the manufacturers point of view on adapting to consumer psychology and behaviour


Notes from [accessed 05.04.2018]

‘WOW’ FACTOR – Consumers increasingly want experiences that deliver the maximum impact, and this expectation is filtering across all aspects of their lives … consumers expect more, and want richer, more rewarding and more engaging experiences from all quarters.

THROUGH-THE-LINE EXPERIENCES – Consumers are putting themselves at the heart of any experience, and hence companies are having to become more ‘user-centric’, ensuring human insights are considered at every turn.

SEE-SMELL-HEAR-TOUCH – People want to use all of their senses, and expect many of the products and services they buy to meet this need …products need to look good, feel good and smell good.

CONSUMERS TO CO-CREATORS – There has been a consumer to partner metamorphosis. Newly empowered customers want to have a greater say in how they experience service. They want products and services to be designed, sold, delivered, serviced and purchased in a way that suits them.

Notes from [accessed 05.04.2018]

It is evident that manufacturers base their production on the customers’ psychological and social bahaviour. So, what to expect next? Is this the cleanest we can get? From the manufactures point of view, Mattin analyses the factors contributing to the formation of the 2018 trends (Mattin D., 2017). Consumers will adopt the outsourcing of certain retail experiences to their smart phones leading to the further rise of the automated commerce. Post-demographic consumers of all ages are crafting new narratives of adulthood (awareness, acceptance and embracement of various groups of the community) looking to brands that teach life skills, let them outsource daily tasks, or help them realize personal life goals. Even manufacturers will become virtual companions as consumers start to feel it is possible to have a meaningful relationship with virtual entities. Consumers will expect of products to be compassionate of their past product selections by adapting around their changing needs. With the Weinstein case being the starting point, 2017 could be characterised as the year of transparency. Transparency and clarity are strongly and loudly demanded and given that the consumers are guiding the development of the production, the producers’ internal culture and practices will inevitably become part of their brand, creating this way an even more personal relationship with the consumer.



on Pareidolia and Simulacrum

(below texts are extracted from and

Pareidolia / a psychological phenomenon in which the mind responds to a stimulus, usually an image or a sound, by perceiving a familiar pattern where none exists / word derives from the Greek words para , in this context meaning something faulty or wrong) and the noun eidōlon / pareidolia can cause people to interpret random images, or patterns of light and shadow, as faces

Simulacrum / Plato speaks of two kinds of image making. The first is a faithful reproduction, attempted to copy precisely the original. The second is intentionally distorted in order to make the copy appear correct to viewers. He gives the example of Greek statuary, which was crafted larger on the top than on the bottom so that viewers on the ground would see it correctly. If they could view it in scale, they would realize it was malformed. This example from the visual arts serves as a metaphor for the philosophical arts and the tendency of some philosophers to distort truth so that it appears accurate unless viewed from the proper angle. Nietzsche addresses the concept of simulacrum (but does not use the term) in the Twilight of the Idols, suggesting that most philosophers, by ignoring the reliable input of their senses and resorting to the constructs of language and reason, arrive at a distorted copy of reality.

Postmodernist French social theorist Jean Baudrillard argues that a simulacrum is not a copy of the real, but becomes truth in its own right: the hyperreal. Where Plato saw two types of representation—faithful and intentionally distorted (simulacrum)—Baudrillard sees four: (1) basic reflection of reality; (2) perversion of reality; (3) pretence of reality (where there is no model); and (4) simulacrum, which “bears no relation to any reality whatsoever”. In Baudrillard’s concept, like Nietzsche’s, simulacra are perceived as negative, but another modern philosopher who addressed the topic, Gilles Deleuze, takes a different view, seeing simulacra as the avenue by which an accepted ideal or “privileged position” could be “challenged and overturned”. Deleuze defines simulacra as “those systems in which different relates to different by means of difference itself. What is essential is that we find in these systems no prior identity, no internal resemblance”.

David Campany’s, A Handful of Dust


(image and text from

“A Handful of Dust is David Campany’s speculative history of the last century, and a visual journey through some of its unlikeliest imagery. Let’s suppose the modern era begins in October of 1922. A little French avant-garde journal publishes a photograph of a sheet of glass covered in dust. The photographer is Man Ray, the glass is by Marcel Duchamp. At first they call it a view from an aeroplane. Then they call it Dust Breeding. It’s abstract, it’s realist. It’s an artwork, it’s a document. It’s revolting and compelling. The very same month, a little English journal publishes TS Eliot’s poem The Waste Land. “I will show you fear in a handful of dust.”

And what if dust is really the key to the ensuing decades? Why do we dislike it? Is it cosmic? We are stardust, after all. Is it domestic? Inevitable and unruly, dust is the enemy of the modern order, its repressed other, its nemesis. But it has a story to tell from the other side.”

intersections and articulations : part 3

Study (Blue) for 'Floor' 1992 by Rachel Whiteread born 1963

Work by Rachel Whiteread, “Study (Blue) for Floor”, 1992

The approach of the InSite Arts organisations resembles the testing boundaries task for this year of the MA:  the creation of a new work to be exhibited in a public space. As mentioned in this audio file, in a commission scenario the artist must have the freedom to research and present a proposal for a piece of work that will  have references from the installation space as a well as the greater space that this space is situated. Immediately this gives the artist a direction and guidance as to their research. At the same time this gives many possibilities for the final work. Commissions may be good opportunities for artists to develop several ideas that they might not have developed otherwise because of restrictions relating to space and funding.  When it comes to installation the technicians will need clear instructions and supervision and coordination, especially when you have several disciplines involves (builders, carpenters, electricians) – as the architect guides them for the building construction, similarly the artist must act for the preparation of the space for the installation.  The artist should also take into account the materials and specifics of the construction.  Similarly to the contextual reference of the work to the space and greater location, the aesthetic and visual parameters should also be researched.

Reflecting on the video on Rachel Whiteread, it is interesting to see how the combination of the exploration of what seems as a simple idea with a memory or thought at the back of your mind can develop into a a project. Also the fact that the artist collects, records ideas, draws, makes sketches, makes sculptures create a database of information that can be further researched and developed.

intersections and articulations: part 2

Notes on the Art of Helen Chadwick



  • most commentators emphasised her energy, both physical and intellectual, her personality, being inseparable from her practice, informing her practice
  • work suing pieces of clothes, pealed off the body, similarity with pealing off skin
  • exploration of intimate tensions between people, the underground research project, this was the step to turn her work to autobiographical
  • taking photos of places that reminder her pf her childhood, present history as traces using the wood
  • tried to renew artists’ traditions, reaching her Greek background
  • use of home waste to create compost, research on death and mortality, decay and corruption, the bubbles that were created a metaphor for life, contradicting/related ideas in one project
  • exploited her own body, used her own body cells, piss flowers
  • her work is easy to ready, however with contextual and consensual depth
  • last project of fetuses into jewels, reference to preciousness, her concerns with greta economy, nature’s regularity and order, attention to beaty of things that are damaged or standard
  • fragility of our existence


Notes on Jon Barraclough’s talk

  • a maker of drawings, sound works, drawing as a medium inhuman’s connections, how brain works
  • publishing drawing newspaper, alternative way of exhibiting, multiple uses of the used newspaper, no particular curatorial approach as to the work to be shown in the newspaper, connection between works, drawing as connecting
  • is the curator responsible or not on how the work goes out when it leaves the studio? My opinion is that the maker must have control and opinion on how the work is exhibited. A dialogue with another professional (historian, artist, curator etc) can surely be and should be constructive, however the artist should have the last word and make the final decision. This can apply in cases of solo shows or in small group shows. In cases of many artists participating in a show the  work of  a coordinator/curator is important. Once the work leaves the studio that is the moment when the  dialogue with the audience begins, the artist decides to expose their work and consequently themselves, and that should not be left to the hands of any other than the artist.

art and meaning



Microscopy of Dust Sample Collected from the Nelimarkka Museum, Alajärvi, Finland and the Barcelona Contemporary Art Museum, Barcelona, Spain, from (accessed 11.02.2018)

  1. What is‘meaning’within art?

In contemporary artmaking, meaning has a dominant role in terms that the identity of the artist is being abolished and that works aim at the activation of the viewer. In other words contemporary art is evolved around the audience, how the audience will react to the work, and what meaning will the audience give to a work. Almost as if the role of the artist is secondary, trying to catch the audience’s attention in visualizing the contemporary way of living.

The meaning of art may be defined as the combination of two factors: the life subject matters and the materials of the art. Both these factors are transformed within the work into a new systematic artistic unity. The art materials already have perceived characteristics with aesthetic meaning (colour, texture, sound, rhythm) which are then transformed by the artist, resulting in an internal aesthetically systematical meaning.

The intellectual background of the work plays an important role and informs its meaning and “beauty”. Artists tend to inform their work with strong theoretical background, sometimes almost to an extent that is not understandable by the audience.  Τoday we characterize as beautiful or interesting or with meaning works that represent the disturbing /bad reality, works that are shocking, frightening or look ugly. Is the artist aiming in catching the reality? Are the audience exposed in such a great number of images that the artists is merely trying to follow what is happening in the world? So does meaning in a work actually means reality?

  1. Is there a universal meaning to a work or will there always be a battle between objective and subjective?

The meaning of a work may be reinforced by the use of symbols (in the general sense of colour, shape, form etc) which create a symbolic language and they form concepts. For the artist a symbol refers to a specific meaning and has a specific reference. However, several other aspects might be considered: is meaning and feeling the same, and if a feeling is created through a work does this add value to the work. Does a symbol has the same meaning for all? Is there a universal meaning to a work or there will always be a battle between objective and subjective. Even if we try to set a logical explanation or definition to the use of symbols and thus the creation of a universal meaning, we reach a point where psychology comes in the picture. Freud said art is a sign or a symptom of the individual’s unconscious, on the other hand Jung said that a symbol is not a symptom and it should be understood as the expression of an intuitive perception. Unconsiously or intuitive, each artist is aiming in establishing a dialogue with the audience, in setting a meaning to the work which will be universally understood.

  1. What role does meaning play in your work.

What I intent to do through my work is to tell a story. Whether this will be considered as the meaning I am not sure. I think that the meaning is the reaction of the viewer. It is not an action controlled by the artist as the work might receive different responses and so interpreted in a variety of meanings. Meaning can be a self-contradicting idea: on the one hand the meaning of something might refer to something specific (for example an artist’s intention in using many empty plates refers to hunger in Africa); on the other hand something might have different meanings for different people (empty plates might make someone think of the amount of food they ate the day before and that they should go on diet), or get a different meaning if placed in a specific area (someone might hang the empty plates work in their kitchen, another one might place it next to the image of a skinny top model) etc. So I cannot say that I think of meaning when working, I think that I should be consistent to my story telling, to the context of my work. How this will be interpreted and what meaning will have for the viewer, this is beyond my control.

References (accessed through OCA Library)

Mikkel Bolt Rasmussen, “Art Revolution and Communication – On the Transcendence of Art and Meaning without Reality”, Third Text, Vol. 26, Issue 2, March, 2012, 229–242,

Louis Arnaud Reid, Meaning in the Arts, (Taylor and Francis: London, 2004)

Abigail Diamond, Terms and Strategies of Engagement: Perspectives on Constructing Meaning and Value in Contemporary Art, Thesis, Nottingham Upon Trend (2006)