A most enjoyable blind date, I must admit, largely because of the exceptional generosity of the Vassar community. Upon arrival, I was immersed in an atmosphere already immersed and fluent in Limited Fork Theory, attending a class I didn't want to leave; the student questions and comments were so insightful and made me probe Limited Fork Theory for answers seldom demanded —the tines vibrated with rapture in configuring responses. At the end of the class, as I was leaving the learning space, I heard this comment:
It's as if we were visited by Blake himself!
In advance of the Bishop Lecture installation, three students had agreed to be lecture Installation soloists, knowing only that they would be assigned words that they would say as conducted during the installation, and that they would not know these words until minutes before the event.
A tech crew was in place to handle the video and audio projection, playback and capture. A single video projected in three ways, on a large center mounted screen, on smaller free-standing screen to the left of the mounted screen, and on an intersection of ceiling and wall to the right of the mounted screen. Projection into the corner allows disruption of the flatness of projection onto flat surfaces. The projected material adapts, interacts with the architecture and dimensionality of the complex geometry of the surface intersection system. At first, technicians expressed concern because the projections spilled over boundaries of the screens, interacting and mingling with neighboring projections streams, a spill that pleased me —"great spill," I said. One technician smiled and said,"You mean like John Cage?" "Yes," I said; "I love John Cage!" and gave my consent to interactions unfolding however they unfolded, that the goal was an outcome system within a set of minimal limiting factors that increased variability. The three looping copies of the same projection piece were not to be synchronized. The looping audio of the Bertolozzi/Moss Bridge Music was not part of the projection video, and was to be played separately. The audio and video of the lecture installation were to be captured for 15-20 minutes, then played back into the event space to be interacted with as the lecture continued to unfold, and continued to be captured with another camera.
After another 15-20 minutes, the layered capture was again fed back into the event space for further interaction to become part of the active present, the activated moment.
Both video feedbacks were projected onto the large center screen, displacing the initial center screen loop of prepared video while the smaller screen and the corner wall projection continued their uninterrupted prepared video loops.
With each feedback, what was unfolding attempted to occupy gaps in the appearance of what had previously unfolded without filling all gaps; in fact, without apparently reducing the number of gaps at all. Subsystems of infinite gap potential appeared; as infinite but smaller for some gaps having received content, filler that didn't fill.