Month: October 2016

collage heart (final)


To be done with two (or more) players.
Preferably to be done on a digital canvas such as Google Drive, so that players may use their own saved files. May also be done on a single digital device.

Select a concept.
Go around until every person has placed a found image that strikes them as relevant upon the canvas. They may overlap, arrange, and rearrange the images as they wish, so long as it is their turn.
Go around again until every person has placed a found phrase that strikes them as relevant upon the canvas.
Alternate until you feel the canvas is complete.


(Warning for gory, bloody stuff in the first image!)

I wanted to try out the game with more than one person, so during the class period, I tested it out again. This time we settled on the concept “horror” in celebration of the current month. I started off with a cute little ghost, but very quickly things escalated, which was actually surprisingly fun. The end result is a little horrifying, but that was the whole point, in the end.

horror final(recent playthrough)

bright 4(original playtest)

Artist’s Statement:

While the style I wanted for this piece did not quite match up with the underlying messages and concepts behind Dada, I loved the aesthetic of it. Especially the collages of images and words removed from their context, such as Raoul Hausmann’s “ABCD”/”Portrait de ‘artiste” or Hans Arp’s “Untitled (Abstract Composition)” or others. These collage pieces just seemed like they would be so fun to make. And so, I made that one of the bases of my piece: to actually go through that process of creating a collage.

As might be obvious from my last piece, I am really interested in exploring interactions between different people in a creation process. I also love seeing how different people perceive what should be the “same” concept or idea. And so, I thought, why not have people work on a themed collage together? At first, I wanted it to be entirely physical – I wanted to be able to cut out images and phrases from magazines and books. However, there would have been some level of difficulty in staying consistent with the theme and might have limited people’s visions. (Besides, I have rarely been able to actually go through with cutting up a book.) But then I remembered – it’s 2016. We’ve got the internet, and boy howdy does it have a lot of stuff!

So, I came up with a piece that asks for the participants to use any image or words that they did not come up with specifically for this piece to illustrate some concept. Using the internet (and sometimes weird screenshots from a long time ago, or words from a short story you had almost forgotten about, or even screenshots of a salient portion of the current canvas) would result in what I hoped would be a very varied, fun experience.

I think it is in this back and forth growth and interaction that I also incorporate some ideas from Fluxus. Art is experience and life, and life is constantly changing. With this piece, the participants are constantly giving and receiving a stream of information from the other player(s). Just like regular communication, you give your own interpretation of a subject and wait to interpret someone else’s. People also feed off of each other’s innovations. For example, when I took a screenshot of a word in the “horror” piece, on Ilayda’s next turn, she did too. Incorporating transparency into the images used was also a fun twist that made for a really interesting final result. I like how fluid this process inherently is – how far from static it has the potential to be.

I really like intimacy in creation, but for this piece, the intimacy depends on the number of participants involved. The more people there are, the less individual connection you get with them, of course. But, either way, I want it to be a fun – or interesting, at least – experience!

Appropriate Final Iteration


Under 10 seconds = 2 points

Under 5 seconds = 3 points

Under a foot away from previous player = 2 points

Under 6 inches away from previous player = 3 points

img_3471  img_3473 img_3474 img_3475 img_3476 img_3477 img_3478  img_3480 img_3481

This piece was fairly hard to start. I thought that I understood what Dada and Fluxus were, but then when I had to create a game based on the ideas of these ‘movements,’ I was completely lost. I started with the one thing I definitely understood; find appropriated objects or something that may not usually stand out to me. I looked all around my room and soon discovered a set of safety pins and a washcloth. To me, these seemed like the most acceptable objects to use in a game. The next step was to figure out how to use them. I spent a fairly long time trying to determine what to do until I visited our class’ website and saw the short excerpt at the top of this project’s page. ‘Use the transformation of these objects into the materials of a game to critique, subvert or call our attention to their original meaning.’ This gave me the idea to write down all of the uses of a washcloth and safety pins and once that was done, I was able to determine which aspects I wanted to completely change. Safety pins are usually used to pin items of clothing together so that they may be sewn into a different size or shape and to alter the clothing for a better purpose. I wanted to create a game so that the safety pins would be used in a way that was actually detrimental to the players.

Learning about Dada and Fluxus was definitely a huge help in creating this game. Usually I would think up some game story and implement it for a single player. I learned to love the idea of using random objects found in the world to create a game. Fluxus taught me that games didn’t always have to be digital and that they could be cooperative with no real meaning, as seen in some of the happenings we learned about in class. Dada also taught me to turn things on their heads and create new meanings where some people may not have been looking for them.

This game was heavily influenced more so by the Dada movement than Fluxus. I wanted to turn my game into more of a random one than create a happening, but I guess during my playtest it sort of turned into a happening anyway. I had a set of rules for the players to follow, however, I like the idea that this game turned into a score with appropriated pieces.

I learned that this game should probably be a bit safer to play so I decided to experiment with different objects. I came to the conclusion that a long piece of fabric would be a better choice so that there was no chance of a player getting stabbed with a safety pin. I then decided to use a long scarf that the players would then have to use to tie knots around their wrists instead. This game went a lot quicker than the previous iteration and seemed to be more enjoyable for the players.

Artwork #2: Spam Fighter

Fighting games are some of the most competitive games out there, as such, there are a bunch of implicit rules in place in order to keep the competition fair and exclusive to “pros”. What I mean by that is that these rules require an intense understanding of the game’s mechanics, and any player that is trying to learn the ropes is ostracized. One of these rules involves the action of “Spamming”, or repeatedly using a strong move to gain an advantage instead of utilizing combos or other tools. Spamming is looked down upon in numerous fighting game communities, but nowhere is it more widely used than in the Street Fighter series. That’s where the idea for this project stemmed. I looked at the game “Street Fighter II”, arguably the most well-known of the series, and thought: “What would happen if all you could fight with was projectiles?” So, I recreated the code as best as I could and left only projectile attacks for the players. I made only one hit be the win condition for the project because the projectiles consistently collide and destroy each other as they do in the real game, and having to repeatedly hit the opponent without colliding with another projectile could get a bit tedious.

From the start, I wanted to do a digital project for this assignment, so my first theorized approach to appropriation was taking assets from a previously made game and reusing them in a different context, similar to Cory Arcangel’s “Super Mario Clouds”. I remembered seeing a play-through of the indie game “DiveKick”, a fighting game where all you could do was jump and kick and one hit was all it took to win, and I wondered how I could do something similar in a way that fit the theme of the assignment. I knew that limiting to a physical attack would be too obvious for this project, I needed to limit gameplay to a move that isn’t supposed to be used every 5 seconds. Projectiles came to me pretty quickly, and I knew Street Fighter would be relatively easy to recreate in a Unity Engine, and I completed the first prototype in about 2 days.

Play-testing for this project occurred over two sessions. For the first session in a class, I had the two players sit down and read the instructions before playing. They appeared to have fun during the session, though they were a bit confused by the controls the first couple of rounds they played. They got the hang of it, and reception was overall positive saying how they enjoyed the fact that the only move you could do was projectiles. Of course, the two were not avid fighting game players, so how effective it would be on more experienced players was still up in the air. The second session was with two more “hardcore” fighting game players, I explained the rules and they began play. They too caught on to the controls quickly, and got very competitive over it, yelling expletives at each other and hastily trying to be the fastest button pushers. It reminded me of a real competition for Super Smash Brothers I’d participate in during my Freshman year. Overall, I think it captured the idea behind my project quite well, as the players were able to have fun despite the constant spamming. There was no elitism over “the right way to play”, there was just two players trying to win, and that’s all competition’s supposed to be about.



img_1307 img_1306 img_1305 img_1304

Appropriation Piece Playtest

For four players

  • A picture is cut up into four pieces
  • One by one, players have 10 seconds to look at their given piece
  • However, they must look at their piece through a semitransparent blindfold
  • After the ten seconds are up, the player must then draw out a recreation of what they saw on a piece of paper
  • After all players have seen and drawn their piece, they must put together their pieces and attempt to figure out what the original image was. If their guess is correct, they win.


image19  image20image21

Play testers noted that the paper used to draw the recreation should be of the same size as the original piece. Also, there was initially a 1 minute time limit at the end of the game when players attempt to put together their pieces, but the deliberation lasted much longer than a minute. Therefore, the time limit was removed.

Appropriation Test


To get the most points by scoring balls of used paper in the recycle bin.



Scoring from the first floor stairs is 1 point. 2 points from the second floor, and 3 points from the 3rd floor. If a shot goes in the trash, its -1 point. Each player gets 5 shots.


The players alternate turns between shots. The player with the most points by the end wins.


Appropriation Final

There are a lot of Dada appropriation pieces that involve appropriating a work and then making it completely non-functional. That was where I started for my game. I was largely inspired by pieeces like Der wildgewordene Spiesserr Heartfield by Grosz and Heartfield and the work of Marcel duChamp.

I knew at the outset that I wanted to use sewing tools, considering that I have a box full of them in my dorm and they can be far more versatile than we usually give them credit for. The core experience that I initially thought of for the game was the idea of players sabotaging each other’s efforts to create something.


The first iteration of my game involved a set of fabric scissors, a box of pins, a box of chalk, a square of fabric, and a set of cards with nouns on them. To start, each of the two players drew a card, and then took turns manipulating the fabric to try and make it look like the noun on their card. They could either make one cut with the scissors, make a marking with the chalk, or use three pins to manipulate the shape of the fabric. The players drew the cards “cane” and “banana,” and both were able to create their objects. However, the unforeseen problem with including the scissors was that the fabric ended up being cut in half so that the players were not interacting with each other.

There are several changes that I made for the second iteration. First of all, I used a t-shirt instead of a square of fabric (this was always part of the plan, but didn’t happen for the first playtest because of time constraints). Second, I removed the scissors and replaced them with pieces of thread. I initially included them because I thought it would make it a little less infuriating to have a way to shape the fabric beyond pinning it, but by making it possible to cut the fabric, I also made it possible for players to create separate pieces to work on and for them to simply cut silhouettes out of the fabric. Initially I was going to make a third change of changing the number of pins available to the players on each turn, but I ultimately decided against it.

There are a few things that I would have liked to have had more time to play around with with this project. Namely, I wish that there were some way to keep the scissors as an implement without losing the core experience that I was  aiming for. One of the hallmarks of the Dada movement is taking something functional and making it nonfunctional. Without the scissors, the piece of clothing/fabric is only temporarily nonfunctional, because none of the other tools permanently alter it (the chalk rubs off, pins can be removed, thread can be untied or cut off). If I had more time and resources, I think I would try to add in a serger and limit the amount of time that the pedal can be pressed per turn, which would allow players to permanently alter and cut the fabric without the risk of it being cut in half.


clark, peter and joey: a word game

Originally, I wanted to create an appropriated game about gender, trope reversal, & subversion. Unfortunately, due to time constraints & a lack of materials at Target, I had to alter my idea!

I bought up a couple of children’s books– “Clark the Shark” by Bruce Hale, “Rubble to the Rescue” by Kristen Depken, “The Poky Little Puppy” by Janette Sebring Lowrey, & “Pinkalicious & Planet Pink” by Victoria Kann. Then, I gave a book to two of my friends & asked them to cut out words & sentence fragments. We divided up the work until all of the books were effectively stripped of everything that made them books in the first place, & we soon had a pile of words & phrases.

My intention was to create a sort of found poetry engine, allowing two or more players to work together to create something artistic & meaningful out of children’s literature, which is often overlooked.

Little did I know that my friends had put their own spin on things by focusing on words or phrases that seemed adult in nature. They even cut up certain words to CREATE vulgar fragments! For example, multiple instances of “class” or “grass” were turned into “ass.”

I didn’t protest, because if anything, this only added to the appropriation of the piece. They appropriated my idea.

SO…I changed the rules of the game! This game takes two players. They compete to create a sentence that will make the other player break face– sort of like a childhood game I used to play called Old Stone Face. All you have to do is get your opponent to smile, sputter, laugh, or otherwise show emotion!

The game is called Clark, Peter, & Joey because those are the only names we could find within the books chosen.

For the final play test I intend to go out & buy more books to cut up, & possibly organize the words & phrases so that they’re easier to sort through.

I did two playtests– one with friends, & one in class. Content Warning for occasional vulgarities.

img_6123 img_6139 img_6140img_6202 img_6122



I changed a couple of things for this round. Firstly, I gave each player their own pile of words, which made the task of sorting through them much easier. Secondly, I finalized the rules:

-Two players compete over three rounds. Players each create a sentence using their word pile & take turns reading their creation to their opponent. The player who gets the bigger reaction out of their opponent gets a point that round. If both players are in stitches, each player gets a point. Words used in a sentence may not be recycled. They are removed from the pile for the remainder of the game.

ADDITIONALLY, Since most players take an “adult humor” type of route in this game, I advised players against creating sentences that implied a lack of consent. I do not want my game being used in that manner.

Here are some priceless reactions & interesting sentences created. Once again, there’s a content warning for adult humor.

img_6221 img_6219 img_6214 img_6213 img_6208img_6229 img_6228 img_6220 img_6216



My piece, called Clark, Peter, & Joey: A Word Game, was pretty distinctly different from my balloon piece last time. Conceptually, my piece changed a lot from initial creation to its final iteration. I began wanting to create something in a similar vein to my last work- something that had a lot of personal meaning to me, something deeply self-reflective, something with a message. Unfortunately, a lot of that fell through as soon as I realized that I couldn’t afford to purchase the materials I envisioned for this kind of piece. So I had to adapt on the spot, which in my opinion, sort of fit the spirit of appropriation & happenings. My game began to take shape in my head– a found poetry engine, inspired by the likes of Dada collagists. I wanted to subvert the everyday, subvert the childishness of the children’s books that I was about to tear apart. I wanted to surprise the player with the beauty & elegance they could create with only simple words. However, I was the one who ended up getting surprised.

I enlisted the help of my friends for cutting up the books, & quickly my game became filled with “ass” & “daddy” pieces. In a way, they appropriated my game as much as I appropriated those books in the beginning. And we certainly achieved some sort of subversion– maybe not the kind I really wanted, but subversion nonetheless. While Dada artists subverted the imagery & everyday media of the bourgeoisie with their collages, my players subvert the innocence & simplicity of children’s books. Clearly, one is on a much greater & more valuable scale, but I don’t think that my game in invaluable. One interesting intersection in my game where I found the chance to insert my own political & moral views was on the off chance that someone create a sentence that seemed to imply a lack of consent– instead of letting this type of sentence get played, we talked about why it crossed a line. It was no longer funny adult humor, but instead a very icky & malicious perpetuation of a culture that disregards victim’s stories. I am all for games like Cards Against Humanity, &, I suppose, my game as well, so long as they remain receptive to removing aspects of their game that are truly harmful. So, even if my original design intentions changed greatly over the course of the piece, I still think I held onto some of the same values that Dada collagists like Hannah Hoch instilled in her pieces.

collage heart playtest


To be done with two or more players.

Select a canvas and a concept.
Go around until every person has placed a found image that strikes them as relevant upon the canvas. They may overlap, arrange, and rearrange the images as they wish, so long as it is their turn.
Go around again until every person has placed a found phrase that strikes them as relevant upon the canvas.
Alternate until you feel the canvas is complete.


I did this digitally through Google Drive with one of my close friends. The word I selected was “bright”. It was really fun – we were video calling while doing this, but we ended up not talking much, as focused as we were. At one point she asked if she could take screenshots of portions of the canvas and use that as her image, which I thought was a wonderful idea. Then she asked if she could paste the same image multiple times for one turn. I said that as long as it was the same image, she could do whatever she wanted. At another point I used a quote from a story I’d written about a year ago. Through the playtest, the idea solidified further in my mind – I wanted people to come together to build a collage of a concept using only previously created things. Appropriate them.

Some screenshots!

bright 1

bright 2

bright 3bright 4

Appropriation Playtest – Serpent to Ride

So for my Appropriated Game, I wanted to do something that took a traditional game, and transformed it (with mostly the same pieces) into a whole new game experience. I wanted to see how the game pieces could be used differently, and how to apply a new spin on something made entirely for one purpose.

I started going through all the games that I had available to me. I ruled out most board games that had cards with specific lines of rules text on them (Dominion, Betrayal at House on the Hill, Munchkin). But one of the most intriguing games that was not ruled out was Ticket to Ride. In this game, you have a board with cities and train tracks, cards that have colors, and route cards that only mention two cities. Looking at the Ticket to Ride board, I noticed that there are only a limited number of possible movements to get from one city to another. This is an important mechanic in the game, and I decided to take that one step further and transform that into the mechanic of my appropriated game. Another important game that influenced me, and this decision, was Tron. In this game, there are four competitors trailing paths as they move, and if you collide with a path, you are eliminated.

In my appropriated game, the point would be to cut off your opponent by making strategic plays and moves, using the Ticket board as a playing field. This game is titled ‘Serpent to Ride’. Alien Serpents have been dropped onto the US around the industrial revolution, and they must cause as much destruction as possible.

Each player starts out on one of two cities (designated by a route card). They put a train there (signifying their head) and then they trail behind their head five connected paperclips (which lay on a pathway from that city). On their turn, each player must move to one or more other cities, as long as the distance of their move doesn’t exceed 6 train cars. They take their paperclip trail with them as they move their Serpent head. Any paperclip trail signifies spaces that cannot be moved on. After everyone has moved, a color card is drawn, which signifies which color pathways the players cannot take. A maximum of 3 of these cards are visible at any given time, and as the 4th card (7th card, 10th card, etc) is revealed, everyone gets a route card (each player starts with one). If, on your turn, you are on one city on a route card, and there is an unobstructed path to the other city, you play the card, move your Serpent to that city along the legal path, and then you get five more paperclips attached to your tail, effectively making less room for your opponents and making it easier to trap people in.






The paperclips are a bit hard to see, so maybe I’ll get something more visible for the next time.

Overall, this game works best with either 1) more players or 2) more paperclips covering the board. The game was relatively slow because we only had 2 players, so I was thinking of changing the starting number of paperclips for your serpent based on the number of players.

The playtesters said it was a fun game, and they liked the concept and mechanics. They felt the slowness as well. The route mechanic was not used as much as I had hoped, but I think it’s important and I will see in a future playtest. The color flipping did provide a situation where someone couldn’t use a route card in their hand, and it did constrain players’ movement, so I feel that was successful at least. Overall, I think it went well.

(By the way, the last picture is an example of a lose state for red because the red serpent is entirely blocked by the green serpent and cannot move)