shows improvement!Today I need to finish my article on electronic art in public spaces. I’m procrastinating like mad, so this post is going to be my personal motivator, like I did when I was trying to finish my PhD before last Christmas. The article’s only supposed to be 2000 words long, and it’s an introduction to a booklet presenting twenty electronic artworks in public spaces in Norway, from imported international classics to sound installations to art on state websites. I need to:

  • Write brief descriptions of other, non-Norwegian works (e.g. Lozano-Hemmer).
  • Paragraph introducing electronic art in general.
  • Public art, electronic public art.
  • Paragraph on interactivity, follow me, stamping
  • Paragraph discussing potential for publically funded art in public digital spaces (like Tegnemaskin 1-12).
  • Go to the hospital and experience Adsonore.
  • Check dogeared pages in Digital Art for more examples.
  • Discuss relationships between works presented. Sound, concept, object.
  • Go for a run. Bonus: thought about article!
  • Non-related but necessary: Attend meeting, pick up my daughter from school, shopping, dinner, buy sweets in case kids come for Halloween (not a tradition here but they must have been watching television or something because it’s starting), daughter’s friend staying the night, kids in bed, lights out. Then work more.
  • Work out how it all fits together. Sequence.
  • Write introductory paragraph.
  • Proofread.

Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]