The concept of Derive, reminds me of the work of artists that have mapped out their
own aesthetic landscapes, as well as done projects such as mapping out houses
they have lived in from their memories of the places.
Derive,
however, seems more like meditation and a form of artistic research wrapped
into one. A question that arose during the reading, was my wondering of the
concept of wandering. What is wandering? Can the people participating in these
activities talk with other people? What state of mind should you be in; are you
an empty vessel? If so, what is there to gain unless you are using your memory
to record your experiences? The article goes on to describe things like
studying terrain or emotionally disorienting oneself. These seem to be examples
of the goals and rules, but in Derive, rules and objectives seem to be
determined by whoever is participating in it on a whim.
The
concept of static wandering, as stationary wandering lead me to understand that
as long as one sets aside a period of time for Derive in an environment with
the specific mindset of doing nothing but Derive, are indeed accomplishing
their task. How they go about doing it is completely up to them.
Derive
seems to be something very open ended and individual, the element of
individuality cannot be taken from derive, no matter how much the author
describes success in Derive as freeing oneself from things. As much as this
seems to be the case, taking as much as you can from it hypocritically fits
well with the notion of the Derive.