Transition giving talk at Studio 21 in Kolkata

Installation view at Akar Prakar

From the opening of "Transformation" at Akar Prakar in Kolkata in April 2010

Series of questions for Patua

• How do the Patua see the work? What, in their conception of the project, is the work ? Where do they allocate 'weight'
• What do the Patua think about the project
• What was the most important part of the project for them (another way of asking where they allocate 'weight')
• How would they feel about us showing the work again?
• How would they feel about us reformulating the work?
• Who does the work belong to? Does the work belong to anyone?
  
• Is there anything they would like to change or would have done differently
• Would they like to continue with it?
• Do they think it is finished?
• Were our actions clear to them? Did they feel happy about the way we worked?
• Did they feel we understood them? And how they work?

Designing an apparatus for watching the films

We are currently discussing designing an autonomous structure to watch the films in/ from for future installations.  Previous installations presented the entire process of the project as installation, spanning several rooms, with significant emphasis on the film as the final piece. By designing an apparatus for viewing the films we will , to some extent, be reformulating the work.

Before outlining a brief there are some questions and points that we've touched on in conversation, but haven't yet discussed in detail. 

• How would positioning the film within an architectural structure (that we design) affect the film?
• Will the structure serve the films? Or will the films be subservient to the structure?
• The structure will go some way to dictating the manner in which the film is viewed/ received. The viewer may be subservient to the structure.
• We are showing them how to read the project. Giving it form. Allocating 'weight'
• In generating ideas for the design how do we engage more with the content of the films? Should we avoid being too 'formal' and detached? 
• A lot of our input in the project has been structural. We have architect-ed: the workshop activities, the making of the film, the editing, the installation of the work in the gallery. Whilst the Patua have been the storytellers, the image-makers. They have projected their ideas, processed and interpreted, converted them into language, stories and images. We have been the framers, the punctuation, the material and the manner of presentation.
• who is the viewer?
• what do we want from them?
• What are we trying to communicate to them?
• which films will we show? 
• how will they relate to each other- in space?

To be continued..

understanding language

"it's easier translating the second time around... now that i know how the patuas talk.. it made no sense the first time around... i though they were loosing their minds !!!"

After we came to London we have noticed that the script we were working with in India didn't really match with what was happening in the film. When shooting particular scenes we often felt quite disorientated, as things didn't make sense. We would read the script, trying to match text with what was happening in front of the camera and couldn't understand what was it all about. After reading the second translation (a month ago) from the dialect, which Patua spoke, to English we have realized that our film was supposed to be some sort of comedy. When in India, we were convinced that it was rather serious story dwelling on religion and problems, which Patua dealt in their everyday life.

When Sumona sent us second translation we realized that all our attempts to make the film look "better", by the way we filmed, were going in the wrong direction. We misinterpreted Patua's intentions, and our actions in some way must have been misleading for them.

Here is the first translation: