The video and the article address three issues:

1. Art as Research, where research is understood as finding the ways, methods, approaches of learning while being in the environment, whether natural or social or as part of natureculture (Haraway 2016) altogether. Such understanding of research is based on the processual onto-epistemology, it sees knowing and research itself as an ongoing performative process, and intra-action (Barad 2007) between researchers, the researched, the environment where it is done, the tools with which it is done. All those players actively participate and change during the process in the process of intra-action. Such understanding of research requires flexible methodology that can flow with us, as we create, and provide art of the available materials and fields.

2. Now we come to the second aspect the video addresses: the Art itself. Art, with such aim of being/becoming a way to facilitate learning could be static, canonized or institutionalized. It becomes a special sense-based language, communication between the involved players, that also is changing on the move as the communication goes. There are pattern and rhythms that indicate that it is not random-chaotic but it is random-leading. The communication itself and making self of it while making sense in learning becomes part of the learning itself.

3. Finally, how can we make it public/publish/teach? It is public already. It is outside us. What is needed is to make it visible, to sensibilize its presence, its visibility. We believe our video calls for that. Publishing, from this perspective is not only a one-time event, but an everyday practice of reaching out, being in and being with (e.g. Elliott, Silverman, Bowman, 2016). It means challenging practices of revealing, exposing oneself, making oneself vulnerable, and engaging in a conversation for a purpose of recognizing that we are together in this world.

From seeing the call, through defining our position, through thinking about what to expose, to editing – we were developing prompts-challenges to each other. We did not think of ourselves as researchers who are doing something for the public, but simultaneously the public and the researcher, the roles were floating back and forth, as was also the expressions and thoughts. The learning was an accumulation, expansion, interrupted, random from the linear point of view. Memories, associations, everyday activities, styles became citations. It was not an imitation but an ongoing conversation, dialogue, an exchange. The prompts could be called stages or strata, while in actuality they were part of the intra-active performativity.

Now back to the call's challenge: expositionality (Schwab, 2019) speaks to the dialogic and performative (Barad 2003,2007) nature of the art. We used the process of developing this video as a lab of a kind one teaching from each other while learning from each other from the positions of our skills while simultaneously empty-out (Haraway, 2017). While conventional publishing, self-publishing are all important, there could be one more ever-transforming way of publishing – the call.