Hapticivism: haptic + activism: an artistic imperative in keeping the haptic sensibilities of the artist/object maker relevant

I am an art object maker and the mediums I create with, are mainly of a textile nature. My visual and haptic senses combine to create my hand crafted oeuvre. But my touch sense is the ‘curator’ in my studio, it negotiates with my other senses and the final word rests with ‘touch’. I am constantly and confidently forcing my touch sense to dictate aesthetically in the decision making process. I acknowledge that with the dominance of the ‘visual’ in the field of art and in the ever increasing digital/virtual world that this becomes a daily challenge. I argue that in today’s digitally dominated environment it is difficult to not spend at least, a few tallied hours in touch with a digital interface. Significantly it is at this point of contact with a digital device that the user is only in touch with one kind of tactile experience. These are smooth flat surfaces which are globally a generic shape, size and form. It is in this space that I choose to initiate my Hapticivism, which is an interruption of haptic action. My art objects are placed in close proximity to the user as to provide a haptic alternative. A prescriptive touch moment to re-posit the user in real time as opposed to the mesmerizing visual digital time, which is one that questions temporality and existence. This thesis explains why and how I consider this as a liminal space between material and creator, a moment when crucial haptic information is processed by the body and becomes a creative haptic knowledge. I argue that this constant of sedated touch by our hands in a ritualistic timeframe at a digital interface creates a deficiency in haptic understanding; the touch sensation received does not correlate with the visual information at the digital device. Of course we are cognitively aware of this, but does this haptic deficient digital time affect the artist object maker? And in response, create objects that are ‘other’ than smooth and generic. This space, where the artist’s haptic skill knowledge is born is a liminal space where creativity is unbounded. It is not a mono-type of engagement, a ‘mono sensory approach’ as existing in the virtual digital environment, where the visual dictates perception. I place emphasis on this liminal space and assert it to be of artistic importance; as it is where the artist object maker navigates intimately through medium and process via their sense of touch. Recognition of this liminal space by the artist is obscure and there is a reliance on the artist object maker to be constantly in attentiveness through haptic reception with actual contact with their mediums and process. Creativity can only be positively affected by a return to the actual physical bodily sensing of all phenomena rather than a constant of two dimensional, flat abstract phenomena.