Since part of the focus of my practice is to react and make things appear, I would like to know how to see things. But it is not only about seeing, it is also connected to the process of production I am related to. To reach this degree of perceiving and reacting, I have to go through the production system itself. To become a producer, I have to initiate an action that will allow me to take part in the production process. This will infuse a sort of personal activism into the creative process.

Facing the standardization of production, going back to a DIY considered, low form, always appeal to me. WHAT KIND OF DIALOGUE CAN BE ESTABLISHED BETWEEN THE HANDMADE AND THE MASS PRODUCT OBJECT? The handmade object can be an undesirable response to an imperative of production. In the era of hacking and self-made bombs, craft becomes suspicious. But its practice is a symbol of pure autonomy and freedom. It is a positive resistance. A rebellious figure that would maintain our faith of social reality and provide a certain political consciousness.

Labor is being rapidly redefine today as a continuous and dematerialized element of the business world. Digital fluidity removes the distances between professional and private environment. How to interrogate this understanding through my predisposition and my choices? A working outfit, a uniform could influence my working behavior. Its not only about the tools, but about the maker herself. What to wear to work? Does it make you feel like working?

If it is about exploring the role of the designer as provider of tools, then this outfit should come from those tools and be one of those. TO ESTABLISH A SYMBIOTIC CONNECTION BETWEEN WORKERS AND MACHINE, THE PATTERNS SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY THE MACHINE. So how to create a garment that support my relationship to the work, without predisposing me to a negative methodology of working.

HOW DID YOU PROCEED? The attraction to an artistic work or object is quickly followed by in interest on the material execution. It is about the celebration of the technical production of a work. In the era of serial production, I want to know if there is still a place for the hand of the artist, where can i feel the signature of the maker.

Weaving is a long standing method of textile production. It involves operating a weaving loom to interlace multiple sets of threads. It was the first machine to be semi - autonomized by Jacquard in 1801. The binary logic of weaving involve the same translation of information into zeros and ones as all digital technology.

Using machines and looking at technology in relation to craft, seems to offer society a certain vision of it's own futur. By reconsidering my tools and my surrounding I CHALLENGE MY RELATIONSHIPS OF PERCEPTION, DECISION-MAKING AND SELF-DETERMINED BEHAVIOR. I can then use my work production as a speculative tool for mapping human involvement in an industrial process.

The human being carries out a series of day-to-day tasks, such as eating or reading or working. The printer device is activated to execute a single task: to print. COULD IT BE THAT THE MACHINE EXPRESS IT'S SINGULARITY AT SOME POINT? By using a continuity of action, printing the printed print, the machine digest its own production and each time gives a different answer.

This experience has then a physical dimension as what is seen as mistakes, becomes the signature of the maker. The continuity of new result can still reveal, the human hand or a sign of their action in the production.

The principle of the assembly lines is to place the tools and the worker in A SEQUENCE OF OPERATION THAT FOLLOW A LOGICAL CHOREOGRAPHY. Considering the cartridge as a part of an assembly line that make all of us, consumer and producer, an equal part of the process, I used the cartridge as a framework to interrupt an automated process. The action of intervening into a programmed movement, allows the ink to spread into the fibers of the fabric in less predictable ways. What happens if we risk unexpected encounters and discover affinities that can not be predictable?

By investigating critical aspect of LEARNING AND UNLEARNING, I am trying to steer my production process away. I want to continue to ask my own questions rather then be restricted by the answers that technology often wants to provide. What do we learn when we learn? What do we know? What do we not know and why? And how can we learn without being appropriated into a logic?