Although I believe we achieved a considerable amount of which we set out to, if we were to do this again there would be several things I would change which I believe would make the overall execution of the performance better and more effective.
The first of these would be to engage with what time meant for other people apart from us. This could have been done by organising a short survey to find what time meant to them and then interpret that through our performance. , potentially by projection, or displaying their comments physically. Another way in which this could have worked is by adding a different dynamic to our piece, sound. If we had either spoken the words, or played recording of them, I believe that we could have had a bigger impact and it also would have made the piece more integrated with Gallery 3. Moreover, to help further see what affect we had on the them, as well as their perception of time, a feedback survey or comment box would have been really interesting and insightful, being beneficial for our findings but also for the Usher gallery as they could use it as an assessment of the space.
Secondly, I think we could have played about more with the projections and should have looked deeper into the idea of projecting something against us. We did talk a lot about this but could not decide on a strong enough image or way to do it. At points the projection was displayed on us, especially during the sleeping segment, which I thought was a really interesting effect. If we were to have a segment where the image was projected across us, I believe this could have been a good to show how time and our experience had affected us and people as a whole.
Although not entirely vital, but as stated previously, to add a new dynamic to the piece, more audience being among us would have been desirable. It would have been interesting to see not only how they reacted and felt being right in the centre of our piece, being part of something they were more than likely not familiar with, but how differently we reacted and how it changed the feel and impact of the piece. We did put up a sign welcoming the public into the space and to enjoy the performance as part of their museum experience, though more could have been done. Maybe introducing the idea to the public on their entrance with leaflets to accompany their visit, making them feel more comfortable with the idea, would have enticed more people to come closer to the action. Also more signage and direction would have been beneficial leading up to the gallery.
The gallery had introduced an ‘iGuide’ too late into our process to utilise it, but we had discussed using different forms of technology to present our piece. If we were to do the piece again using the ‘iGuide’ would have been really interesting, and beneficial, as we could have put a lot of different images of time and clocks on there and more explanation of our perception, and others, on the effect of time. Moreover, audio clips would have been good as it would have added a contrast to normally a very quiet experience, changing it to a more dynamic one.
Authored by Shane Humberstone