Points leading to an understanding of the Modal Environs:

  1. To establish that digital culture has transformed our experience of time and our perception of objects through our continual management of increasing amounts of information, and that this experience has influenced the adaptation of our personal work methods towards meeting the demand of its new standard.  That this transformation has become manifest through a new paradigm of speculative expectation; meaning, that in order to survive this new paradigm -both economically and in terms of visibility- we must surrender over to an existence of short-term expectation with continuous focus towards securing results of the near future into the present as rapidly and with as much predictability as possible. Otherwise, we do not participate within the realm of this new, dominant cultural medium and face a reality of obsolescence as the current environment has become incapable of understanding other formulas of presentation.  
  2. To acknowledge that in accompaniment with this new paradigm, an Accelerated Object of Experience occurs regarding our perception of what seems tangible in the present.  That is, as soon as the results of our short-term expectation have arrived into our present, our experience through an immediately reporting and responding media diligently relegates these events into the past with an equal amount of urgency as did our experience of speculative expectation facilitate their arrival.  Every new experience thus arrives with the pronouncement of its immediate transpiration into the past as we make way for the next oncoming and ultimately transpiring event. 
  3. That the combined result of these two phenomena is a transformation of the present into a nebulous state of the illusory with applicable recognition as a formal modality, through a necessary coping method of information management and type casting, while the things in our immediate environment become ultimately more intangible, more interchangeable and more pliable as plastic categorical types. 
  4. That this state of the nebulous becomes a space where our lingering sense of feelings, memories, or thoughts in association with the experience are left to occupy. That these resultant senses of feeling, memory, or idea are a reflexive means of constructing a “concrete proxy” to this newly understood experience of reality which has since become illusory, fleeting and transient.
  5. That this new means reconstructing a reality out of the effective remnants of experience we might describe as a “Modal Environs”; as a means of communicating a “perceptographic” image or a corporeal visage based on expressions of content or the creation of context which need not be actual, but formulated through a type of pluralistic, aesthetic, spatial histiography based on typifications and modes of aesthetic representation.  These aesthetics, moods, tones or qualities become tangible materials with which to create a place or setting which contain sensibilities extending beyond the limits of the object's local physicality. 
  6. That the role of our creative autonomy in the digital will age continue to evolve into something bearing resemblance to that of an executive producer; as one who attempts to organize as a means of producing an image of greater lasting potential; of an image born within the language of physical space and visible reality but one which appeals to qualities of the imagination. It is an image which varies from the static appearance of everyday reality however, in that it maintains an experiential operation manifesting as the tactile performance of a perceptual construct, designed as becoming veiled over what we consider as conventional reality.  It is an image which is meant to somewhat replicate, yet subvert, components of the commonplace into an atmospheric, albeit more changeless, semblance of reality.