The meaning behind the experiment.

I think our work tends to have quite a broad appeal, the ways that we find to present our ideas tend to be quite unusual and visually engaging but importantly they also spike interest with people like Jo Melvin, Charlotte Cotton and Gothard and that's probably because they have a different background to our other visitors / audience, they are more familiar with 'art' issues / practice and perhaps have more appreciation or awareness of the underlying concepts and / or processes (like documentation).

I think, like a lot of art, our work is finding a way to look at and confront human ideas. With Existere I feel that our decision not to photograph really contributed to the experience of the piece. One of the first things that visitors were instructed before entering the space was that they were not allowed to use photography or video. It is an interesting challenge to face and I think represents a human struggle between our instinct to hold on to moments versus certain change. There are lots of interesting questions that come out of this for instance: why we experience this compulsion to record and capture what can not be captured? Perhaps it adds to the meaning of what we are doing. I wonder what this meaning represents and what motivates it?

This is something I would be interested in looking at more closely: The questionable border where control ends and uncertainty begins and how that border is treated - sensitively or as a battleground. I found Barry Flannagan's work quite interesting in that respect, how he used certain malleable materials like hessian and sand that might be affected by external forces. He must have been very aware of his own control over the work and at which point he felt happy letting go.

Collaboration is a subject that we have looked at quite intensely and I wonder if it is something that we specifically want to focus on again. I think collaboration is a useful tool which is something that we employed on Existere, are we talking about it as a possible subject or a tool?

I'm not sure what aspect of 'chance' you are interested in. It is such a broad subject in a similar way that 'Failure and Success' were, it's so broad it's virtually meaningless. But I do think it has some kind of connection to what we have done in our work already, in dealing with uncertainty. Maybe this is where our thoughts have a connection? Perhaps it is in this grey, undefined area you call chance, where I wonder where control and uncertainty draw their border lines, how they tussle for parity and what that means.

I think it's a good idea to treat Brighton, if we do it, as an experimental opportunity but I guess we just need to agree on the idea behind the experiment.