An Incomplete Contemplation on the Origins of the Way Things Are: A Diagrammatic Essay.
In the previous term, I asked: are we encouraged to exercise the labor of consideration? To shape and interpret meaning? The question that consistently came up in my dialogues was. Why? What is the importance of this ‘labour’? To me the answer to that question was: ‘So that we can understand better the way things are. And perhaps imagine alternate ways of being.’
But why?
Because maybe tracing the origins of the way things are can reveal the limits, the exclusions of the systems we occupy. The knowledge systems. The design systems. The economic systems. Yes, I know this is too big an area for me to investigate. If I have to be more concise, it sounds like I’m asking, ‘Where does knowledge come from?’ Where do our ideas, positions, realities and knowledges come from?
Obviously many philosophers, theorists and scientists have pondered such questions and have come to their own positions, conclusions and non-conclusions. Obviously any answer to this question I can give will be inadequate. But what can I as a communication designer do with this question?
Where do I begin? Where anyone would. The library. Perhaps with the simple intention of contextualising and simplifying this question.
If you’re confused, what you’re looking at on screen [in the video] are a set of diagrams (some accurate, some fictional) alongside my limited musings on knowledge (from what I’ve been able to engage with in the last couple of weeks.)
Dealing with questions of a universal yet somewhat microscopic scale: I thought to look at Central Saint Martin’s limited collection of books on Physics; ranging from textbooks, to philosophical discourses within the subject.
First: I should acknowledge I am someone who hasn’t studied Physics in over seven years. The concepts I was once familiar with are now vague. And many concepts far beyond my A-level understanding. But I was drawn to the diagrams. Looking to them for help in making sense of some of these ideas. I was drawn to their symbolic qualities, their metaphorical qualities.
I was made aware of Jenny Holzer’s ‘Diagrams’ (1977) as I shared my ideas and work with my peers. This made me think. Is any idea original? Every path that I am going down seems to have been walked on before. But maybe somewhere down this path I will branch away and find one that is my own. But for now, I take comfort that someone else has deemed this path worthy enough to walk on.
How do these diagrams illustrate my train of thought? What new meaning do they take on when presented like this? In this context?
Through my dialogues I had been engaging in conversations surrounding the western, capitalist and patriarchal hegemonic skew within our systems. I’m left wondering, if all we have created so far has come from here, what are other ways of doing and being?
In ‘From Certainty to Uncertainty,’ David Peat (2002) makes multiple metaphorical parallels between scientific and social constructions of reality. On the theory of relativity and knowledge he says ‘the world appears different to observers moving at different speeds.’ and likens this to the limits of cultural assumptions embedded within our paths of discovery. This made me think of feminist and de-colonial perspectives of Donna Harraway & Gayatri Spivak.
Spivak critiques our constructions of historical fact by revealing the eurocentric, patriarchal and imperialist lens within the archives she uses to decode the history of the Rani of Sirmur (1985). Many have later criticised her for working within the the very same limits she is critical of – leaving her construction incomplete. Therein lies the problem I’m concerned with. What is our way out of the limits we are so embedded within?
Haraway has formulated the concept of ‘Situated Knowledges,’ in questioning objectivity or an ultimate reality. We are moving bodies, and the knowledges we inherit as we move evolve and are born out of the contexts we’re exposed to. Situating this context is important.
On quantum uncertainty Peat poses that, ‘no matter how refined our experiments may be, the ultimate reality of nature can never fully be revealed.’ (p. 15). So, as a communications designer, in this context, I am not really aiming to reveal ultimate reality. But perhaps could work towards revealing the lack of an ultimate rational, coherent reality.
Scientific experiments often create simplified models – devoid of friction, resistance and the limits of scale in order to easily describe and calculate the mechanics of the complex world we inhabit. These models are a fictional metaphor – ‘they are not so concerned with reality but rather a model of reality.’ (Peat, 2002: p. 105). I don’t know what to do with this yet, but I’m interested in this tension between representing what is and isn’t. And the gaps between reality and the smooth fictionalised conceptions and metaphors to explain reality.
I acknowledge that this question I began with – and all the sub questions – are too big for me to reach a satisfying conclusion in a few weeks. But why must that stop me from figuring out a way to respond to it? Our knowledges are bumpy. My thoughts on the subject are clunky. And these diagrammatic symbols are ambiguous. This is intentional. As designers we can in small ways find openings within these questions to reveal the limits of our individual positions – or imagine what lies beyond those limits.
Bell Hooks (2000: p. 110) in ‘Feminism Is for Everybody: Passionate Politics’ says, “To be truly visionary we have to root our imagination in our concrete reality while simultaneously imagining possibilities beyond that reality.”
So: what is the value in responding to questions you can’t answer? Perhaps it can lead me on a journey during – but not limited to – the duration of this course to learn. And imagine an evolving practice, position and a set of guiding principles as a communication designer and researcher.
Reference Images from Physics Textbooks:
Below are some scans and screenshots from physics textbooks I have found at CSM Library and Online. I looked online for NCERT / CBSE Physics textbooks – which are the textbooks I used while studying physics in high school growing up in India.
Practice Reference: Jenny Holzer’s 1977 ArtistBook – Diagrams – A collection of diagrams from many sources.
Jenny Holzer has similarly appropriated diagrams from physics and science textbooks in her work. She, re-drew hundreds of diagrams in exact replica, along with the captions, however, removed from their original context. The captions and diagrams take on a larger-than-life metaphorical shape when this is done.
On a slight tangent to this, while I did begin myself with re-drawing, I eventually separated the diagrammatic elements and created new configurations of my own. Ones that are reminiscent of physics diagrams, have similar qualities of giving shape to grand ideas, questions and thoughts but are not accurately scientific diagrams any more.
Working Bibliography
Haraway, D. (1988) ‘Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective’. Feminist Studies, 14(3). pp. 575–599.
Holzer, J. (1977) Diagrams – A collection of diagrams from many sources. [Artist Book]
Hooks, B. (2000) Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics. Cambridge: South End Press. pp. 110.
Krishnamurthy, P. (2021) On Bumpiness, In Letters. [Recorded Lecture]. Available at: https://vimeo.com/theoneclubforcreativity/review/546841106/1d3121bfb4 (Accessed: 20th September 2022).
Peat, F. D. (2002) From Certainty to Uncertainty. Washington D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.
Spivak, G. (1985) ‘The Rani of Sirmur,’ History and Theory. 24(3). pp. 247-272
Feedback & Reflections
- Play with the tension around the ‘poetic’ vs ‘logical’ – rather than ‘real’ vs ‘fictional’
- What question from the above monologue can I extract to respond to further?
- What can I extract from the existing set of diagrams to make new ones? What are they responding to? What do they prompt? The diagrams almost have their own grammar. The individuals shapes and sentences come together as metaphorical sentences. How can I extract this linguistic quality? Grammar? Create a grammar?
- How can the diagrams respond to a text? Or vice versa?