the fibreculture journalfibreculturejournal.org/wp-content/pdfs/fcj-152goodman... · 2020. 10....

Andrew Goodman. Monash University, Melbourne. Erin Manning. Concordia University, Montréal.

FCJ-152 Entertaining the environment: a conversation.

124 FCJ-152 fibreculturejournal.org

The Fibreculture JournalDIGITAL MEDIA + NETWORKS + TRANSDISCIPLINARY CRITIQUE

WeatherPatterns—ErinManning,NathanielStern,BryanCera,AndrewGoodman,2012

issue 21 2012: Exploring Affective Interactions issn 1449 1443

fibreculturejournal.org FCJ-152 125

AndrewGoodmanandErinManning

Andrew: Erin,beforewediscusstheimplicationsof‘Entertainingtheenvironment’[1]withanartworkorevent,Ithoughtwecouldperhapsstartwithabriefoutlineofhowyouarrivedattheconcept?

Erin: Ithinktheconcepthasbeenlurkinginthesidelinesofmypracticeforsometime.Itbegantotakeformaroundquestionsofinteractivity,particularlyaroundtechnologicallyinnovativeartprojectsthatthemselvesquestionhowarttacklesnotionsofparticipation.Twoissuesseemedmostsalientformeinthisturntowardthetechnological:1.Howdowenotbecometooentrancedbythetechnologyitself,bendingtoitsneeds—how,asartists,dowenotfallpreytofeelingasthoughitistechnologythatprovidestheexperience.Or,putdifferently,howdowenotfallpreytotheideathatitistechnologythatsuppliesthewonder,whileatthesametimenotdismissingthecomplexityoftechnologyandthemanyrolesitcanplaywithinourpractices?2.Howdoweretainasensitivitytotheart-event(notjustthetechnology-event),keepinginmindthedifferencebetweeninteractivityandrelation,betweenthesettingupofacause-effectscenarioandthecreationofanevent.

Thesequestionsledmetotaketheprocessofinvestingindigitaltechnologiesverycarefully,wantingtobecertainthatIcouldbackoutatanymoment.Mysenseisthatoncetheinvestmentinatechnologicalprocessbecomestoodominant,wecanlosesightofthefieldeffectwearelookingfor—aneffectthatmaybeavailablewithmuchmorelimiteduseoftechnology.Thisisnottospeakagainsttheuseoftechnology,buttoaskhowtechnologyitselfbecomesartful.Howtocreateapatientinvestmentin“whattheartcando”andnotjust“whatthetechnologycando.”

“Entertainingtheenvironment”comesoutofthisthinking.Itisaremindernottoplaceourselvestooquicklyatthecenterofeachexperience.Itsuggeststhatwhatisperceptiblemaynotbeimmediatelyavailabletous,ormaybeobfuscatedbyourexpectationthatrelationalwaysincludesus.Anditperhapspushesustoreconsiderhowexperienceunfolds,leadingtowardmorenuancedinterpretationsofwhatparticipationcanmean.

“EntertainingtheEnvironment”alsoplacesusimmediatelyinarelationalframeworkratherthaninvestinginthehierarchyofsubjectandobject(humanandnonhuman).Whenthehumanisconsideredthecentreoftheexperience,thesenseisthattheentertainmentalsohastofitintohuman-scalesoftime.Inanartexperience,thisusuallymeansthattheaccesstotheartworkhastobequitequick—theattentionofthespectatormustbesecuredwithinseconds.Butwhenit’stheenvironmentthatisbeingentertained,suddenlythereisadifferentsenseofduration.Itisnotsolelyaboutus,butabouthowthevariousassemblages—concreteandabstract,humanandnonhuman—arerealignedthroughthe


FCJ-152Entertainingtheenvironment:aconversation

artisticprocess.Concretely,thismeansthatwebegintodesign,orbettertocreateplatformsofrelation,formoreephemeralparticipants—aircurrents,movement,breath.Andindoingso,weareperhapsmoreawareofhowspaceiscrafted,howtimeitselfisartful.

Andrew:Thisisgoinginseveralinterestingdirectionsalready...Perhapstobringitbacktoyourfirststatementsabouttechnology,theredoesseemtobeageneraldifficultyinfindingabalancewheretechnologiesareutilizedinartworks.Somanyworksseeminvestedinademonstrationofthetechnology’scapabilities(and/ortheartist’stechnologicalskills).Likewisein‘interactive’work(aproblematictermatbest),thereisatendencytodemonstratetheinteractions/connectionsonaveryovertlevel—adoublydeathlycombinationwheninteractivityandtechnologyarecombined.Somehowbothartistsand,Ithink,viewersneedtogetbeyondtheentrancementwithwhatthetechnologyisdoingand,asyousay,backto“whattheartcando”.Ifwethinkofpainting,forexample,Idon’tthinkanyonewouldacceptthatthemajorconversationbetweenapaintingandaviewerwouldbeaboutthepigmentortypeofmediumused,evenifthepainterorapainter/viewermight




beinvestedinthinkingthisthrough.AndinfactwhenwewatchTVorgotoamovie,forthemostpartthehugetechnologicalcomplexitiesthatallowsucheventstohappenarehiddenfromsight—evenCGIimageryneedstodomorethandemonstratepowernowadaystoholdanaudience—wewantadifferentkindofengagement.Itseemsnaiveforanartisttothinkthattheycouldsupplymuchwonderthroughtechnologicaldemonstration,consideringthecapabilitiesofXboxes/iPadsandsoon.

Givenallthat,yourapproachofinvestingcautiouslyintechnologyseemsawisetactic.ItrytoremembertherelationalworksofLygiaClarkasabenchmarkofwhatmightbeachievedthroughverysimplemeans.Perhapsweshouldallplasterourstudioswithimagesofherwork,alongwithDanGraham,RobertIrwinandSteinaandWoodyVasulkatoremindusoftheimaginativepossiblitiesatthefringesoftechnology.Atthesametime,electricity,forexample,seemstohaveinterestingpossibilitiesintermsofthinkingforcesoutsideofanyhumanagency.I’mthinkingoftheearliestexperiments/arteventswithelectricity—runningacurrentthroughalineof300monksholdinghands,forexample(it’stheimageofmonksholdinghandsthatbringsinthepoetry).[2]Whileclearlythishasa‘demonstrative’element,itseemstomealsoinvolvedinashiftinpositioningthehumanintheenvironment—anunderstandingofandentrancementwithenvironmentalforcescapableoftransversingandreorganisingthehuman.Inthiswayperhapstechnologydoesopenpossibilitiesforthinkingarteventsoutsideofhuman-centricfields.

Erin: Andrew,Ilovethisimageofthemonks—particularlywhenwethinkofitlessasahumancirclethanasanelectriccircleactivatedthroughacollectivebody.LygiaClarkiscertainlyanexampleIholdonto,particularlyasareminderthattheartobjectisnotultimatelywhatartisabout.Theartfulnessofartisaboutthelureitactivates,theprovocation.Apaintingisalureforfeeling-seeingtexture-become-imageorshadow-become-sound(tothinkoftheuseofcalligraphyinearlyChinesepainting).LygiaClark’srelationalobjectswerenot“valuable”or“artistic”abstractedfromwhattheycoulddo—theywere“just”bags,rocks,air.Buttakeninconcertwiththerelationalfieldtheywerecapableofactivating,theybecame-art,becameartfulinthesensethattheywerecapableofaffectingtheenvironmenttheywereco-creating.

Technologies,asyoupointout,areever-present.Wecannotconceiveofaworldwithoutthem,norshouldwe.Thepointistoactivatethemattheleveloftheirintegrationintoalurethatstimulatestheevent,nottomakethemtheeventintheirownright.It’snotthatIdon’tthinktechnology-in-itselfcan’tbeanevent.It’sjustthatIdon’tthinkthatisthebestuseofanartist’stalents.Microsoft,NASA,Nikecanmaketechnologyanevent—theyhavethemeanstodoso,andtheirteamsarepoisedtoproducethenewest-new.Art,itseemstome,isbestatdoingsomethingdifferent:atmakingapparenttheintersticesbetweencapitalisms



andtheiroutdoings,atmakingapparenttheintersticesbetweenthepresentandthefoldsoftimethatrunthroughit.Ithinkofartasproposinganevent-timethatisnotalliedtolineartime,thatisnotaboutnoveltyperse,butaboutcreatingalternateconditionsforatweakingofexperience.

Andrew:Ilikethefactthatwe’reincludingpaintinginthisconversation.Itseemstomethattoooftenitsrelationalpossibilitiesareoverlookedinfavour,onceagain,ofmediumsmoreovertlyabletodemonstraterelation,whereasreallyanymodeofarthaspotentialtoincludeinterestingeventsofrelation,asitcanalsofallintorepresentationaltraps.




Whatwearetalkingaboutherecouldbedefinedasthemakingof‘propositional’artworks—Whitehead’sdefinitionofapropositionbeingofa‘luretowardsfeeling’.ThismostobviouslylinksinWesternarthistorytoconceptualart,butalsowhenevereventsofrelationarethoughtofastheprimaryartistic‘product’,whetherbetweenobjects(Duchamp’sThree standard stoppages[1913-1914]),objectsandbodies(Clark’sCaminhando[1963]),orpurelytheconceptual(YokoOno’sGrapefruit[1964]).Imeanthatitdoesn’texcludethemakingofobjects,butthattheyareemployedtacticallyratherthanrepresentationally,valuedfortheirabilitytocondition,toseedtheactualisationofinterestingevents.Itdoesseemtomethough,thatthereisperhapsaninterestingshiftfrommuchof60s/70sconceptualarttocontemporarypropositionalworkssuchasyours—ashiftawayfromtheindexandtowardsaconcernwiththemuchmoreslipperyareasofaffectandsensation.Itrelatestoconceptualartinthatitisconcernedwithanopen-ended‘thinking-through’ofconceptsthroughactionandisnotaboutrepresentation,buttheeventsproducedarelessconcernedwithactivatingconceptualprocessesintheviewer/participant,andmorewithactivatingDeleuze’s‘blocsofsensation’(myfavouritedefinitionofart).


130FCJ-152 fibreculturejournal.org


PaulKleedefinesart’spurposeasmakingthingsvisible,makingusseeorexperienceinanewway,whichIthinkfitsinwithyourstatementaboveaboutartnotbeingaboutnoveltybutratherallowinga‘tweakingofexperience’—reconfiguringoldoraccessingnew,andpotentiallydecentered,relationswithintheworld.Perhapsthisbringsusbacktothequestionofwhatreconfigurationsofrelation/experience“Entertainingtheenvironment”mightspecificallyoffer?Oneofthefirstthingsthatcomestomindforme,suggestedbythetitleofyourworkintheexhibition—Weather patterns—isaninterestinreconnectingwithorembracingtheforcesofmultiplicitieswithinnature[3].MichelSerresreferstomultiplicitiesas‘nebulousset(s)...whoseexactdefinitionescapesus,andwhoselocalmovementsarebeyondobservation’(1995:103),andhelistsheat,flame,clouds,wind,andclimateasinstancesofmultiplicitieswithtransformativepowersthat‘naturemakesuslivein’.Areconnectionswiththesekindsof‘unknowable’fieldsofrelationofinteresttoyouinyourwork?

Erin:Absolutely!Iamthinkingofweatherasthatwhichsurprisesanddisrupts,andalsothatwhichisabsolutelyeveryday,backgroundedfromexperience.Whiteheadtalksofnegativeprehension,referringtoaspectsofexperiencewhichactivelymakeupexperiencewithoutbeingprehendedassuch.Ithinkthatforthemostpartthisdescribesweather.Though,incountrieslikeCanada(andperhaps,withclimatechange,moreandmorecountriesaregoingtomoveinasimilardirection),weatherisalsothatwhichexplicitlymouldsexperience.Itisnotsimplythatwhichisexpected,itisthatwhichisovercome(beitthe-30ofwinterorthe+30ofsummer).Thiswouldalsobethecaseinplacesthathighratesoffloodsortornados,orforfarmerswhodependonweatherforthecrops.Insuchcases,weatheritselfbecomespropositional,anactivitythatnotonlyframesbutalsocreatesmodesofengagement.)

WeatherPatternsasapieceplaysonallofthis,butwithafocusmoreonthesideofnegativeprehension.Ithinkofitasaweathersysteminitsownright—asound-and-wind-makerthatrespondsnotonlytoyourdirectinteractionwithit,buttothemultitudinouselectromagneticvariationsinitswirelessfield.Theideaofbackgroundinghumaninteraction(oratleastnotforegroundingit)wasbasedtosomedegreeonweatheritself,whichisverymuchoutofourhands!

Thelastiterationofthework(May2012,MiIlwaukeeUSA),withNathanielSternandBryanCera,complexifiedthefieldofinteractionbybuildinginasystemofdigital-analogspeakersthatmovethesoundthroughthefabric-field(alineof45speakerswascreatedwithsound



bouncingfromonetoanother).Wealsocreatedafan-linethatissimilarlyactivatedbythemovementsinthefield.Thedatastreamitselfisactivatedbysensorssewnintosomeofthefabricpieces(whichalsohaveconductivefabricsewnintothem).Butthefocusformeisnotsomuchonthetechnicalaspectsasonthewaysinwhichthissystemcanmakefeltsomeofthecomplexityofweatherallthewhileemphasizingitsnon-human-centredfocus.

Withyourcollaborationforthenextiteration(August-November2012,MelbourneAustralia),Iseeuscomplexifyingthesoundscape,whichatthemomentisverybasic.Soundissomethingyouhaveworkedwithalot,perhapsyouhaveideasabouthowsoundcanbestworkinaworkthatseekstomakefeltfieldeffects?Iknowyourownworkhasplayedwiththesekindsofideasaswell.Oneoftheideasyoumentionedwasthepossibilityofmakinga(sound)effectthatisitselfnegativelyprehended—asound,perhaps,




thatunfoldsinatimethatisnotofthehuman.Whatwouldasoundbelikethattookthreemonthstounfold?(Iamthinkingofthethree-monthspanofourexhibition/collaborationproject).

Andrew: Soanegativelyprehendedsoundwouldperhapshavetobeconceivedasonethatone(asahuman)couldsomehowbecomeawareof,initsexistence,butunableperhapstoperceiveit—onetograspsitconceptuallyonly.Ifyoutakethepitchofasoundoutsideofaperceivablehumanrange—higherorlower—Ithinktherecanstillbeanaffectualrelationtothebody:lowsoundsexperiencedassomekindofalmostrhythmorpulseinyourbones,andhighsoundsthatarealmostfeltasasensationonthehairsonyourskin—that’satleastmyapproximation,sincetheyescapeanydirectconceptualisation—youknowthemonlysideways,throughtheireffects.Ofcoursewiththehigh-pitchedsoundsyou‘know’themthroughtheeffectsseenintheenvironment—mostspecificallyallthedogsstarttohowlinmyneighbourhoodwhenI’mmixing.

Tomethiscouldleadintotheideaof‘micro-perceptions’,thingsnoticeablethroughaffectandsensationratherthanperception,thatasamultiplicityperhapscanbecomeaperceivedsound.ItssomethingI’vebeenexperimentingwith,layeringeightormoresounds‘behind’thedominantsoundsothatwhileyoucannotevernamethemasseparatethings,theyaddqualitativelytotheoveralleffect.Thatis,whenyoutakethemoutitsoundsdifferentsomehow,butthechangeisnothingquantifiable,almost,Iwanttosay,anaffectualtonality,thatworksthroughthebodyinwaysotherthantheears.Perhapsthisrelatestosynesthesia—wehavetostartthinkingoutside‘normative’perceptionandaboutwhatasoundfeelslikeontheskin,whatittasteslike,whatitlookslike,asmuchaswhatitsoundslike.

Butmoregenerally,asyousuggest,thinkingimaginativelythroughspecificallynonhumantimespansand/orfieldsofenvironmentalforcesthatother‘beings’canconnectwithisaninterestingangle,inherentlydecenteringthehuman.IfweacceptfromWhiteheadthatallentitiesarecapableofprehensionthenwewillwanttospecificallythinkinanimateaswellasanimateandsentientbeings—whichiswhereimaginationcomesin.Whatforcesinnatureisarockattunedto—heat,wind,acidity?Wheredoatree’ssympathieslie—withrain,daylightpatterns,symbioticconversationswithbacteria?OnsomelevelwecanIguessimaginethesethingsconceptuallyifnotbodily—wecanalsoknowmechanicallybutneverempathicallyunderstandwhatthechangesinsapflowasthedayslengthenfeelslikeandhowthisconnectsatreetothetiltoftheearth.



Butwhataboutwaysofexperiencingthatwecan’tevenreallybegintoimagineorname?InThe embodied mindFranciscoVarelatalksaboutdifferentmechanismsforseeing—humanshave,apparently,developedthreedifferentialcategories(hue,saturationandtone),whilesomeanimalshaveonlytwo,andothershaveperhapsfourormore.Theseaddedqualitiesarenotsimplyextensionsofourwaysofseeing(beingabletoseeinfrared,forexample),butcompletelynewcategories.Forexample,hepostulatesthattheremightalsobe,forsomecreatures,arhythmicpulsetoobjectsthatgivesawholenewdimensionto‘seeing’(Varela,ThompsonandRosch,1992:147-180).Evenasweknowandcanalreadyexperiencethatthesensesaresynestheticandalreadyirretrievablyintertwined,thisseemstogobeyondthattotrulyunknowableforces.

Thebigquestionformeiswhetherwecanmanagetomakesomethingfeltthatissooutsideofhumantimespanorperceptionsothatitcanonlybeunderstoodnegatively.Canthisbemorethanaconceptualunderstanding?Thatis,canwemovebeyondalevelofpitchingatonethathumanscan’thear,whiletellingthemitexistssothattheycanconceptualisetheirlackofperception,toatrueprehension,relatedto/inabodily,affectualorsensualmanner?I’mnotsureifthiswillbeaproductivelineofinquiry,whetheritcouldproveenlighteningortoonegativetowards,notonlyhumansubjectivities,butalsomore-than-humanbodiesratherthanestablishingnewandinterestingrelationswiththem...

Erin:Thechallenge,asyousay,isnotpresumingtoknowhowamore-than-humanecologymakesitselffeltnotonlybeyondthehuman,butalsoforthehuman.Itwouldbearelativelystraightforwardmovetocreateatheoreticalproblemthattranslatedtoonethatwecallnegativelyprehended(thatis,workwithsoundsthatareoutsideofhumanhearingbutheardbyanimals).Butthismightsimplykeepusinastandstillasregardsexperimentingwiththeideaofentertainingtheenvironment—itmightpresumeweknowwhatthatmeansandcanorchestrateit.Itseemstomethatthecallmustremainexperimental,thatentertainmentissomethingthatweneedtobereinventingallthewhile.BrianMassumiandIrecentlywentbacktoWhitehead’stwoperceptualcategories“causalefficacy”and“presentationalimmediacy”andrethoughtthemintermsofentrainmentandentertainment.Wedidthistotrytoactivatethesensein“causalefficacy”oftherebeingaforcethatexceedsanystraightforwardnotionofcausality.Asweunderstandit,thefirstphaseofperception-whatWhiteheadcallscausalefficacy-involvesanimmanentlyrelationalintertwiningofperceptionwithaction.Itiscausalinthesensethatitdirectlyactivatesafieldofrelation.Itentrains.Andoutofthisentrainmentfollowsthepossiblityoftheactivation(theself-activation,atthelevelofthefielditself)ofanotionofentertainment,orwhatWhiteheadcalls“presentationalimmediacy.”Entertainmenthereisnotaboutthehumanbeingentertainedbytheenvironment,butaboutthedirectperceptionofthefieldingofexperiencesuchthatitbringsitsqualitativeresonancestothefore.Ithinkthisiswhatwearetalkingaboutintermsof“entertainingtheenvironment.”Wearenotwantingtoexploretheideaof



aninstrumental,human-centredapproachthatinvolves“entertaining”theenvironment.Thatwouldjusttakeusbacktosquareone.Instead,weareaskingwhatitmightlooklike,feellike,belike,forentertainmenttobegivenbacktousasafieldofrelation.

Biographical Notes

AndrewGoodmanisavisualartistwithafocusonparticipatorypractices,soundandtechnology,andiscurrentlyaPhDcandidateatMonashUniversity,researchingarethinkingofinteractivitythroughprocessphilosophy.

ErinManningholdsaUniversityResearchChairinRelationalArtandPhilosophyintheFacultyofFineArtsatConcordiaUniversity(Montreal,Canada).SheisalsothedirectoroftheSenseLab(www.senselab.ca),alaboratorythatexplorestheintersectionsbetweenartpracticeandphilosophythroughthematrixofthesensingbodyinmovement.Inherartpracticesheworksbetweenpainting,dance,fabricandsculpture(http://www.erinmovement.com).Herwritingaddressesthesenses,philosophyandpolitics,articulatingtherelationbetweenexperience,thoughtandpoliticsinatransdisciplinaryframeworkmovingbetweendanceandnewtechnology,thepoliticalandmicropoliticsofsensation,performanceart,andthecurrentconvergenceofcinema,animationandnewmedia.PublicationsincludeRelationscapes: Movement, Art, Philosophy (Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress,2009),Politics of Touch: Sense, Movement, Sovereignty(Minneapolis:MinnesotaUniversityPress,2007)andEphemeral Territories: Representing Nation, Home and Identity in Canada(Minneapolis:MinnesotaUniversityPress,2003).Hernewbook,Always More Than One: Individuation’s Dance,willbepublishedbyDukeUniversityPressin2012.

Notes

[1]Entertaining the EnvironmentwasanexhibitioninMelbourneinduring2012.See<http://www.andrewgoodman.com.au/388/>.Formoreontheconceptofentertainingtheenvironment,seeManning,2011.Weather Patterns isaworkbyErinManning,NathanielStern,BryanCera,AndrewGoodman,exhibitedinoneiterationaspartof Entertaining the Environment. [2]SeeElsenaarandScha,2002:19.

http://www.senselab.ca/%22 %5Ct %22_blank

http://erinmanning.lunarpages.net/%22 %5Ct %22_blank

http://erinmanning.lunarpages.net/%22 %5Ct %22_blank



[3]FormoreonWeather Patterns,seehttp://www.erinmovement.com/erin_manning_weatherpatterns_exhibit.swf.

References

Elsenaar,ArthurandScha,Remko.‘ElectricBodyManipulationasPerformanceArt:AHistoricalPerspective’,Leonardo Music Journal 12, ‘Pleasure’(2002):17-28.

Manning,Erin.‘Fiery,Luminous,Scary’,Substance 40.3 (2011):41-48.

Serres,Michel.Genesis(Michigan:UniversityofMichiganPress,1995).

\Varela,FranciscoJ.,Thompson,Evan,Rosch,Eleanor.The embodied mind(CambridgeMassachu-setts:MITPress,1992).

TheLOCKSSSystemhasthepermissiontocollect,preserveandservethisopenaccessArchivalUnit

TheFibrecultureJournalispublishedunderaCreativeCommons,ByAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative

TheFibrecultureJournalisanOpenHumanitiesPressJournal.

the fibreculture journalfibreculturejournal.org/wp-content/pdfs/fcj-152goodman... · 2020. 10....

Documents