A note on video documentation

I already asked Tashi on the first occasion what she thought about documenting the work. She didn't like the idea, and I didn't know whether it was a question of principles or she was simply feeling reluctant. I can imagine both, or that both had a share in it. It practically makes no difference as regards the result - we didn't record the events. I regret that a lot. After the most spectacular fourth occasion I came out with the question once more. Even she admitted that if we had recorded this occasion, we would have an unparalleled video in our hands. Better not to imagine. It wouldn't yet be a work of art, but as a document it would be fantastic. I asked her what if we recorded the analysis of this occasion, but her reaction was the same as before. According to her, knowing that the work is recorded would unintentionally influence it. Even if the work itself is for the sake of recording, for documentation. She must have been right, though I personally would have accepted the experimental situation and role ensuing from the recording. All in all, no documentation was made this time, either. All we tried was drafting key words and key sentences to enable a later description to be as accurate as possible.

In want of material documentation I must think now that the distortions emerging throughout the work and its subsequent documentation, and the modifications of opinion that follow drawing conclusions and setting up connections can be considered part and result of the work.

There were indeed such conclusions drawn during the work, that modified the results of previous occasions. The events of later occasions easily gained importance in determining the points of emphasis and the proportions.