't a clue which rite to right)
To understand this new collaboration I thought about the way we work together - are we like Jess and Richard who "write every word together" or do we bounce things about between us. I think we value that we have different skills and this makes us interesting- complement each other. Jess and Richard are a good example as they both write within their own fields of English and Geography independently so I suppose like us they have an individual and a collaborative practice.
So in terms of our collaboration I think we have a thing about been in the same space when we have ideas. This means that the ideas go into the melting pot very early - they are adapted and shaped together - I think if I want to sound clever which I occasionally do I'll call them "Becomings" which is a bit Deleurzian which I think is shorthand for "A load of complicated bollocks."
All the work In Parson X "made for you" was like this we walked around - we went into shops together - we were in the world we shared out tasks - we tacitly agreed what was the "Rite thing to do" in the space - in-fact the whole work was very spacial.
I think things are more difficult when we have an idea which is allowed to have a "Form" before we get our teeth into it. For example I really like the idea of the" flower press" for force of nature. I found it and still find it difficult to see it as "Our collaborative idea." I see it as your idea which I'm happy with - I'm adding thoughts to it like the idea of using slate and stone but this feels like 'Part of the form" rather than development of the form itself. I'm sure that the idea to turn off the escalator is a similar thing. This to me feels different to the Parson cross made for you work in it feels like we are defaulting to our personal practice position and feeling like we are generously sharing this with each other. I don't think there is anything wrong with this and I like both ideas very much I also think that in the same way the second edition of work for made for you was "Something we had to do" trying to work our way between these two possible pieces of work is possibly "Where the work is."
So I was going to write down a long list of ideas my over active mind has had for the Ruskin studio but as they are now only really 'Becomings." I'm not sure writing them down is a good idea. We need a day to sit together and struggle- to metaphorically cook a giant pot of soap to add and take out ingredients. It feels like we should be able to do this via emails or on a Blog but perhaps this is not the way we should work as we are talkers and batters abouters and although we can both right and you can spell this is not perhaps the way to kick things off.
I think perhaps we should start with a journey to Brantwood. Not see anybody- a pilgrimage into the world- to Ruskins house- talk in the car have a thousand ideas and discard 1001 perhaps this is the "Form" of our collaboration - perhaps Tim was correct. ( because I havn't a clue which rite to right)
for a man so in love with venice - this is not so great looking, perhaps in life it will look less pink. i also think its funny in a post about collaboration you showed Brantwood which looks like it was put together by committee!
ReplyDeleteI'm very suspicious of all collaboration! aren't you? When we fall in love we do things together and then we don't and we do but we don't collaborate. When we get on and are excited we share ideas and emotions but this is not collaboration. When two people academics or not come together and write every word, this is not collaboration - it is just doing that for some other reason and calling it for some reason collaboration.
ReplyDeleteCollaboration comes from difference and that alone, the only interesting use of the word is the collaborator of WW2 who negotiated violent difference by taking sides. Nothing good in it. It is not nicely coloured but a statement of separation.
So. If you are comfortably writing every word together then you are not collaborating, just having complicated tea.
If you are uncomfortable with each other, you disagree, maybe not even get on, then you are on the right royal road of the true collaborator.
if i think about it [this comment of tims/collaboration] in relation the the farm - and often with steve, this makes sense. We fight, we are both strong willed, we have our own desires to take something forward, we have to be quick or fleet of foot, resilliant and experienced and knowledgeable about the past, what worked before, we have to nuture, force, ask nicely, will, graft, labour and rely on luck, chance and time. Only then does the thing you've sown, dug in, planted come to fruition - but as with everything, the constant reality that the finely balanced problem of life/death sits there and often no matter how hard you try death wins.
ReplyDeletedeath wins but life is always winning until that moment.
ReplyDeletethats very positive of you - try it when your lambing sheep in the rain.
ReplyDeleteI think that perhaps there is a third way which is more gentle and collaboration can be more than conflict, pragmatism and struggle. Maybe the third way is synergy - the value of the "Exchange"outweighs the problem - and in the words of Bonny prince Billy perhaps "Death is not the end"
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete