Reactive Experiments // Interview with Gabriel Bryant

This article is part of the Analog Futures issue of Analog Cookbook. Available now.

“I started creating daily ‘reactive’ experiments in response to research made in my dissertation that looked at how the Japanese concept of ‘Ma’ is used as a form of audio visual manipulation, and how this affects pacing. I ended up creating three films as a response to a major university project. An experimental animation that was the ‘Outcomes’ of the experiments. A ‘Process Film’ that looked at the process of making and the third film looking at the outcomes and process in the form of a book. The first experiments I made were destroying some of my old celluloid film and drawing upon them as frames.” -GB

Process Film 1

AC: You mention the Japanese concept of Ma. Can you give us a quick rundown of what that means to you and how it applies to your work?

GB: From what I understand, Ma is the Japanese concept that considers the importance of negative space within space and time. Separation is needed to enhance or open up an interpretation. A helpful view of Ma by Issac Stern refers to it as ‘the silence between the notes that creates music’

For me, Ma has become an important way to approach the balance between audio and visual communication. This balance separates, abstracts, removes, and also levels out in harmony. Untitled Outcomes is an experiment that explores this balance through reactive making and the audiovisual manipulation of pacing through documentation. 

Would you share a few of the processes that you used to manipulate your film? Did you have a favorite or least favorite?

I used some 35mm shots of mine presenting sentimental areas and objects. I then cut them all into individual frames. I was fascinated by the unique and uncontrolled marks that were left behind by ‘destroying’ the film. Some were boiled and then burnt, others were dashed through a bucket of bleach and left to soak in lemon juice. The remaining, I left in washing-up liquid and coffee. I really enjoyed the immediacy of change that bleach would have. Whereas, burning the film seemed to tighten the image which I was less excited about.

I followed the processes of destroying film with hand-drawn watercolor marks and removing film in the process of scratching the surface with a scalpel.

Untitled Outcomes

It seems as though the process is just as, if not more important than, the outcome in this case. 

The process of making directly influenced what the outcome would be in terms of the materials being used and the actions involved. This meant that the outcomes were separate and also didn’t influence each other. It was interesting seeing these outcomes together on a timeline in terms of their placement and how they worked or didn’t work together.

Can you tell us how you feel when you are working? And then how do you hope someone would feel looking at it (if anything)? 

Being present, unfiltered, and honest has always been an important catalyst for how I would approach making. This unapologetic response to making is very direct and often comes out of nowhere. The lack of planning helps me to jump straight in, and within the process, find different routes of thought to stumble upon. I would like my viewer to feel confused and disrupted at first. Within this, I would hope that whoever is viewing my work can piece together their own, personal, narratives from what they are seeing and hopefully feel involved along the way. 

You mention the term “reactive making,” what does this mean?

Reactive making is essentially reacting to a thought, theme, or word through making. It is initially absent of any narrative or direct meaning. Once a visual has been formed this can be repeated but now based upon the previous visual made.

Static Outcomes