[-empyre-] Process as paradigm: Time/Tools/Agency
sawatzky.jacky
sawatzky.jacky at gmail.com
Wed May 26 23:40:15 EST 2010
Hi Eileen,
And all.
I know how you feel.
Often I wonder with electronic art , what is the goal the use of
electronics or the project? What does the use of electronics add,
change, to the experience/ awareness/knowledge/empowerment of the
audience ? For example opening the chicken coop (my favorite morning
activity) consists of so much more then opening the coop e.g. looking
for the eggs, feeding them , seeing who is laying who not, is a
chicken sick? ext, this is such a multi layered rich experience,
which empowers me. (Only on the fact that I am not dependent on an
electronic gadget) If an electronic gadget would take over,
keeping chickens would become much to pragmatic for my taste. But
pragmatics has a place. Electronic gadget as well as electronic arts
have a danger of making a commodity of an experience/ empowerment/
knowledge. Where is the art? WHat is the affect if something is made
into art? Adrian Parr writes in Hijacking Sustainability "The feeling
of power is too often confused with the power to act as compared with
a more affective notion that involved a power to affect and be
affected. In other words , instead of asking what power is and where
it comes from , we need to ask how it is practiced." ( 16) (MIT-
press, 2009)
An example of this affect I have in my own life.
In my twenties in lived in a circus wagon on a city nomad camp in the
Netherlands (where I live) , this was not a political choice but a
deep passion a love for this life, made political because it was
unconventional and illegal. It's neither art, though the wagon was
an inspiration for people to make art. I have seen projects like
this camp created as an art project. But ... my question is what is
your goal? Art or a place to life? do they exclude each other? If
art, a whole other system starts coming in play, funding, the
artist's goal, the 'exhibition'. For me these questions also apply
to electronic arts projects that address issues of environment.
But I think there are very engaging electronic arts projects out
there that have the possibility to add and change. How you use a
gadget, when, why is a question that the insitutional funding/
publication/ exhibition system has difficulty with, the goal is often
something else then the original intent. Which power(s) direct the
process.
As to the biodegradable computers , it would be great , but first and
easier I would like a constant 'bettering' of electronic technology
and computer application to slow down. Make computers that are meant
to last 10 years or more with little maintenance and not 3? The
open source software movement and DIY computer building/upgrading
workshops are inspiring outcomes of this.
Jacky
http://campwalks.blogspot.com/
"Success is relative: it is what we can make of the mess we have made
of things"
-T.S Elliot
On 26-May-10, at 1:12 AM, Eileen Reynolds wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In regards to Nicholas Roberts nice ideas of:
> ..."for instance, was thinking about public art in community
> gardens that used wind, rain, sun and soil to manage the garden
> with sensors and water reticulation, with feedback to the web to
> citizen science and transition to sustainability citizen science
> projects, to climate change... webcams/art/droid/automations/
> scarecrows that take time series photos, and open the chicken-coop
> or water the seedlings, turn the compost, feed the worms.."
>
> I have a devil's advocate response to electronic art dealing with
> environmental issues. Even though I have used cameras, sensors,
> projectors, and computers in my work as well to speak about
> environment, I sometimes feel hypocritical and sad that I use these
> tools due to the electronic dumping in places like Nigeria,
> Vietnam, India, China and the Philippines...
>
> http://tobethechange.blogspot.com/2009/12/african-children-are-
> being-poisoned-by.html
>
> Just wish I was smart enough to create a biodegradable computer or
> cell phone. Anyone?
>
> -Eileen
>
>
>
>
>
> Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 11:36:10 -0700
> From: nicholas at themediasociety.org
> To: empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm: Time/Tools/Agency
>
> plenty of opportunities for process as paradigm with purpose
>
> I am going to chime-in and bang a few pieces together too
>
> I read an earlier version of this thread just after attending Maker
> Faire in San Mateo County in California; lots of tinkering for the
> sake of it, cute electronics, gee wiz electronics new media, fiery
> interactives, steam punk contraptions, robots, drones and all sorts
> of rather pointless high-tech toys
>
> there was a small, minority of makers who had strong purpose, a
> social/world changing mission and where makers, and process what
> their paradigm, but they had PURPOSE.. i,e save the world, educate
> kids, give mobility to poor people etc...
> http://permaculture.tv/ross-evans-from-tinkering-to-world-changing-
> maker-faire/
>
> then there was a big gap and the majority of the toy-makers
>
> it would of been great if there was lots more creativity, making,
> new media and installations connected to real problems
>
> for instance, was thinking about public art in community gardens
> that used wind, rain, sun and soil to manage the garden with
> sensors and water reticulation, with feedback to the web to citizen
> science and transition to sustainability citizen science projects,
> to climate change... webcams/art/droid/automations/scarecrows that
> take time series photos, and open the chicken-coop or water the
> seedlings, turn the compost, feed the worms
>
> household sensors for water taps and garbage bins that connect to
> creative user interfaces of recycled objects that move or make
> noise or give colors based on sustainability sensors, that again
> connect to the web or mobiles and give wonderful interfaces into
> sustainability transitions and citizen science
>
> to group interactive / visualisations that allow democratic
> decision making for illiterates, or multi-lingual, using mind-maps
> created from photos, video, documents etc, and would allow people
> to touch and interact and move virtual objects in a room or on a
> touchscreen or a mobile or webpage
>
> use of games like Scratch and Etoys, to create ecological activist
> parables that give a sense of soil food webs, community ecology,
> cooperation vs competition, game-theory, Elinor Ostroms commons,
> permaculture and agroecology... that could be installed on OLPC
> XO's so that kids the world over could learn about ecology online,
> build their own models of school gardens, share libraries of
> ecosystems, provide real data for citizen science projects... could
> use Modkit and Adruino and Processing and Scratch to interface to
> the garden automota art
>
> for a movement of visual and new media artists to provide engaging
> and inspiring visualisations into the massive data dumps coming
> from the open government and data initiatives of world governments
> i,e Obama's Open Gov Directive data.gov or the World Banks
> data.worldbank.org
>
> use drones such as UAV and home-made weather balloons and connect
> via SMS or mobile or HAM radio with web aggregators like Managing
> News or Ushahidi to provide useful and inspiring pictograph based
> generative codes for regenerating a society, an ecosystem after the
> disasters of an earthquake and the slow disasters of after-shock,
> the famine
> http://mobileactive.org/howtos/mapping-sms-incident-reports-review-
> ushahidi-and-managing-news
>
> counter-surveillance tools for communities facing the neo-liberal
> onslaught of the Shock Doctrine; mobile, SMS, web, OLPC based tools
> for citizens in distress to manage the BINGOs, mil, corporate
> contractors and media...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveillance#Countersurveillance.
> 2C_inverse_surveillance.2C_sousveillance
>
> low-budget weather ballons that make low-tech, low budget maps of
> areas for citizens ecoligical and economic intelligence, DIY UAV
> drones that could fly-out an area and make maps of mines or
> extractive agrobusiness, i.e. logging the Amazon or Sumatra with
> powerful gut wrenching interactive visualisations and viral
> communications
>
> plenty of opportunities for process as paradigm with purpose
>
> --
> Nicholas Roberts
> skype permaculturecoop
> plans http://gaiapermaculture.com
> video http://Permaculture.TV
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:38 PM, christopher sullivan
> <csulli at saic.edu> wrote:
>
>
> kick me off this group if you like, but I cannot believe that in a
> world
> full of hunger, politics, love, sex, children, moose, you name it,
> that so many people think that Data, machines, are content.
>
> Eilean is making a valid comparison. At least I hope you realize
> that those
> using image and sound as generative content, are not just behind
> the times, we
> work differently than you, and to much success.
> As a teacher I have told graduate students that I could not work
> with them,
> three times. one wanted to make fashionable purses, one was a color
> field
> painter (I sent them to fine color field enthusiasts) and one
> animator who said
> they where not interested in what there work was about. But in
> twenty years I
> have run into nothing but people who look at there medium as a
> tool. I much
> beloved tool, but a tool, a skill set, a craft, to be reckoned with
> historically,
> but not the content of there work..
>
> this is not about age, (I am 49) my 20 year old students are as
> bored by
> glitches, chance operations, and algorithms as I am. a computer IS
> a tool. If
> you have a relationship with it, that is fine, but many complex
> thinkers,(I
> will call myself one) does look at my cameras, sound recorders,
> computers, as
> tools.
> We make our work about other things, like most filmmakers, writers,
> painters,
> play writes, have been doing forever.
> Why are so many New Media artists and academics, embracing
> modernism at
> this moment in history. do we really have so little faith in having a
> meaningful dialogue with the world at large! where is your blood?
>
> from the Love, hate, sex, birth, death guy, Chris.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Erika Jean Lincoln <fur_princess at yahoo.ca>:
>
> > Hi Eileen,
> >
> > I am going to have to disagree on your comparison.
> > You stated that
> > > The image as output seems to me the most active agent
> > > because it is out in the world
> > > communicating.
> >
> > I don't think it is the image that communicates in the example we
> are looking
> > at if that was the case then why have any process at all. the
> software
> > communicates through the image.
> >
> > > However, if one is more
> > > interested in the the data set being "algorithmically"
> > > processed through a computer, then why waste the paper to
> > > create an image that is non active at the end?
> >
> > I think the image can still be a part of the work, I feel that
> the way the
> > work is described misplaces the location of the agency within the
> work. On
> > the larger question of agency and images and tools, I think to
> describe a
> > work as we are discussing by not talking about the software/
> hardware we do
> > just create an impression of "computer as tool".
> >
> > Your illustration of a painting on the wall in a museum painted
> centuries ago
> > cannot be used as an example. Time is not accounted for in the
> same way.
> > Leonardo and/or his helpers painted an image where time is not
> considered.
> > Yes it took time to make the work but that time was singular not
> to be
> > addressed again. The desire of the artist was to create the work
> as a
> > singular piece that exists in time the process stops when the
> artist puts
> > down the brush an says "Yep its done". Conservators exist to halt
> time on
> > such paintings, museums spend money to halt time on works.
> >
> > Where as a work that exists in space and is intended to change
> over time is
> > very different. Process denotes actions over time. I happened to
> be in
> > Toronto a couple of weeks ago and Hans Haacke's work Ice Stick
> was on
> > display, (someone mentioned Haacke's work in relation to this
> topic earlier).
> > It consists of a refrigeration unit, and condensed water vapor
> that is in the
> > form of a stick, for lack of a better description. the work
> exists in its
> > environment and changes over time. People may look at it and call
> it a giant
> > popsicle sculpture. But it cant be reduced to only one element,
> the popsicle
> > cant exist without its refrigeration unit which has to be plugged
> in to work,
> > and the gallery's environment. these elements are integral to the
> work, and
> > cannot be seen as tools displayed on a pedestal separate from the
> work.
> >
> > It is like the difference between the terms complicated and
> complexity that
> > N. Katherine Hayles describes in her book "My Mother was a
> Computer: Digital
> > Subjects and Literary Texts"
> >
> > Complicated: (within machines) parts interact with each other in
> defined and
> > predictable ways. reducible
> >
> > Complex: (computation) many parts interacting with one another to
> create
> > something different and unpredictable. non-reducible
> >
> >
> > Erika Lincoln
> > Electronic Media Artist
> > Winnipeg/Manitoba/Canada
> > http://www.lincolnlab.net
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 5/21/10, Eileen Reynolds (Asst Prof)
> <EReynolds at ntu.edu.sg>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From: Eileen Reynolds (Asst Prof) <EReynolds at ntu.edu.sg>
> > > Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm
> > > To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > > Received: Friday, May 21, 2010, 11:18 PM
> > > Hi Erika,
> > >
> > > The image as output seems to me the most active agent
> > > because it is out in the world
> > > communicating. However, if one is more
> > > interested in the the data set being "algorithmicly"
> > > processed through a computer, then why waste the paper to
> > > create an image that is non active at the end? If the
> > > production of the image is just a remnant and record of the
> > > computer's processing, then no, it is not an active agent,
> > > and only proof of the actively processing computer and its
> > > ability to do something.
> > >
> > > My other thought is the old classic - "the computer is just
> > > a tool". And since we place these tools on
> > > such a high pedestal, perhaps the Louvre should instead
> > > display the paint brush that Leonardo used to paint the Mona
> > > Lisa rather than just the 30 × 20 inch remnant of the
> > > pigmented data set that he "algorithmicly" processed through
> > > the bristles. But I'm not too certain that would interest
> > > very many.
> > >
> > > -Eileen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > [empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au]
> > > On Behalf Of Erika Jean Lincoln [fur_princess at yahoo.ca]
> > > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 11:38 PM
> > > To: soft_skinned_space
> > > Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm
> > >
> > > Hi Maria, Yann,
> > > Isn't it more precise to say that the data set of the
> > > digital image is "algorithmicly" processed through an
> > > computer which leads to a different data set which is then
> > > represented as an image?
> > >
> > > To me the image is not the active agent.
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Erika Lincoln
> > > Electronic Media Artist
> > > Winnipeg/Manitoba/Canada
> > > http://www.lincolnlab.net
> > >
> > >
> > > --- On Thu, 5/20/10, Maria Verstappen <notnot at xs4all.nl>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Maria Verstappen <notnot at xs4all.nl>
> > > > Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Process as paradigm
> > > > To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre at gamera.cofa.unsw.edu.au>,
> > > "Yann Le Guennec" <y at x-arn.org>
> > > > Received: Thursday, May 20, 2010, 11:37 AM
> > > > Dear Yann,
> > > > In the context of this exhibition the notion of
> > > "generative
> > > > image" can be taken quite literal as a still image
> > > that
> > > > generates the next image in real time. Subsequently
> > > this new
> > > > image forms the basis for the next image, etcetera. In
> > > case
> > > > of a screen based work, the viewer experiences this
> > > ongoing
> > > > sequence as a dynamic animation.
> > > > Maria
> > > >
> > > > On May 19, 2010, at 10:09 PM, Yann Le Guennec wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello dear Empyreans,
> > > > >
> > > > > systems are open;
> > > > > entropy is a mistake;
> > > > > boundaries are in the mind (of the 'modelizer'=
> > > > someone making a model);
> > > > > every process is part of n systems;
> > > > > quantum physics is a biface (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Biface);
> > > > > we build tools we need, to prove what we think;
> > > > > we use tools someone built (some day), to prove
> > > what
> > > > we thought (some day);
> > > > >
> > > > > but ... i would still like to know what is this:
> > > a
> > > > 'generative image';
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.laboralcentrodearte.org/en/714-catalogue
> > > > (PDF p: 55)
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you mean a picture can generate something, or,
> > > an
> > > > image is necessarily a mind projection ? in the
> > > future
> > > > (unforeseen) ?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > best,
> > > > > yann
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > empyre forum
> > > > > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > > > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > empyre forum
> > > > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > empyre forum
> > > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > >
> > > CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the
> > > person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged.
> > > If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it,
> > > notify us and do not copy, use, or disclose its content.
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > > Towards A Sustainable Earth: Print Only When Necessary
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > empyre forum
> > > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
>
>
> Christopher Sullivan
> Dept. of Film/Video/New Media
> School of the Art Institute of Chicago
> 112 so michigan
> Chicago Ill 60603
> csulli at saic.edu
> 312-345-3802
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
> The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple
> calendars with Hotmail. Get busy.
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20100526/2d263338/attachment.html>
More information about the empyre
mailing list