General Inquiry:  

What question do I want to explore?

The inanimate aspect of objects / things that indeed had a life or hold life in some way.
ie- making an inanimate object something more anima.

anima: the part of the psyche that is directed inward, and is in touch with the subconscious.

opposite of persona: the aspect of someone’s character that is presented to or perceived by others.
(goes back to an animal=human theme of subconscious and conscious life) 

 

Narrow it down to a few specific questIons:

Why do people shun their instincts?
Why do people see humans on a higher level than animals? I mean, do you know anything about orcas? biomimicry?
Nature is the ultimate design. How is technology surpassing/ altering how we view our natural systems?
Are technological innovations really new at all? Aren’t they harnessing natural forces, arranging them in mechanisms already constructed by nature? (ex- the shape of the internet vs neural networks).

Context:  

What do you need to know about the context to answer this question? How do you want to frame your research?  What do you need to know more about to start understanding the context of your questions? How do you have to educate yourself to understand the problem in a deeper way?

i wanna make an object that invigorates an inanimate/lifeless object to be an interactive and fun to play with, full of life object: ie an instrument.  

Artifact Research:

•   How has the issue you outlined in your concept been addressed previously?

  555time keyboards, organs and theremins, kraadoo boxes, circuit bent objects, mug music. 

•   What do they do well?
  They give life to something that was previously a buncha wires. 
•   Exactly how do they do it well?

by making an instrument, something a human can create art with, suspending the belief that an inanimate object does not have character or life. It allows these object to be anthropomorphized.

•   What do they fail to do?

mug music- attached to a computer, does not suspend belief as there is a digital umbilical cord.
kraadoos- not the most pleasant or relatable noise.

•   Why do I consider that a failing?

I want the user to feel empathy and connection / compassion / interest / love for the object.

•   What could it or another object do to better achieve its purpose?

provide a programmable sample base the audience could input their own noises or recordings, relatable or special to them, and have this object speak to them in a aural vocabulary/language they are fond of.

Once this is articulated this should set us up to get to the core of the conversation:  

• Start to posit/ideate an ideal object that could speak to the above
  handheld
  attractive
  programmable
  loudish
  options (potentiometer, photocell) for aural iterations to provide a broader vocabulary for the object, depending on its user and environment. 
• What the qualities of that idealized object have to be to be effective
• How could I pare down the qualities of the object into something I could address with my time/resource constraints?

 

• What technology could I bring to bear to get the above concept across?