Hello hello everyone! So I thought I'd expand on what Kris and Karishma have said, as well as add some other stuff.

Starting with the other stuff, I was thinking about the cut-up technique and how we could go about it, as well as the other ideas involving words and language...

1) we could focus on advertising. Our theoretical backdrop would be that of disillusionment of the masses and consumer culture. If we took note of all adverts in our day, or wrote down their words (or some of the words, the main titles maybe) in a notepad or the like, at the end of our day we should have quite a lot of sentences and words written down. If we identified the words that came up most (excluding words such as and, it etc) we might be able to identify some sort of trend- for example, the words 'want' and 'you' might highlight the 'me me me' of our everyday. Perhaps we could do something with this? Maybe we could rearrange these words into categories? Maybe we could put them into different sentences- giving them different meanings- to highlight just how meaningless language is on its own when it is without context? We could highlight the power of language in our everyday- for if powerful words and sentences are a part of our everyday, and when we each see thousands of ads every day, then surely these must have a subconscious sort of effect on us without us even realizing. This might part-explain the 'me me me' of the everyday. The intervention would be some sort of awareness campaign where we show the group the various words of the everyday ads, or perhaps we put them up on posters around the college to make people aware of what they are reading. It would be some sort of 'read between the lines' exercise. I'm not sure if this is a weak idea, but I thought I'd put it out there.

2) We could write some sort of book and omit certain words from it. Not necessarily a book, perhaps, but a chapter each maybe. Or maybe we could go with the whole 'describe your everyday in extreme detail' thing. If Karishma is off to Bangladesh, I think those descriptions would be very interesting because they would differ to that of the British everyday over here. This would bring us to the significance of objects in the everyday- for without the table, the chair, the colour of the wall, etc, our every day would be very different. We NEED chairs to function as we do. Maybe this would draw attention to the more silent aspects, or necessities, of the everyday, especially through objects- maybe it's all under our noses (Jane Bennett's 'thing power'. Theoretically, and when writing our essays, this would give us room to delve into the subject of flows and discourses of vision, and the lives and meanings of objects- very rich in theory so lots to talk about. I am aware that this idea might need a bit more expansion.

3) We could approach from a philosophical angle. What about the need to 'dream' in every day life? How we need to 'see tomorrow' in order to make some sort of sense of today? We spend our 'today' working up to a 'tomorrow'- almost everything we do is 'for the end of the month when we get paid', 'for next year when we graduate', or even 'so that when I'm on my death-bed I'll have no regrets'? What is with this obsession with time? I understand that we humans like to structure and organize all of the time (it's how our brains operate, and it's often why we fall for various optical illusions) and we need to plan in a sense, but why is our everyday built upon some sort of tomorrow? What is living for now and what does it actually mean to live in the moment? Could we conceive of a structure without any sense of time? Is it a human need, or does 'time' cater to those who need workers to work, those who want to keep the world in order for their benefit? This ties in with what some of us were discussing with regards to dreaming, and how we're kept dreaming and aspiring (however irrationally, and however paradoxical and contradictory it is when we think of how logic and reason is drilled into us as the best way to think and be throughout our entire lives). And even when we 'make it', it's still not enough. We seem to find it hard in society to not have something to aim for, and when we don't aim for anything we are considered 'lazy' or 'losers' who probably 'won't make it anywhere in life'. Is this human nature at work, or the system manipulating us to certain ideals? I understand that this is more theoretical than anything else, but there are some things we could do. Maybe if we played with the idea of time as a structure? If we removed this fundamental structure from our lives for even a day, how would we go about it? We have learned that we have a body clock that tells us when to sleep etc, but studies have shown that the environment affects our sleep-wake cycle through light exposure. Is 'time organisation' innate to humans, or not? Is it necessary? Could we go without time awareness for a day? I understand that this idea might not be popular, but it's just a thought...just a very long one.

Next is the 'invisible' idea, and the proposals of Kris and Karishma...

Kris:

I very much like the idea of drawing more attention to what happens behind the scenes in consumer culture. We only really see shiny rings behind fancy shop windows- we don't really understand the process behind it, and nor do we really understand the power of marketing. We are not always aware that certain wants, and most especially needs- such as the 'need' to buy a shiny ring for marriage- is a matter of perception alone, a perception that has been toyed around with by those who just want our money. I don't know if you have already read this (Kris) but it's on the lines of what you're talking about. It's also quite funny.

 http://blog.priceonomics.com/post/45768546804/diamonds-are-bullshit

In many ways, most of our practices are entirely unnecessary, and we only really follow suit because we are taught to. This very much applies to consumer culture and market manipulation. If we could find an area that is totally market-driven- such as mobile and technology, food, cars, online social media, the web giant Amazon (which essentially tells you what you should buy next on your very screen in the 'recommended' list)- then maybe we could apply something similar. It's just a case of 'how do we go about it exactly'?

Karishma:

I also like Karishma's idea because it also links to the whole consumer thing, and it's also a definite issue out there that could do with some serious intervention. If you (Karishma) could film in Bangladesh that would be a huge advantage to us. However, what would everyone else do? Perhaps we could do our own research, but we would be pretty limited to the internet. Also, it is something that is already being looked into. Maybe if we went about it in a different way to that of convention? The play project intervened on one level (the factory process), but it just depends on whether or not we want to intervene on a personal, low-key sort of level (which might arguably be more powerful) or on a grander scale which might be a little looser but would reach more people.

The idea of the invisible came along mostly when watching the homeless. I understand that some people probably aren't so keen on the idea of homelessness, but there are many invisible faces out there in the world that could do with being seen for once- mental illness, areas of abuse, the invisible history's of the non-West (history's that have been manipulated by Westerners, voices silenced through language etc)- even certain aspects of our own human nature which are (arguably) suppressed and hidden! The idea of the invisible is so broad that you could intervene on many levels and in many ways. It also calls upon the social dynamics behind what we see and don't see, as well as many other theories and backdrops. We could perhaps make ourselves invisible, or call into question the things in our own lives which we do not ever see. I suppose this links back to the invisible nature of certain objects in our everyday etc...

So sorry that this was long, and enjoy your day!