'No Fixed Abode'

'Conviviality vs Antagonism'

The thing that interested me about this Sheffield based duo's talk was their detailed analysis of what a collaboration is (in relation to how theirs works). They explained that there are many varying degrees of collaboration, but that it was essentially a continual dialogue and conversation/rhetoric between the collaborators, and, for a true collaboration to succeed there would have to inevitably be a compromise (amongst all involved). It is at times, a union, and, at times, a struggle. 'Togetherness vs Antagonistic'. This is the way they work with each other to achieve their project outcomes. They also discussed the pitfalls of collaboration vs. solo artist in relation to our society, stating that work and economics favors the individual, therefore working as a collaborative means working 'against the system'. 

Personally, in relation to the collaborative project we are undertaking at the moment, I found their ideas on 'togetherness vs antagonism' the most interesting and relative. I feel Shanna and I have worked most productively together when we come up with separate, distinct ideas, disagree then evaluate and compromise, resulting in work we are both happy with and feel as though we both have ownership of. If we didn't challenge each others ideas and thought the same way all the time, ;the 'collaborative' aspect would be defunct. 

The analytical approach of the 'No fixed abode' talk helped me to evaluate my own collaboration thus far.