I deliberated for some time over whether to jump in at the deep end with this and here I am doing it. Part of me thought “but if you write about the really cool stuff right away you might run out of things to write later!!!” but honestly, shouldn’t everything I write about here be the really cool things? Obviously the answer to that is yes. So I’m going to introduce you to my latest favourite concept - this being the first of a series because there’s far too much for one email.
Apper..what?
So what is apophenia and why am I so obsessed with it? To be fully honest, I only recently discovered the term, despite the fact it’s always been a huge part of my life. Yet another case of me having no idea what the correct term is for a concept I’m hyped about (these things can be hard to Google ok!)
According to good ol’ Wikipedia, apophenia is
“the tendency to perceive meaningful connections between seemingly unrelated things”
The term originates from psychiatry, but its usage has broadened over time in that it now more generally refers to the natural ‘human’ instinct to see patterns where there are none. As best I could gather, the closest medical term now to its original meaning is ‘delusions of reference’.
This notion of delusions of reference is how I personally came to be captivated by the idea of connection-seeking, and what happens when that instinct goes into overdrive. It’s no secret that I have experienced delusional thinking (as a result of what medical professionals would term mental illness) and for me this has always manifested most significantly as seeing connections that others don’t.
I’m particularly fascinated by the fact that I always experience this, whether I am considered well at the time or not. It waxes and wanes in intensity, but it’s definitely always there. This realisation became particularly apparent to me as I was writing the first instance of this newsletter where I attempted to map out the connections between all the thoughts and interests that inform my arts practice. Seeing ALL THE CONNECTIONS feels somehow like both my downfall and what I’m very good at.
An extension of this is the way I think about art making. My favourite cliché phrase to fall back on when I work with young artists or other creatives looking for some critical feedback is “art isn’t made in a vacuum”. Every single decision you make, medium you use, even who you are and your background and how you choose to share your work - it all has significance, and is part of a huge network of pre-existing meaning that you don’t necessarily have any control over.
An example of this I have been known to get somewhat heated over is artists using the (admittedly very accessible and user-friendly) augmented reality software Spark AR Studio. With Spark AR you can make AR ‘face filters’ specifically for Instagram and/or Facebook - because that’s who owns and distributes the software. Now I am by no means saying that using Spark AR means your work is pro-Zuck. What I am saying is that your work does not exist outside of the structures that provide the tool. So if you’re using Spark AR to create a piece of artwork around identity (for example), what does that mean? What unavoidable context does it bring to the work, and how can you critically acknowledge that? Not only is there the connection to Facebook - and the fact that your audience must agree to their terms in order to access the work - what about the nature of social media more broadly? What does it mean to be exploring notions of identity within that specific environment of edited selfies and filtered realities? That’s just an example, but hopefully you get what I mean. What I’m saying is, context holds meaning.
Yet I recently had the realisation that perhaps not everyone’s brain works this way. Maybe what I’d always considered as a standard approach to art making is another instance of my pattern seeking going into overdrive. My sneaky brain has done it again. Or perhaps I am just completely characteristically making a link that really isn’t there and these two points are entirely unrelated. Either is equally possible.
So I’ve become obsessed with this idea - apophenia - and how deep it all really goes. To what extent is it a universal experience? When does seeing connections stop being helpful and start being perceived as a problem? How do we even qualify when a connection is ‘real’ vs imagined?
I am aware this introduction to the concept has been from quite a personal point of view, but I do intend to broaden it out a bit more in my next email - I wanted to start off by sharing with you why this concept is particularly exciting to me personally. As I unravel it further and tease out some of the really interesting bits I hope you’ll find it exciting to you too.
Thanks so much for reading and subscribing, it means a lot to me. If you know others who would be hyped to learn more about weird concepts like this please do share. And if you wanna let me know about all the exciting ideas this has triggered in your own mind then feel free - I love when something I share gets cogs turning in the minds of others.
I intended to send this out every other Sunday but as you are probably well aware it’s currently Wednesday. I’ve heard that for good engagement you should send a newsletter out once a week but I really don’t want to bombard you. Shout if you have a preference for day, time or frequency.
Edie x