Working with the ambivalence between fact and creativity, this middle tension. Due to lack of knowledge with these scientific facts, I am looking into them as if they are merely an idea, a concept, a philosophy. Which is subjectively perceived, which I cannot visualise, cannot put into an object due to the fear of falsely imposing how one should or should not perceive this concept.

This led to being impaired, I myself am impaired in this instance because I cannot see, hear, or touch this idea of the impossible and state of entropy. We are impaired to visualise these concepts as something tangible. There is a limit to envisage the ubiquity through our senses. Through impairment there are other senses one can objectify in order to gain understanding, which may be braille or audio vibrations. Which can each be interpreted subjectively by the receiver. These are a good means to use because I don’t want to visualise something that’s impossible to visualise, as it’s almost an impossible concept in itself. This then raises what is the creation through impairment? To represent the complexity of the concept itself? I am trying to represent something that I feel is best left unrepresented, but trying to embody that idea within it.

How do you show something without showing it?

How to present the curiosity of questioning without knowing the answer? What I am questioning, researching, and trying to present, I am also within the state of. I’m not even sure myself so how do I talk about or work with it? Which both coincides and contradicts this statement of ‘one can never be sure of anything’ it’s such a paradox.

Looking at this tension between contradictories, structure and improvisation, meaning and meaninglessness. This also differs people, their personalities. It’s hard to have conceptual knowledge and factual knowledge because it’s a contradictory of the two, but to have both, and/or neither, you can’t really function because you’re battling between the two.

2022