DeLillo always writes remarkably poetically about the sky, you get a feel that the sky is open…and he is writing about America after all… I could not say I felt as open a sky in my time in London, London is an open enclosed retinal humdrum, the idiosyncrasies of London’s skyline…. The strange shapes,… Sadiq Khan did not permit the Tulip…. I remember back to Primrose Hill to the hill in Dulwich … the different perspectival shift in viewing one’s city’s guts…. To Bradley Garrett not the lioning place-hacking subculture but a culture on the ground, transversal, but also conservative…in the legal, in the energistic, I sit on the hill beside tories…drinking wine and filtering down from their large homes of parents in the television industries or the creatives making Downton Abbey and other period dramas in West Hampstead…by the heathen, elysial lake in summer and the turning bodies in the sun.
“Most of our work, if you look at our work online or in our exhibition here, is about methodology. We need to show the way we do things, because otherwise you will not trust us. … We cannot just simply give you a statement, because we do not want to have any institutional credibility, we want our work to be its own credibility, we want to show you how every video links to every other in order to do that” There was also a subtle addition to this in the Q&A at 01:22:40 around how openly showing methods was one thing but then weaving the exposure of method with a rhetorically compelling presentation was where open verification might finds its instrumentality: “Your presentations nonetheless don’t only work because of the enormity of the information that you present to us, or the elegance and sophistication of the technological manipulations, there is a narrative dimension to them, an incredible act of suasion, and that surely must be a big part of what makes the open verification into an instrument for the kind of interventions you are describing… At what point do you seek to pursue a rhetorically compelling presentation and not merely the exposure of your method?” You responded at 01:26:14 that: “For [ ] , “we do not want our evidence to simply be a prisoner of the bureaucratic process of judicial review and to sacrifice its political and public work… in fact for us the very idea of forensics is making things public.” This also fitted with a nice set of images around alignment and coordinating different fields which could work in the final aesthetic commons section: “A very important part of our work is our limited resources, our limited means to undertake all the investigations that we are asked to undertake, and therefore in choosing the right moment to intervene, we need a map, we need to map the way in which politics is aligned in a particular conflict, rarely we can do it without people who ha ve a lived experience of that conflict … and on the NSU case…”we were able to align the art world and the judicial system and the political system in such a way that they actually contributed to one another .. sometimes you need to operate in one field, in the field of art, in order precisely for that evidence to enter a parliamentary inquiry | I also trialled some language working Karan Barad / Donna Haraway’s ‘diffraction’ into the final section, but may not work:
In acting to socialise the production and dissemination of evidence, open verification ultimately seeks to establish an unlikely but imminent commons, that is, a shared perception of a world. This commons is analogous to a natural resource such as air or a freshwater lake that we must protect when it is polluted by the toxins and cataracts of dark epistemologists. Yet, like the thin layer of atmospheric lake we move under, its surface is not reflective but diffractive, ‘recording a history of interaction, interference, reinforcement and difference’ FN. Arriving at a shared perception of the world, the retina of the lake is not bludgeoned into shape but glass-blown from many sides. With each new investigation, a new community of praxis emerges like the meltwater of joindering retinal lakes. In open verification, these imminent commons weave divergent perspectives and viewpoints that establish common ground on Jean Francois Lyotard’s collapsing frame. With each update of the ledger in time, open verification melds retinas to the quake with no record.