The Fibreculture Journalfibreculturejournal.org/wp-content/pdfs/FCJ-122Vince... · 2020. 10....

Vince Dziekan Faculty of Art & Design, Monash University, Melbourne

FCJ-122 Anxious Atmospheres, and the Transdisciplinary Practice of United Visual Artists

In the electric age all former environments whatever become anti-environments. As such the old environments are transformed into areas of self-awareness and self-assertion, guaranteeing a very lively interplay of forces. – Marshall McLuhan

65 FCJ-122 fibreculturejournal.org

The Fibreculture JournalDIGITAL MEDIA + NETWORKS + TRANSDISCIPLINARY CRITIQUE

issue 18 2011: Trans issn: 1449 1443

Figure1.UnitedVisualArtists,Chorus(WappingProject).Kineticlightinstallation.WappingHydraulicPowerStation,WappingWall,London(15thJune-18thJuly2010).UsedwithpermissionofUnitedVisualArtists;Photocredit:UnitedVisualArtists–JamesMedcraft.

66 FCJ-122 fibreculturejournal.org

AnxiousAtmospheres,andtheTransdisciplinaryPracticeofUnitedVisualArtists

ThisarticleinitiatesacourseofresearchthattakesasitsfocusthetransdisciplinarypracticeofUnitedVisualArtists(UVA).AttheheartofUVA’sdistinctiveartanddesignpracticeisaprevailinginterestintestingthespatio-temporalrelationsthatexistbetweensite,theperformedworkandaudienceperception.Concentratingprimarilyontheexampleoftheirkineticlightandsoundsculpture,Chorus,thefollowingtextwillinvestigatetheaestheticconditionsthatunderwritethework’sexhibition.Bydoingso,thisenquirywillspeculateonhowtheintegrationofdigitalprocessesandspatialpracticeembodiedbythisparticularartworkoperatestransductivelyaspartofitsframingasamediatedexhibitionexperience.

Havingsetoutapropositioninpreviousresearchforcuratorialdesign—asapracticableapplicationormethodforcuratingdevelopedinresponsetotheemergenceofwhatIhavedescribedasthemultimedialmuseum—thisforayintotheworkofUVAisbeingundertakenwiththeaimoffurtheringmyinvestigativeresearchintotherelationshipbetweenvirtualityandtheartofexhibition.[1]Insayingthis,itiscrucialfromtheoutsetthatanysuchdefini-tionofthevirtualnotbedelimitedtothecapacityofdigitalmediaandassociatedinforma-tionandcommunicationtechnologiestoproducenew,artisticformsofillusionism.Rather,theexperienceofvirtualityneedstobeunderstoodasdeterminedbyitsembeddednessintherealworld,alongwiththecapacityofsocialspacetoproduceprotocolsforviewingandroutinesofaudienceengagement.

ItfollowsthenthatthisenquiryintoUVA’sdesign-basedmediapracticewillserveasameanstoengagewithhowaestheticconditionsarisefromtheintersectionofdigitalmedia-tionandspatialpractice.Moredirectly,thisparticularinvestigationoftheirworkwilluseChorusasafocalpointtointerrogatehowitsexhibitionmightbeshowntofunctionanalo-gouslyasaformofexhibitionarchitecture:

… conceived as situated at the intersection of the material and the virtual, as funda-mentally mutable, continuously negotiating, adapting to, and interacting with equally dynamic and mutable physical, social and technological environments (Blau, 2010: 38-39).

WhiletheintentofthiscriticalobservationbyarchitecturalhistorianEveBlauwasdirectedatbroadlycharacterisingthedispositionofpracticesrepresentedinthemostrecentitera-tionoftheArchitectureBiennaleatVenice[2],itsindirectinferencereiteratestherelevanceandcurrencyofinvestigatingthecharacterofmediatedaesthetictransactionspromotedbyUVA’stransdisciplinarypractice.As‘newandemergingtechnologiesofcommunicationandinformationtransfercontinuetowidenthecognitivegapbetweenmodesofknowingtheworld—betweeninformationandexperience—andtomultiplytheircontradictions’(Blau,

fibreculturejournal.org FCJ-12267

VinceDziekan

2010:39),IbelievethatitistimelytolookmorecloselyathowUVA’sproductionsnegoti-atethetransversalrelationshipbetweenmediacyandspatiality.Asthistextwillshow,closerexaminationofthecuratorialdesignassociatedwiththeexhibitionofaseriesofiterationsofChorushasimplicationsthatIbelievenotonlyextendourunderstandingofcurrentmediaartpracticebutalsocanbeusedtoturncriticalattentiontowardsprogrammearchitecture,asamodusofcontemporarycurationformedfromthemediationofperceptualandsocialrela-tions.

Inrecenteffortstofleshoutanexpandedhistoriographyofcontemporarymediaart,numerouscommentatorshavebeendrawntotheexperimentalartisticpracticesofthe1960sbecauseoftheirapparentanticipationofcontemporaryconcerns.Theseincludethetrans-formativeeffectsoftechnologyonhumanrelationsandelectronicmedia’sintegrationacrossalllevelsofsocialandculturalinteraction.Ofparticularinterest,thecloselyconnectedtheo-risationofintermediaandsystemsaestheticshavebeenviewedasparticularlyusefulaes-theticprogrammesthatextendtheconceptualisationofvirtuality,particularlyasithasbeenarticulatedpreviouslyintechno-artsrhetoricofthe1990s.Thelatter,MitchellWhitelaw(1998)hasnoted:‘amount[ed]toakindofanti-systemspractice…[thatoverlooks]thesystem,theconcreteinfrastructure,forafranticallyoverproducedinternalspace’.Whereas—accordingtoEdwardA.Shanken’srecentinterpretationoftheshortpaperfromwhichWhitelaw’sobserva-tionisextracted—asystems-basedapproachprecipitatesawayofunderstandingthetrans-materialityofdigitaltechnology.[3]Inordertounderstandtheaestheticconditionofvirtualityasinextricablylinkedandsituatedintherealworlddemands:

… a turn outwards… [that] raises questions about the intervention of art in the world… of agency… that threatens to spill out into everyday life… so as to evaporate complete-ly, or rather to become imperceptible. (Shanken, 2009)

Asareflectionoftheinfiltrationofinformationandcommunicationtechnologiesacrossalllevelsofsociety,newmediaartmightbesaidtocharacterizetheculturalexpressionofourtechnologicaltimes.Giventhedisparaterangeofartisticapproachesthatthetermencom-passes,ithasprovenmoreproductiveforcommentatorstoapproachtheirdefinitionofthe“artform”via“processes”thatareexhibitedthroughactualisation,ratherthanasmedium-specificattributes.Indoingso,creativepracticesemployingtechnologybecomelinkedwithahistoricallineageofpracticesthatemphasisethedematerializationoftheartobject.[4]Giventhevariable,distributedandcollaborativenaturesmostcommonlyascribedtonewmediaart,‘nomattertheformoftheartwork,themediumnevermattersasmuchasthecontext’(Graham&Cook,2010:83).Redefiningsocialengagementoftheaudiencewithart,suchpro-cesseschallengestandardized,normativemodesofinterpretationandmeansof“publication”throughexhibition.Strategically,bydefining“(theartformerlyknownas)newmedia”assets

68FCJ-122 fibreculturejournal.org


ofbehaviours,thisopensupawayofthinkingabouttheimplicationsthatworksutilizingdigitaltechnologiesraiseforamoregeneral‘understandingofthebehavioursofcontempo-raryartpreciselybecauseofitsparticipationinthecreationofaculturalunderstandingofcomputationalinteractivityandnetworkedparticipation’(Dietz,2010:xiv).Consequentially,formsofcontemporarypracticethatembraceopen-endedformsofinteractionandpartici-patoryinvolvementintheco-productionoftheworkareplacingevengreaterdemandoncuratorialtacticsandmethodologies.Thesearehopedtoestablishaestheticconditionsthatprovidesupportingplatformsforthesedynamicandemergingformsofcontemporaryart.

Fromthestandpointofmyearlierstatedresearchinterests,whichgravitatetotheintersec-tionofnewtechnologieswithexhibitionspace,Isubmitthattheexhibitionplaysacrucialroleindeterminingthecontourbetweenculturalprocesses(encompassingbothartisticandcuratorialformsofpractice)andtheaestheticconditionsthatinfluencetheexperienceoftheviewer.Theexhibitionoperatesasaninterfaceactivelymediatingthedimensionalityofartworksandviewingconditionsthatarecoordinatedacrosstimeandspace.Theartifact,thegallery’scubicenvironmentandthemuseum’sinstitutionalapparatusarepowerfulmanifestationsthatshapeourperceptionsandunderstanding,aswellastheexpectationsthatweplaceonart.Theinfluenceofsuchconventionalstructuresontheforms—andresult-ingconformity—ofartisticandcuratorialpracticeshouldnotbeunderestimated.Revealedinthelightofnewmediatechnologies,theclosed,circumscribednatureofexhibition-basedpracticetraditionallyaffiliatedwithinsulatingformatsandtheirassociatedconventions—whetherof“WhiteCube”or“BlackBox”varieties—isreconceivedasanopen,transversalcoordinationofelementsconstitutedfrommaterial,technical,perceptualandsocialpro-cessesthathavebeenbroughtintorelationshipwitheachotherthroughtheirspatio-tem-poralactivation.[5]Theimpactofdigitalprocesseshasbeguntotransformart’sexhibitioncomplexthroughwhichthefundamentalinterdependencebetweenartobjects,galleryspaceandprocessesofmuseologicalframingisrevealed.Particularlyasspatialpracticeanddigitalmediationbecomeincreasinglyintegrated,newformsofaestheticinteractionandexpandedformsofprogrammearchitectureswillbeneededthatproposealternativewaysforthemul-timedialmuseumtotakeshape.

Inordertomeaningfullyaddressthenatureofaestheticexperienceassociatedwiththeexhibitionofdigitallymediatedortechnologicallyenabledartworks,therelationalproper-tiesoftechnologyneedtobeacknowledged.Movingfromtheideaofpassiveformtoactiveformationentailsrethinkingthenatureofmedia,awayfromthemedia-specificconstitutionofparticularformstoafocusupontransductiverelations.Theserelationstakeintoaccounttheirorganisationintotechnicalassemblagesorensembles.GilbertSimondon,whooriginallyformulatedtheconceptinhisdissertationTheModeofExistenceofTechnicalObjectsof1958,describestransductionasanoperativeprocessinwhichphysical,biological,cognitiveorsocialactivitiesaresetinmotionwithinagivendomain.[6]Or,asAdrianMackenziesuc-


VinceDziekan

cinctlyputsit,transduction‘account[s]forhowthingsbecomewhattheyareratherthanwhattheyare’(2002:16).Addressingthisproblematicholdsimplicationsnotonlyforadigitalaes-theticsbutalsomorebroadlyforcontemporaryartpracticeingeneral,particularlyinresponsetowhathasbeenpositedasa“post-object”or“post-medium”paradigmshift.[7]RecentinterestinestablishingthebasisforahybriddiscoursebetweennewmediaandmainstreamcontemporaryartatteststotherenewedrelevanceofthesystemsapproachthattheartcriticJackBurnhamarticulatedinhiswriting.Lookingbacktothefuture,Burnham’stheorisationofasystemsaestheticsdescribesa:

… moment in history when artists working with and without high technology, were engaged in a post-representational, post-object practice concerned with provoking an awareness of the real as an extensive, relational, dynamic network of processes. (Whitelaw, 1998)

Whilethepredominanttraditioninmodernistaestheticsholdssteadfastlytothenotionthateachdistinctmediahasitsowninnatequalities,theemergenceofexperimentalpracticesinthelate1960ssignalsthewaningrelevanceofmedia-specificityasameansofcriticallyengagingwithart.Characterisedbytheirmulti-mediaandpluralisticapproaches,theseformsofpracticeprecipitateareappraisalofmodernism’shierarchicalaestheticorder.Intheirowndistinctiveways,intermediaandsystemsaestheticsarerepresentativeofthisshift.Theirpropositions—articulatedmostclearlybyDickHigginsandBurnhamrespectively—shareanunderlyingobservationthatthenewformsandnovelformationsassociatedwiththeseexperi-mentalpracticesarereflectiveofsocio-technicaltransformationstakingplaceacross“super-scientificculture”.[8]

TheconceptualbasisforintermediawassetoutinHiggins’influentialtextofthesamenamefrom1966,whichstartsoffwiththepropheticstatement:‘Muchofthebestworkbeingproducedtodayseemstofallbetweenmedia’(2005;1966:170).Hegoesontoelaborate:

For the last ten years or so, artists have changed their media to suit this situation, to the point where the media have broken down in their traditional forms, and have become merely puristic points of reference. The idea has arisen, as if by spontane-ous combustion throughout the entire world, that these points are arbitrary and only useful as critical tools, in saying that such-and-such a work is basically musical, but also poetry. This is the intermedial approach, to emphasise the dialectic between the media.



Figure2.DickHiggins,IntermediaChart(1995)viaexternallink:http://stendhalgallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/p1021.jpg Thisdialecticbetweenmediacanbevisualiseddiagrammaticallyastheoverlappingofartisticforms(mailart,concretepoetry,graphicmusicnotation)andmovements(conceptualart,actionmusic,Fluxus).WhileHigginswasinhisownrightanearlyadvocateoftheuseofcomputersasatoolforart-making(shouldwepresumethatcomputerartisindicatedbyoneofthe“questionmarks”representedinHiggins’diagram?),itisanotherartistcloselyidenti-fiedwithFluxus,NamJunePaik,whosecreativeapproachtotechnologyexemplifiesthisdialectic—anditsinnatetransversality—mostquintessentially.AsPaikhimselfwouldwrite:

Art history and musicology [have] suffered too long from the separation of the un-separable … But if all arts merge into one, as [sic.] recent movement of Mix Media shows, then the study of various arts should merge too into one. (2004; 1967)

However,muchoftheartisticworkthatwouldcometofallwithintheprovinceofintermediacanbecharacterisedasmulti-disciplinary.Thisapproachisbestillustratedthroughthetypeofadditive,recombinantmedia-mixingexemplifiedbyhighlytheatricalforms,suchasstagedenvironmentsorperformativeinstallations.Inthisrespect,doestheenduringlegacyofPaikperhapshavemoretodowiththetransdisciplinarybasisofhishybridproduction?ItisinthiswaythatPaik’sapproachtocreativetechnologyalignswiththesystems-basedapproachformulatedbyJackBurnham.Thelatterarticulatesamorethoroughlytransversalresponsetoartisticmotivationsinanadvancedtechnologicalsociety.ReiteratingtheearlierquotedremarksofHiggins,Burnham(2005;1968:169)wouldwrite:

A polarity is presently developing between the finite, unique work of high art, that is, painting or sculpture, and conceptions that can loosely be termed unobjects, these being either environments or artifacts that resist prevailing critical analysis.

Ineffect,Burham’ssystemaestheticsrefutesthenotionthattheprimaryexperienceofartresidesinmaterialentities.Burnhamwoulddrawuponkineticart[9],luminalart—distin-guishing“articulatedilluminationsystems”from“lightsculpture”—andresponsiveenviron-mentstoillustratehiscontentionthatart’sfunctionalityexiststhroughrelationsbetweenpeopleandthecomponentsthatmakeuptheirenvironment.[10]Theseparticularmodesofpracticedemonstratehisclaimthatafundamentaltransitionwastakingplacefromanobject-orientedtoasystems-orientedculture,wherein‘changeemanates,notfromthings,butfromthewaythingsaredone‘(Burnham,2005;1968:165;myemphasis).

http://stendhalgallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/p1021.jpg

http://stendhalgallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/p1021.jpg


VinceDziekan

Contextualizedbythepraxisof“expandedcinema”acrossthe1960sand70s,experimen-talformsofcinematographicinstallationalsoplayanimportantpartinredefining,indeedblurringtheboundariesbetweenimage,sculptureandliveperformance.[11]Asdemon-stratedbyAnthonyMcCall’s“solidlight”films—mostnotablyhisseminalALinedescrib-ingaConefrom1973—theimmediacyoflight,inandofitself,intheprojectionprocessispredicatedonthecoexistenceofimageinspace.Throughtheadmixtureoflightandsmoke-inducedatmosphere,McCallconjuresasculpturaldensitythroughwhichapurer,undilutedformofopticqualityorilluminismisachieved.Notdissimilarly,theresponsivelightinstalla-tionsofUVApromoteatransversalwayofthinkingabouthowlightandspace,theperforma-tiveenactmentoftheworkandparticipatoryinvolvementoftheviewerareeachintegraltotheprocessoftheirreassembly,achievedthroughthemediumofexhibition.

Aspartoftheconsequenceofthesere-evaluationsofdisciplinaryboundaries,thesituation,siteormilieucomestothefore.Initsway,“site-specificity”opensupamultiplicityofspacesandcontextsinwhichartcanoperateandfinditsmostapplicableformofexposition.Theparadigmaticshiftannouncedbythisunderlyingpost-mediumconditionreplacesthespecificformaltraitsandpropertiesconventionallyusedtodefinemediawithagreateraccommoda-tiontothecompositeandinter-connectedoperationsofan“apparatus”orsystem.Accord-ingtoBurnham(2005;1968:167):

The components of systems—whether these are artistic or functional—have no higher meaning or value. Systems components derive their value solely through their assigned context. Therefore it would be impossible to regard a fragment of an art system as a work of art in itself—as, say, one might treasure a fragment of one of the Parthenon friezes.

Themedium,previouslycondensedtoaformofmaterialsubstance,isreconfiguredasanassemblageofrelationsandvaryingmaterialitiesthatareinterdependentwiththeviewer.Byencouragingongoingtransformationasaresultoflateralmobilitythroughandacrossdifferentsystems,theresultingtransversaltrajectorytakesonalifeofitsown.Theartworkrecognisedaspure,aestheticunityisnolongeraviablepropositionundertechnologisedandmediatedconditions.AsNicolasBourriaudnotesinhishighlyinfluentialRelationalAesthet-ics(whichreprisesanumberofthepropositionsoriginallyformulatedinBurnham’sSystemEsthetics),thedialogicprinciple,ortransivity,effectivelybecomes‘thetangiblepropertyoftheartwork’(2002:26).Form,reconstitutedassuch,emergesfromthisdurational,unfoldingencounter.

Inthespiritofdrawingtransversalconnections,Ifinditparticularlyrelevanttothelineof



enquirybeingfollowedheretoaskhowtheseaestheticconditions,whicharemostreadilyassociatedwiththevirtualrealitiesofnetworkedsociety,newtechnologiesandtheinfo-sphere,aretranslatingtothespatialrealmthroughcriticalpracticesincontemporaryar-chitecture.JeanNouvel’sRedPavilion,forone,isarchitecturethatbothexpresses,andisderivedfrom,publicrelations[12],whileKazuyoSejima’sdirectionofthemostrecentitera-tionoftheArchitectureBiennaleatVenicesoughttorevealarchitectureasareflectionofcollectiveconsciousness.[13]Titled‘Peoplemeetinarchitecture’,thebiennalewasexempli-fiedbySejima’scuratorialselectionofcollaborativeandspeculativeprojects,manyofwhichfunctionedascontrolledexperimentsvariouslyinvolvingactsofshapingspace(throughtheuseoflight,watervapour,sound)andgivingsubstancetotime(photographically,strobo-scopically).Throughsuchworks:

The interdependency of space and time are explored through projection, movement, images (still and moving) that reveal both the complex subjectivity of perception and the intersubjectivity of experience that is shared – in the spaces of architecture as it is in the context of the exhibition itself. Throughout the exhibition the worlds of informa-tion and experience collide, intersect and multiply their contradictions (Blau, 2010: 39).

Theroleofexhibitioninestablishingthisbasisin‘interdependency’becomesparticularlyevidentwhenencounteringworksthatexperimentallydemonstratethestructureoftrans-parencyanddensity(Junya,Ishigami&Associates;MatthiasSchulerandTranssolar)ormediatedenvironmentsthattestthethresholdsofperception.Particularlypoignantinthisrespectwerepresentationsofmulti-sensoryenvironmentscreatedbyartistsOlafurEliassonandJanetCardiff.Usingcinematiceffecttocarveoutslicesofvisibility,Eliasson’sYoursplitsecondhouseoscillatesbetweenthefluidityofperceptionandmomentaryflashesthatregistertheseimpressions.ExhibitingaminimalistattitudethatcontrastswiththegrandioseeffectthatEliassoncoaxesfromthevoid,CardiffandMillerStudio’sreprisalofTheFortyPartMotet—whichIwillrefertoagaininrelationtomyinvestigationonUVA’sChorus—insteadplacesheightenedemphasisontightlycontrolledspatio-acousticstoproducetheintertwin-ingofsonicproximityandintimacy.

Whileholdingtheseprecedingobservationsinmind,theprimarydriveofmyresearchatthistimeisdirectedtowardsexploringthesystem-likeattributesoftheexhibitioninterface—inandofitself—inordertobetterunderstandhowtransversalrelationsreinforcetheconcep-tualframeworkforcuratorialdesign.Whilesite-specificityhasbeenaprevailingundercur-rentthroughoutmostofmyrecentresearchintovirtualityandtheartofexhibition,thefocusofthoseenquirieshasbeendirectedforthemostparttothestagingofexhibitionsthataresituatedwithinamuseologicalcontext.Yet,particularlyastheexperienceofpervasive,inte-


VinceDziekan

gratedmediaenvironmentsbecomesmorecommonplace,Iwillusethecourseofthisparticu-larinvestigationintothepracticeofUnitedVisualArtiststospeculateonhow,whendigitalmediationandspatialpracticeareintegratedwithinanexhibition“eco-system”,atransduc-tivewayofproducingaestheticexperiencesthatextendbeyondthegallerybecomesopera-tive.

UnitedVisualArtistsareaLondon-basedcollectivewhoseportfoliorangesacrossliveperfor-mance,temporaryinteractiveinstallationandarchitecturalinterventions.UVAarerenownedfortheirabilitytoworkacrossvariousdisciplines(includingvideo,installation,architecture)andapplications(commercialmusicvideo,stagedperformance,lightshows,responsiveartworks,publicartandarchitecturalinterventions).[14]Asleadingexponentsoflight-basedinstallationworkandcross-mediaexperientialspaces,theirproductionsarecharacterisedbyaprevailingemphasisuponthevisualandsculpturalqualitiesoflight,mostrecentlywithanemphasisonLEDandLASERtechnologies.Exhibitingacoolandtightlycontrolledformalaesthetic,UVA’slight-basedartworksharnessthepotentialoflighttotransformandanimateasenseofspace,bethespacesenclosed,interiorarchitecturesorpublicenvironments.Combinedwiththeirsophisticateduseofmediatechnologies,theirspatialpracticeprecipi-tatesstrongsubjectiveaswellascollectiveresponsesfromtheiraudience.AsrecountedbyMattClark(UVACreativeDirectorandco-founderalongwithChrisBirdandAshNehru):

When we started UVA we were predominately designing for live performance, using light to create a focal point for a large audience. With our installation work we created spaces where people were completely immersed, experiencing light on a very intimate level. We became more and more fascinated by the notion of light as a presence, how it changes the way people relate to the space around them, and to others. (Clark and Whelan, 2009)

Overthepastdecade,UVAhavesuccessfullyproducedcompellingaestheticexperiencesthatturntheaudienceintoactiveparticipants.Theextentofthesuccessoftheircreativepracticeinthatrespectisdemonstratedbynotableworks,suchasVolumeandChorus–whichwillbeusedastheillustrativebasisofthisparticularstudy.[15]Volumeisalarge-scalepublicinter-activeenvironmentthatconsistsofforty-sixlightcolumnsarrangedinagrid-likespace.Eachcolumnisequippedwithitsownspeakerrelayingauniquechannelofsound.Usingacamerasystemtotrackthemovementofaudiencemembersthroughtheinstallation,theabstractlightpatternsandaudiosamples(providedbyMassiveAttack)respondtocombinedindividualandcollectiveinteraction.[16]Theinstallation’sdistinctivesystemframeworkischaracterisedbythenatureoftheexchangethatoccursbetweeninteractorsandtheelementsthatmakeupthework’stotalsensoryenvironment.Thisinteractioninfluencesthetransformationsthateffecttheaestheticqualityofthelightingpatternsofthecolumns,theresultingsoundscape



andtheoverall,highlyintegratedrhythmoftheentireenvironment.Whenengagingwiththeworkthereisaprevailingsenseoftherebeinganinter-dependentrelationshipbetweenindi-vidualpresenceandtheemergentqualityofthesystem.

ChorusiscomprisedofanarrayofeightpendulumseachmountedwithanLEDlightsourceandsinglespeaker.EachpendulumhasbeenassignedauniquescorecomposedbyMiraCalix.[17]Theindividual“voice”associatedwitheachpendulumcanbeheardwhentheauditoriswithinimmediateproximityofthemovingpathoftheswingingpendulum,butasanensembletheyformatightlyinterwovenchorusoflightandsound.Thework’sconceptarosefromthesearchforasimpleandunifyingrelationshipbetweenlightandopera.Inmusicalterms,achorusisthemainpartofasongthatgetsrepeated;etymologically,theword“chorus”relatestoarefrain(fromtheLatinrefringere,“torepeat”).Chorusorstrophicformdescribesaparticularwayofstructuringapieceofmusic,whichisbasedontherecurrenceofasingleformalsectioninawaythatisanalogoustorepeatedstanzasinpoetry.Equally,thetermcanbeusedtomeanadistinctivemethodforthespatialarrangementofsectionsofachoirthatcanaffecttheresultingperceptionofsound.

ApproachedinitiallybyOperaNorthwithadesigncommissiontocelebratethere-opening

Figure4.UnitedVisualArtists,Chorus(HowardAssemblyRoom)Kineticlightinstallation.HowardAssemblyRoom,Leeds(6thFebruary–1stMarch2009).CommissionedbyOperaNorthProjectsinassociationwiththeCultureCompany.UsedwithpermissionofUnitedVisualArt-ists;Photocredit:UnitedVisualArtists–JamesMedcraft.


VinceDziekan

oftheHowardAssemblyRoomoftheGrandeTheatreofLeeds,thegenesisofthework’sformalsolutionwasinspiredbythecombinedconceptual,physicalandgeometricalre-sponsestothissite-specific“backdrop”.[18]Theshape,designandfunctionalpropertiesofChorusrespondinasynergeticwaytoarchitecturalfeaturesofthespace.Thedesignutilisestheceiling’sarcsaspivotpointsforthesuspendedarmsofthependulums,withtheresultingmovementofthependulumsformingamirroredarcofthebarrelvaultedceilingitself.Whiletakingthepre-existingspatialpropertiesofthesiteanditsoverridingsenseofproportionalorderintoaccount,theworkalsoexhibitsanunderlyingdesiretoproduceaformofvisitor/

viewerengagementthatreflectsascaleofhumanpresenceinthespace.Chorusoperatessimultaneouslyatalevelofindividualandcollectiveexperience.IndevelopingtheconceptdesignofChorus,UVAsoughttobalancecreatinganimposing,andattimesmenacing,physicalpresencewhilestillenablingthepublictomovefreelyinordertofullyexploreitsaudiovisualpropertiesaseverypositioninthespaceoffersadifferentperceptualrelation-shipwiththework.Visually,thisisachievedbyenablingrelativelyunobstructedpanoramic

Figure5.UnitedVisualArtists,Chorus(Architecturalplan-HowardAssemblyRoom,Leeds)CommissionedbyOperaNorthProjectsinassociationwiththeCultureCompany.Acknowledgment:UsedwithpermissionofUnitedVisualArtists;Designcredit:UnitedVisualArtists.



viewsoftheoverallsettingthatframesthework,aswellasdrawingtheattentionofitsviewerswhenpassingbelowtheworkitselfupwardstotheceilinganditsgothicdecoration.Complementedbyitsacousticregister,thework’sspatialperformancerestoresasenseofthebuilding’soriginalsplendourandmystique.

Consideredasatechnicalensemble,thesependulumsformaninstrumentthatallowsthecreativeartistsandparticipantsaliketoexploretherelationshipbetweenperformance,sculptureandcomposition.SubsequentrestagingsofChorushaveenabledUVAtocontinuetorefineandtestthelimitsoftheworkanditsadaptabilitytootherspacesandsituations.[19]

Inthefollowingsection,IwilllookmorecloselyattheinstallationofChorusatDurhamCa-thedralinordertoaddresshowthisparticularlyevocativesettingisanimatedbythework’sdirectperformanceanditsperceivedoperativity.

Figure6.UnitedVisualArtists,Chorus(DurhamCathedral)Kineticlightinstal-lation.Artichoke’s‘Lumiere’Festival,DurhamCathedral,Durham(12th–15thNovember2009).Acknowledgment:UsedwithpermissionofUnitedVisualArtists;Photocredit:UnitedVisualArtists–JamesMedcraft.


VinceDziekan

DurhamCathedralisconsideredamasterpieceofRomanesquearchitectureandamongstthegreatestNormanbuildingsinEurope.BuiltasashrinetoStCuthbertandbegunin1093,thecathedralbecameamaindestinationforpilgrimsthroughoutthemiddleages.ThechoicetoreinstallChorusinthisparticulararchitecturalsettingactivatesaninterpretationoftheworkthatreferencestheroleofchoralmusicinthemedievalchurch,whereitservedthepurposeofnotonlyillustratingscripturaltextsbuttranscendingthememotively.[20]Arguably,suchassociationswithchoralformandeffectbecomeevenmorepronouncedinthisreprisalthanwhentheworkwasstagedinitiallyinLeeds.

Riggedinsuchawayastobesuspendeddirectlyoverthemainaisleofthecathedral,thearrayofswingingpendulumsassumesadistinctivelyanthropomorphiccharacter.[21]Formally,thestarkminimalismofChorussetsitselfinstarkcontrasttothearchitecture’sRomanesquefeatures.Howeverthisphysicalrelationshipsetsupanintriguingrhythmicoscillationbetweenthemechanicalarmsandviewsthatjuxtaposetheresultingstreaksandtrailsoflightwiththeornatealtar(whichactsasabackdroptothelightingemittedfromthehubofeachpendulumwhenviewedfrontally)orthecathedralceiling(whichservesasacompositionalsurfaceforthekineticworktoplayuponwhentakeninfromdirectlybelow).Bysituatingtheworkinthisarchitecturalcontext,audiencemovementischannelledalongthenarrowcentralnave.Asaresult,theexperienceoftheenvironmentisintensifiedwithinacentralcorridorofactionandactivation.Thecadenceoftheswingingarmsofthependu-lumsalongwiththeiraccompanyingvisualandsonicrefrainsencouragesacertainproces-sionalqualitythatpromotesastrongreverentialfeel.Theoverallviewingqualityresultsfromamixtureofstationary(perceivingsightandsoundinrelationtoarchitecturalbackdrop,whetherorientedahead,behindoroverhead)andmoving“takes”(walkingthroughorbeneaththeswingingarcsofthekineticarmsreinforcesthecinematicqualityoftheworkasitevolvestemporallyanddynamically).Thecombinedaudio,visualandkineticqualitiesofChorusanimatetheentirespace.Whenmobilised,theoval-shapedlightsthatareincorporat-edintotheheadofeachpendulumassumethecharacterofanorbitingspectre.Whileeachlightingsequenceishighlyindividuated,togethertheseanimateentitiesexhibitacollectiveintelligence,intheeffectbecomingaswirlingcongregationofpoltergeists.Asaproductoftheprogrammingthatdrivestheresponsivesystem,eachperformance,orruncycleofthework,incorporatessubtlerhythmicalvariations.Asaresult,notwoperformancesareexactlyalike.

Operationally,eachpendulumiscontrolledbyaseriesofcomplexmicro-electronicsalliedtoamechanicaldrivesystem.Thependulumswingispoweredbyanelectricalmotorthroughareductiongearboxthatturnsthedriveshaft.ThemotortakesitscommandviadigitalrelayfromanArduinomicrocontroller.TheArduinohasbeenprogrammedtoreceivedatafromthecontrolcomputersrunningcustomsoftwareprogrammedtonotonlycontroltheswingofthearmbutalsotheaudioandLEDcomponentryhousedinthe“bob”,orheadofthependulum.EachcasingcontainstwoLEDboardseachwithfiftysurfacemountedLEDS



framedbyavignetteaperturecreatingaround,orborlight.Additionally,asinglespeakerishousedwithinthe“bob”whichisalsoconnectedtothemicrocontrollerandamplifierwhichdeliversafullsixteenchannelsofaudio.Thefirsteightchannelsareeachdedicatedtoasinglependulumwiththeremainingchannelscorrespondingwiththesurroundsoundsystemofthelocalvenue.

TheprogrammingthatcontrolstheoperabilityofthesystemenablesChorustoexhibitbehavioralcharacteristicsthatdemonstratepropertiesofself-organization(thatoccurinter-nallywithineachrunofthesequence)andvariation(whichbecomesapparentastheoverallrhythmoftheworkchanges).Theseautopoeticqualitiesarerevealedwhentheeightpen-dulumsseemtomoveinconcord;congregatingtogether,beforedispersingintooff-registerpatterns,orfollowingeachotherinasnake-likeweavingthattracesapaththroughtheoverheadspace.

Ineachsectionofthework’scomposition,thependulumsconstantlyadjusttheirpositioninordertomatchthesequencedformationsthathavebeenprogrammed.AsChorushasbeendesignedtooperateasanautonomouslyfunctioningreal-worldphysicalsystem,evensmalldifferencesintermsofweightonthe“bob”/armstructurecancausemajordifferencesintermsoffrictionontheaxisofrevolution.Duringeachperformance,thesystemadaptstoitsenvironmentbyconstantlyretrievingdataandgivingfeedback.Effectivelythesoftwaresystemiscontinuallyadjustingandrecalibratinginresponsetothemomentumoftheotherpendulums,asthisaffectseachoneofthemindividually.Witheveryrunthroughofthework’sscriptorscore,thesystemautomaticallyresetsandstartsagain.Asaresult,varia-tionisintroducedintotheworkassmalldifferencesarisefromacceptablelevelsoffriction(whetherinrelationtoentropyassociatedwithcommunications,triggeringofelectronicsormechanicallag)andintroducein-betweensequencesthatinfluencetheshapeandbehavioroftheoverallsystem.

Thisresultingtextureintuitedbytheviewer/auditorisnotderivedfromisolatedperceptualresponsestosightorsound,butformedoutofChorus’audiovisualmediamix.Acoustically,MiraCalix’sthree-partscoreiscomposedofanarrayofsamples(ofvoice,instrumentandeffect)thatfigurativelyconjuretheflappingofwings,creakingandscrapingofsurfacesandsonar-like“pings”.Calix’svoicerangesfromsoaringpitchandamplitudetowhisperedbreathsandsighs.Theelementsofthissoundtrackfocalisetheauditor’sattentiontotheirlocationinspace,asthemotionofthespeakerhousedintheheadofthependulum’sarmmodulatestheprojectedsoundasitswingsinanarcoverhead.Asaconsequenceofthismodulation,breathlessdelaysandartifactsofreverberationareincorporatedintotheresult-ingsoundscape,creatinganambiencethatisotherworldlyandethereal.


VinceDziekan

Onavisualregister,Chorus’useoflightisattunedtothisintegratedsonicandkineticrhythm.AsUVAarchitectAleTsolakisobserves[23]:

There is a big difference between a sound that moves across many sources (speakers) and a source of sound moving. Like that, a light pixel can move along an LED screen or you can have one pixel/LED moving physically, horizontally. The optical effect, especially from close, is so different.

Aseachofthependulumarmsswing,thesingleluminousapertureofeach“bob”laterallyscansacrossthebreadthofthecathedrallikeasearchingflashlight.Thelightingscenarioshiftsconstantlybetweenmomentsoffocusanddiffusion.Thisoverallcadence,thepaceofmovementcombinedwiththerhythmicon/offsequencingoftheemittedlight,becomeharmonisedasthepulsesofeachseparatelightbegintofindoverlappingphasesandsuper-impose.AsrevealedbyslowmotionphotographsdocumentingChorus’performance,theintroductionofartificiallightintotheenvironmenthasatransformativeeffectthatquiteliter-allycreatesafleetingsensation,thesenseofspacecomingintoexistence,ifonlymomentar-ily.[23]Reflectingthedistinctiveemotivequalitythatunitestheirexplorationswithlight,UVAobserves:‘Mostofourlightworksareexperiential,setintherealworldforpeopletotouch,feelandinteractwith;they’reheretoday,gonetomorrow’(ClarkandMedcraft,2009).

Byfoldingtheirrespectivequalitiesintoeachother,Chorus’choreographedperformanceoflightandsoundissynthesisedintoanaudiovisualexperiencethatbecomesactualisedoveraperiodoftime,throughmomentsofinflexion.

Inseekingtofacilitateawayofthinkingrelationallyabouttheinteractionbetweentechno-logicaloperabilityandhumanagency,GilbertSimondonintroducedtheassociatedconceptsoftechnicityandconcretisation.Technicityproposesawayofthinkingabouthowtechni-calobjectsandpractices(material,cognitive,social)cannotbeseparatedfromtheirsharedmilieu.Concretisationdescribestheprocessbywhichsuchtechnicalensemblesmaterialise,whileinflexionmarksthisturningpoint,thetransformativemomentwhentheindividualactorsinvolvedinthisscenarioexchangetheirconstituentpropertiesandconverge.

Byintensifyingtherelationshipbetweenallelementsofitstechnicalensemble(lightandsound;motionandmechanics;constructionandspace;audienceandsubject;viewerorauditor),Chorusevocativelymanifeststhe‘translationofvariedvisualandauditorymediaintooneanother’smodalities’(McLuhan,1997;1955:44).MarshallMcLuhan’sinfluentialthinkingaboutthewaythatmediatechnologiesimpactuponhumansystemsexertedasig-



nificantformativeinfluenceuponhowexperimentalartwascriticalpositionedandarticulatedinthelate1960s.[24]Drawingparallelsbetweenpre-modernoralcultureandthevarietyofemergingmediaculturesofelectroniccommunication,hewoulddistinguishthecharacteristicsofthisnewmediatedor“acousticspace”thus:

Auditory space has no point of favored focus. It’s a sphere without fixed bounda-ries, space made by the thing itself, not space containing the thing. It is not pictorial space, boxed in, but dynamic, always in flux, creating its own dimensions moment by moment (McLuhan, 1997; 1955: 41; my emphasis).

Atthemomentofinflexion,thetransductivenatureoftheChorusgivesmaterialexpressiontothechoruseffect.Thisphenomenonrelatesdirectlytohowsimilar,butdiscretesoundsemittedfrommultiplesourcesblendtogethertoproducetheperceptionofasingle,richersound.Occurringnaturallyinthecaseofachoir,stringensembleoramusicalinstrumentsuchasthepiano,thiseffectcanalsobesimulatedusinganelectronicmeans,suchasasignal-processingdevice.Regardlessoftechnologyormethod,theeffectisachievedbytakingasignalandmixingitwithoneormoremodulatedcopiesofitself.WithChorus,UVAhavecreatedaworkthatoperatesasatechnicalensembleforproducingkinestheticimpressionsoftendency,durationandintensitythroughitsphasingandprogrammingofvisualandacousticevents.Theevocative,richandshimmeringqualityofChorusresultsfromsuchanamalgamofsoundandvision;and,indoingso,theworkmostelegantlyactualisestransductionthroughits‘ongoinginteraction,stabilizationanddestabilizationbetweendifferentrealities’(Macken-zie,2002:210).

Broadlyspeaking,UVA’screativeprocessreflectsMcLuhan’sappealthatourmediateden-vironmentsshouldbeapproachedself-consciouslyas‘perceptualprobesandtreatedas‘anxiousobjects’insteadofbeingallowedtoremainunperceivedoruntested(McLuhan1997;1967).Whilethisinvestigationhaspresentedtheopportunitytoreinforcecertainideasaroundthecrucialexpositoryrolethatexhibitionplays,ithasalsoreconfirmedformetheneedtocontinueexploringhowmixedrealitiesareformedthroughexhibition.Itwouldseemthatfindingaunifyingmeansofarticulatingexhibitionpraxiscallsforthecreationofhybridarchi-tecturesthatare:

… conceived in the active terms of communication, information flow, and interac-tion—that finds the global in the local and seeks the collective in the personal. While focusing on the particular conditions of site, program, materials and structure, it engages with the larger cultural and economic conditions of its making—the smooth-ness and connectivity of the world of information—inventing new hierarchies that


VinceDziekan

produce hybrid, flexible environments; exploring action-based logics for organizing space that give their users the agency to inhabit them as they wish (Blau, 2010: 43).

UnderlyingthecuratorialphilosophyofKazuyoSejima’s‘Peoplemeetinarchitecture’wastheobservationthatthenewmediaecosystemisradicallyalteringtheconceptionofarchi-tectureandinfluencinghowlivedexperienceinconstructedenvironmentsisbeingshaped.AsBlau(2010:44)pointsout,thistransformationiscompoundedbythefactthatthemediasystemitselfiscurrentlyinastateofradicallyalteringfrom‘asysteminwhichthetrafficinideasandconsumerproductsmovesinonedirection(frombroadcastertoconsumer)toasystemthatismultidirectionalandinwhichusersareactiveproducers’.Associalmediaalterstherelationshipbetweenthepersonalandcollective,andubiquitouscomputingef-fectivelydissolvesthedichotomybetweenvirtualandrealspatialrelations,newcognitivemodelsarerequiredtonavigatethetransverserelationshipsthatexistbetweennewtech-nologiesandarchitecture,andreciprocally,newarchitecturalprogrammesandmedia.

Atmospheremayprovetobeonesuchusefulapproach.EmployedbySejimaascuratorialtrope,thetermatmosphereisindicativeofnon-fixedformsorstatesthatareconditionalandinterdependent.Whilecompelledtodrawallusionstotheprincipleofcloudcomput-inginrelationtowebtechnology,inthecontextofarchitecture,atmosphereconnotes‘anemergencethatarisesoutofamultiplicityofinteractionsbetweenthebuiltobjectanditsphysicalandsocialenvironments’(Blau,2010:40).IntheBiennaleexhibition,thenotionofatmospherewasmostcloselyassociatedwithMatthiasSchulerandTranssolar’sCloudscape.InthisexpansiveinstallationattheArsenale,acloudofdensevapoureffectivelydefinestheexhibitionspace.Thevaguenessoftheseeminglyunboundedspaceisarticulatedbythecontinuouslychangingqualitiesoffilteredlightthatpiercethevolumetricfog,illuminat-ingvistasrevealingtheprocessionofpillarsthatrunthelengthofthegalleryandasinglecurvedrampsituatedatitscentre.Thesearchitecturalforms—oneapermanent,precondi-tionofthespace,theother,designedasatemporaryfeature—arethework’sonlystructuralinterjections.Thedensityofthecloudiscontinuallymodulatinginresponsetotheshiftingmicro-climacticconditionsandthevaryinglevelsofhumanactionintheimmediateenviron-ment.Visitorsexperiencethecloudfromavarietyofpositions:within,belowandabove.Humanpresenceoperatesatboththelevelofindividualandcrowd.TetsuoKondo’srampactsasaregulatorymechanism,determiningtheprocessionofindividualaudiencememberswhotraversethebridgethatloopsacrossthespace.Butitisnotjustthemovementofthecrowdthatisbeingcontrolledinthisfashion.Therampalsofunctionsasa“visionmachine”thatstructurestheperceptualexperienceofindividualviewerandcollectiveaudiencealikeinafeedbackloop.Inaccordancewiththenatureoftheviewingexperienceofthework:



Schuler’s project actualizes the very notion of atmosphere as a negotiated condition by translating the terms of engagement of the exhibition itself from binary subject-object relations to the multiply diffuse terms of environment, ecology and hybrid networks (Blau, 2010: 41).

Inclosing,thistextformspartofseriesofexplorationsderivedfromacloserinterrogationofthetransdisciplinarypracticeofUnitedVisualArtists.Focusingontheirkineticlightin-stallation,Chorus,inthisinstancehasleadtoidentifyinghowitsresultingformanddimen-sionalityasamediatedexhibitionexperiencearetheproductofsettingtransductiveforcesintomotion.Thisobservationisoftopicalrelevancetocontemporarycurating,especiallyinrelationtothenatureofaestheticexperienceinspaceandhowthismightbeseenasactualisingthenatureofsubjectivity,accessandinvolvementintoday’snewmediaecosys-tem.Thisfindinghasimplicationsfortheconsiderationofachievinggreaterappreciationofartisticpracticesthatexplorethecombinedqualitiesofsyntheticimageandspace.Italsosupportstheneedforengagementwithcontemporaryarchitecture,particularlygiventheincreasinglyculturalsignificancethatnewmediaandglobalnetworksbringtothecreationofsocial,mediated,relationalandexperientialenvironments.Itismycontention,then,thatfurthertestingoftheinterrelationshipthatexistsbetweenartwork,audienceandspace—andthatinformsthebasisofrelatedtextsbasedonUVAaddressingthesubjectsofaesthet-icinteractionandprogrammearchitecturedirectly—willproveusefulindemonstratingthetransversalbasisofthevariousprocesses(material/transmaterial),integrations(real/virtual)andinteractions(human/technological)thatarecomingtocharacteriseexpandedexhibition-basedpraxistoday.

Acknowledgements

CollectivethankstoUnitedVisualArtistsfortheiropennessandwillingnesstocollaborateinthisprocess.Inparticular,thankstoKeriElmsly,forallofherassistanceandfacilitation,andAleTsolakis,forhisvaluableinsightsintothecreativeandtechnicalprocessesinvolvedinChorus’realisation.

Biographical Note

VinceDziekanisDeputyAssociateDean(Research)intheFacultyofArt&DesignatMonashUniversityinMelbourne,Australia.Hisresearchfocusesontheimpactofdigitaltechnolo-


VinceDziekan

giesoncuratorialdesignandtheimplicationsofvirtualityonexhibition-basedpractices;hisfirstbookonthistopicisforthcomingfromIntellect.HeisaresearchassociatewiththeFoundationforArt&CreativeTechnology(FACT,Liverpool),memberoftheNationalGalleryofVictoria’sVirtualNGVsteeringcommittee,serieseditorfortheTransDiscoursepublicationseries(incollaborationwithZ-NodePlanetaryCollegium)andDigitalMediaCuratorofTheLeonardoElectronicAlmanac(LEA).

Notes

[Epitaph]McLuhan,Marshall.‘TheRelationofEnvironmenttoAnti-Environment’,inMichelA.Moos(ed.)MediaResearch:technology,art,communication(Amsterdam:G+BArtsInterna-tional,1997;1967):116.

[1]Theseideashavebeendevelopedmostcomprehensivelyinmyforthcomingbook,Virtual-ityandtheArtofExhibition(Intellect,UK).Thisresearchinvestigateshowtheintersectionofnewtechnologieswithexhibitionspaceoffersnewpossibilitiesforaestheticexperience.Thelargerprojectisfocusedbyexpositionsonspatialpracticeanddigitalmediationthatestab-lishthecontextfortheemergenceofthemultimedialmuseum.Thecriticalenquiryinformedthecreativeproductionandrealisationofaseriesofartworks,alongwithcuratedand‘dem-onstration’exhibitionsthatpromotetheconceptualandstrategicapplicationofcuratorialdesign.Throughoperatingasatransversalartwork,TheAmmoniteOrder,OrObjectilesforan(n)NaturalHistory—whichfeaturedintheISEA2009exhibition(Belfast:OrmeauBathsGallery,2009)—demonstrateshowanon-deterministicrelationbetweendigitalmedia-tionandspatialpracticecandislodgethehierarchical,primacyofrealobjectspresentedingalleryspace.Together,theencompassingseriesoftheoreticalandpractice-basedinvestiga-tionsconstituteatransdisciplinaryresponsetotheevolvingroleofnewmediainart,cultureandsocietyattheturnofthetwenty-firstcentury.

[2]The12thInternationalArchitectureexhibition,titled‘Peoplemeetinarchitecture’,wasdirectedbyKazuyoSejimaofthecelebratedarchitecturalfirm,SANAA.Thecuratedselectionofworksplacedemphasisuponcollaborativerealizationandtheconstructionofenviron-mentsthatarereflectionsofcollectiveconsciousness.AsintroducedbySejima(2010:14):

The twenty-first century has begun and many things have changed; people, cultures and economies have never been as connected as they are today. Due to advances in



technology, we have started to connect with other people in a completely different way, forming relationships indirectly as through the Internet. In this new intangible world I believe that architecture occupies a unique and important place.

[3]MitchellWhitelawhasrecentlydevelopedtheideaoftransmaterialityasawayofviewingcomputersasmaterialmachinesthatthroughoperatingascomputationaldevicesproducean‘incrediblydynamic,pliablesetoftechniquesformanipulatingthematerialenvironment’(See:Whitelaw,Mitchell.‘Transduction,TransmaterialityandExpandedComputing’,Blogposting,3May(2009),http://teemingvoid.blogspot.com/2009/01/transduction-transmaterial-ity-and.html).

[4]BerylGrahamandSarahCook(2010:83)makereferencetoLucyLippard’shistoricalaccountoftheriseofconceptualartandthedematerializationoftheartobjectfromthemid-1960sonwardswhenteasingoutthefollowingtrajectory: One of the links among conceptual art practices of the 1960s, networked and systems-based art practices of the 1970s, telecommunication works of the early 1980s, and Internet-based art of the 1990s is the approach to the dissolution of the autonomy of the art object.

[5]EditorialdefinitionofTransversality:atransformativemobilitythoughdifferentsystems(thatcanbeatoncetechnical,butalsosocial,political,natural).Ittendstobelateral,ratherthanhierarchical.Atransversalconnectiondoesnotjustconnectfieldsorsetsofpre-existingrelations.Ittransformsthethings/eventsthatarebroughtintoconnectednetworks.Any‘individual’/individuation/socialornaturalecologyistosomeextentanetwork,andanynetworkinvolvesecologiesoftransversals.Crucially,themicro-reconstitutionofrelationsisasimportantas,ifnotmoresothan,themacro-reconstitutionoffields.

[6]GilbertSimondonwasaFrenchphilosopherbestknownforhistheoreticalaccountofhowindividualandcollectiveindividuationoccursthroughtheactivetransformationofforcesintonovelassemblagesofrelations.Simondon’stheoryhasbeeninterpretedaspresentingaviewoftechnicalobjectsasexisting‘somewherebetweenatransient,unstableeventandadurable,heavilyreproducedstructure’(Mackenzie2002:14).AccordingtoAdrianMackenzie,whodrawsheavilyuponthisfoundationalconcepttointerrogatethewaysthattechnicalme-diationisembodiedinhisbookTransductions:Bodiesandmachinesatspeed,transductionengageswiththeproblematiccorporealityandtemporalityofcontemporarytechnologyandprovidesaparticularlyusefulwayof‘thinkingaboutdiverseinteractionsandresonancesbetweentheelementarytechnicitiespresentinatechnicalensemble’(15).


VinceDziekan

[7]Mostnotably,arthistorianRosalindKrausshasidentifiedthedawningofapost-mediumconditioninlate-Modernistart,drawingdirectlyontheexampleofMarcelBroodthaers’influ-entialpracticeanditsattendantdeconstructionofthefilmicmedium.See:Krauss,Rosalind.AVoyageontheNorthSea:ArtintheAgeofthePost-MediumCondition(London:Thames&Hudson,2000).

[8]DickHigginsviewedtheseparationbetweenmediaasanexpressionofthemechanis-tictypeofsocialthoughtinheritedfromtheeraofindustrialisation.Higgins’heldthatartneededtoadaptinthefaceofchangingsocialfactors(identifyingthewarinVietnamandlaborcrisesascontemporaneoussocialproblems)andaestheticconditions(notingthechangingsensitivitiesandliteraciesofart’saudienceasaresultoftheirincreasedexposuretomassmediasuchasradioandtelevision),while,forhispart,Burnhamidentifiesbiologi-calsustainability,socialinclusion,conservationand‘understandingthegrowingsymbiosisinman-machinerelationships’aspressingneedsofthetimes.

[9]Burnhamdrawsaverycleardistinctionbetween“kineticart”and“kineticsculpture”,inwhichhesawtheadditionalpropertyofmotionbeingtrivialisedaslittlemorethanamodifi-cationoftheformalistaestheticconventionallyappliedtostaticformsofsculpture:

Rather than visual appearance there is an entirely different concern which makes kinetic art unique. This is the peripheral perception of sound and movement in space filled with activity‘ (2005; 1968: 168; my emphasis).

[10]ReproducedarticlefromTimeMagazine,9February1968,reviewingtheexhibitionofHansHaacke’sPhoto-ElectricViewerProgrammedCoordinateSystem:

‘Kinetics: Big Brother’

Luminal artists commonly require the viewer to push a button or step on a lever in order to activate their art, but Manhattan’s Hans Haacke, 31 , has dreamed up an in-genious way of getting the viewer to turn on the art with out really trying. On display last week in Manhattan’s Howard Wise Gallery was a small white room, lined on four walls with 28 electric bulbs at shoulder level. When the viewer walked into the room, the four lights centering on him lit up in unison. When he moved, other bulbs lit up, chasing him around the room in a Big Brotherly game of tag.



The mechanism was triggered by a series of hidden photoelectric cells paired with infra-red light projectors, which together created an invisible light grid. The cells were located directly beneath the light bulbs; when the viewer’s body intercepted an infra-red light beam, the cell triggered a relay switch to the bulbs above. Haacke’s Pho-toelectric Viewer Programmed Coordinate System furnished little to look at, but lots to ponder at the coffee shops. Does a tree make a noise when it falls in the forest if nobody is there to hear it? Does a work of art cease to exist, because no one is there to turn it on?

(See: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,844380,00.html)

[11]Intracingthehistoricaldevelopmentoffilmandvideomediainthevisualarts,GabrieleKnapstein(2006:25)writes:

The turn towards film by visual artists during the sixties must be seen in the context of the praxis of “expanded cinema”, and of the development of an expanded con-ception of art, one manifested beginning in the late fifties not only in the visual arts, but also in music, dance, theatre, poetry, Action Art as well as in film productions. The praxis of “expanded cinema”, as it developed during the sixties, must be seen in connection with the activities of filmmakers, visual artists, musicians, dancers, poets, theatre and action artists, activities that transgressed genre boundaries, as summed up by the concept of “Expanded Arts”, for example in 1966 in the journal Film Culture, edited by Jonas Mekas. The most diverse forms of multimedia and intermedia works have been subsumed by this term, which refers both to the expansion of individual genres, and to spatial and temporal coordinates.

FluxusartistGeorgeMaciunas’‘ExpandedArtsDiagram’(1966)offersanintriguingvisualregistertosupplementthisdescription.

[12]Conceivedasacentrepieceforameditationonandabouttheconditionsofsummer,Nouvel’stemporarystructurecommissionedfortheKensingtonGardensinLondonin2010drewuponperformativityandparticipativeusagecombinedwithheightenedsensoryma-nipulationtocreatea‘contemplatoryexperience’composedfrom‘indeliblemoments’.Inmorethanasymbolicway,the“density”ofthecolourredcelebratesthejoiedevivreandlazyrevelry;the‘pursuitofsensations’(Virilio,2010)thatcharacterizetheseasonalongsideitsdoomedephemerality:‘Reddoesn’tlast.Heatvanisheswithsummer.Energyfadesintoinertiaanddeath’(Nouvel,2010).Spatiallyandtemporally,RedPavilionisformedfromtheparadoxical“complementarity”ofenduranceandfleetingness.


VinceDziekan

[13]Writingintheexhibition’saccompanyingcatalogue,YukoHasegawaspeaksof“bodymind”asakeyconceptforunderstandingtheprocesseswherebyindividualperceptionandexperiencearetransformedintoperceptualformsexpressingcollectiveknowledgeorintellect.“Bodymind”embodiesanewrationalitypremisedoncomplexnetworks,informa-tionsharingandthedissolutionofmediaboundaries.AccordingtoHasegawa(2010:28):‘theenvironmentsurroundingusischanging.Thischangeisinfluencedtoanunprecedenteddegreebymediaandinformation,necessitatingalterationstothearchitecturalprogram’.

[14]Besidestheirresponsivelightinstallations—suchasChorus,whichisbeingfocusedupondirectlyinthistext—UnitedVisualArtists’reputationismoststronglyidentifiedwiththenotableconcertstageandlight-showsthattheyhaveproducedandrealisedforMassiveAttack(between2003–2010),Unkle(WorldTour,2004)andU2(VertigoTour,2005-06).Otherliveperformanceandevent-basedproductionshaverangedfromtheMTVEuropeanMusicAwards(Rome,2004)toEcho,an8-minuteliveperformancepiecewiththeMimbreAcrobatGrouppresentedatTateModern(London,2006)toSpeedofLight,whichwascom-missionedbyVirginMediatomarktenyearsofbroadbandintheUK(London,2010).Inadditiontoliveaudiovisualcollaborations(BecksFusions,UVAvsChemicalBrothers,2007;UVAvsMassiveAttack,2008),UVAhavedirectednumerousmusicvideosincludingColder’sToTheMusic(2006),BattlesTonto(2007)andMassiveAttack’sUnitedSnakes(2008).

[15]ChoruswasrecentlyawardedadistinctionatArsElectronicaintheinteractivecategory.

[16]VolumewasdevelopedastheresultofacommissionfromPlayStationtomarkthelaunchofthePS3.TheworkwasinstalledintheJohnMadejskiGardenenclosureoftheV&AMuseuminLondonfromNovember2006untilJanuary2007.Followingitspopularrecep-tion,VolumehastouredtointernationalvenuesincludingTaipeiandMelbourne.Additionally,theworkhasreceivedcriticalrecognitionthroughitsshort-listingintheInteractivecategoryofthe2008BritInsuranceDesignsoftheYearawardsandexhibitionheldattheDesignMuseum,London.

[17]MiraCalix(ChantalPassamonte)isanexperimentalrecordingartistwhospecialisesinmixingvocalswithexperimentalelectronictextures,orchestrationandclassicalinstru-ments.Inadditiontoherperformancesandrecordedwork,shehascollaboratedonworksfortheatreandinstallationpieces,includingUVA’sChorusandMySecretHeart(whichwasinspiredbyAllegri’s17thcenturychoralworkMiserereMei).TheoutcomeofacollaborationwithStreetwiseOperaandBritishvideoartistsFlat-EProductions,thisworkpremièredattheRoyalFestivalHallinLondonin2008.



[18]TheAssemblyRoomsattheLeedsGrandTheatreweredesignedbyarchitectsGeorgeCorsonandJamesWatsonin1879.Ostensibly,thevenuewascreatedtoprovide“respect-able”entertainment,rangingfrommagicandminstrelshowstoconcertsandmusicalsbeforebeingturnedintoacinemain1911.TheirpublicinaugurationwasmarkedbyaperformancefromthepopularstagemagicianDrH.S.Lynn,whoserepertoirewasknowntofeatureconjuringtricksandillusions.Onenotableillusion(calledPalengenesia)involvedthedisassemblyofahumanbodylimbbylimb,beforeputtingitbacktogether.Accordingtolegend,thisparticularillusionhadaformativeinfluenceupontheyoungHoudini.

[19]AccordingtoUVAarchitectAleTsolakis:

It was from the start (and still is) our ambition to orchestrate Chorus with live performance, to use it both as a stand alone ‘instrument’ and as an active choreo-graphic element. Its full potentials are still to be reached and the functions of the space could trigger a lot of them (Email correspondence with Ale Tsolakis, 16 June 2010).

Todate,ChorushasbeenreprisedinsituattheworldheritagesiteofDurhamCathe-dralaspartofArtichoke’sLumierefestival(12-15November2009)andperformedmostrecentlyinsidethemassiveindustrialsettingofarepurposedhydraulicpowerstationforTheWappingProjectinBattersea(23June2010).

[20]Developingwithinatraditiondatingbacktothe4thCentury,anewtypeofchoralmusicinvolvingmultiplemelodicpartsemergedduringtheMiddleAges.FormssuchastheGregorianChantandthemotet,whichevolvedduringtheRenaissance,weredis-tinctivedevelopmentsofthispolyphonictechnique.Themotet,forinstance,describesacompositionwithdifferenttextssungsimultaneouslyindifferentvoices.EnglishcomposerThomasTallis’exemplarychoralpiece,Speminalium(c.1570),waswrittenforeightchoirsoffivevoiceseach.

Ofcomparativeinteresttothisstudy,Tallis’compositionactsasthebasisforJanetCar-diff’scelebratedinstallation,FortyPartMotet.Cardiff’sinstallationoutlinesthecircum-ferenceofthespacewithaseriesoffortyspeakerstands.Bysettingthespeakersatanaverageheadheight,thisspatialarrangementeffectivelysubstitutesanaudiospeakerforeachsingerinthechorus,enablingthe“viewers”todifferentiatebetweeneachvoice.Astheycircumnavigatethegallery,thevoicescombineandtheauditoryexperienceseam-lesslyshiftstoanappreciationoftheirharmony.Inthisdeceptivelysimpleway,Forty-Part


VinceDziekan

MotetenablesanintimateengagementwithTallis’originalcompositionthroughanopenandpublicaestheticexperience.AsCardiffrevealsintheartist’sstatementaccompanyingElusiveParadise:TheMillenniumPrizeattheNationalGalleryofCanadaof2001:

Even in a live concert the audience is separated from the individual voices. Only the performers are able to hear the person standing next to them singing in a different harmony. I wanted to be able to ‘climb inside’ the music connecting with the separate voices. I am also interested in how the audience may choose a path through this physical yet virtual space.

[21]Astraditionhasit,overtheyearseachofthebellsofDurhamCathedralhavehadtheiruniqueweighsandpitchcharacterisedbybeingassignednamestoreflecttheirindividualpersonalities,suchas“Galilee”,“LongBell”,“St.Bede”and“St.Oswald”.

[22]EmailcorrespondencewithAleTsolakis,16June2010.

[23]ProducedinbetweentheseiterationsofChorus,UVAheldtheirfirstgalleryexhibi-tioninJune2009atSmithfieldGallery,London.TitledDeus,thisbodyofworkexploredthepotentialoflighttoredefineanenvironment,physicallyandemotionally.Theseriesoflargeformatimageswereexecutedinanefforttodistiltheexperienceoftheirinstallationworkintostillphotography.Ononelevel,theseriesofphotographsactasarecordofanumberoflightinterventionsinsecludedareasofBritain.Bydeployingartificiallightinthesurround-ingnaturallandscape,anewephemeralspaceiscreated.ThephotographicseriesrelatescloselytoMonolith,UVA’s2006lightinstallationproducedforOnedotzero’sTransvisionnightattheV&AMuseum’sJohnMadejskiGarden,aswellasconnectingwiththemusicvideocreatedforBattles’single,Tonto,inwhichartificiallightissetincontrastwithastarknaturalsetting(see:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LLAN29W-4w).

[24]McLuhan’scanonicaltextsincludeTheMechanicalBride(1951),TheGutenbergGalaxy(1961)andUnderstandingMedia(1964).Illustratinghisinfluence,HigginsreferstoMcLuhaninhis‘StatementonIntermedia’,whichwaspublishedinitiallythroughSomethingElsePressinJuly1967,whileBurnhamdoeslikewiseinhis‘SystemsEsthetics’essayforArtforuminSeptember1968.



References

Blau,Eve.‘Agencyinatmosphere’,inPeoplemeetinArchitecture–BiennaleArchitecttura2010(Venice:Marsilio,2010),38-45.

Bourriaud,Nicolas.RelationalAesthetics,trans.S.PleasanceandF.Woods(France:lespressesdureel,2002).

Burnham,Jack.‘SystemsEsthetics’,inDonnaDeSalvo(ed.)OpenSystems:RethinkingArtc.1970(London:TatePublishing,2005;1968),165-169.

Clark,MattandMedcraft,James.‘[Interview]‘,CreativeReview(2009),http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2009/june/uva-at-smithfield-gallery

Clark,MattandWhelan,Stephen.‘UVAThinkInsideTheBox[Interview]‘,DazedDigital,4June(2009),http://www.dazeddigital.com/ArtsAndCulture/article/3422/1/UVA_Think_Inside_The_Box

Dietz,Steve.‘Foreward’,inBerylGrahamandSarahCook.RethinkingCurating:ArtAfterNewMedia(Cambridge,Massachusetts:TheMITPress,2010),xiii-xv.

Graham,BerylandCook,Sarah.RethinkingCurating:ArtAfterNewMedia(TheMITPress:Cam-bridge,Massachusetts,2010).

Hasegawa,Yuko.‘Thesensibility,emotionandfluidityofthearchitecturalprogram’,inPeoplemeetinArchitecture–BiennaleArchitecttura2010(Venice:Marsilio,2010),28-37.

Higgins,Dick.‘Intermedia’,inDonnaDeSalvo(ed.)OpenSystems:RethinkingArtc.1970(London:TatePublishing,2005;1966),170-171.

Higgins,Dick.‘StatementonIntermedia’,inWolfVostell(ed.)Dé-coll/age(décollage)(Frankfurt:TyposVerlag,1967),onlinesource:http://www.artpool.hu/Fluxus/Higgins/intermedia2.html

Knapstein,Gabriele.‘FilmicProjectionsbeyondCinema:From“ExpandedCinema”totheCin-ematographicInstallation’,inJoachimJager,etal(eds.)BeyondCinema:TheArtofProjection(Ostfildern:HatjeCantzVerlag,2006),22-27.

Mackenzie,Adrian.Transductions:Bodiesandmachinesatspeed(London:Continuum,2002).

McLuhan,Marshall.‘TheRelationofEnvironmenttoAnti-Environment’,inMichelA.Moos(ed.)MediaResearch:technology,art,communication(Amsterdam:G+BArtsInternational,1997;1967),110-120.

McLuhan,Marshall.‘AcousticSpace’,inMichelA.Moos(ed.)MediaResearch:technology,art,communication(Amsterdam:G+BArtsInternational,1997;1955),39-44.

Nouvel,Jean.‘WhereAmI?WhenAmI?’,inKathrynRatteeandMelissaLarner(eds.),RedSummerinKensingtonGardens(London:KoenigBooks,2010),unpaginated.

Paik,NamJune.‘NorbertWeinerandMarshallMcLuhan’,inJohnG.HanhardtandCaitlinJones


VinceDziekan

(eds.),GlobalGroove(NewYork:GuggenheimMuseumPublications,2004;1967),facsimile.

Sejima,Kazuyo.‘Introduction’,inPeoplemeetinArchitecture–BiennaleArchitecttura2010(Venice:Marsilio,2010),14-15.

Shanken,EdwardA.‘ReprogrammingSystemsAesthetics:AStrategicHistoriography’,inAfterMedia:EmbodimentandContext–ProceedingsoftheDigitalartsandCultureConference(Irvine:UniversityofCalifornia,2009),Unpaginatedsource.

Simondon,Gilbert.OntheModeofExistenceofTechnicalObjects,trans.NinianMellamphy(London:UniversityofWesternOntario,1980;1958).

Virilio,Paul.‘AMachineVision’,inKathrynRatteeandMelissaLarner(eds.),RedSummerinKens-ingtonGardens(London:KoenigBooks,2010),unpaginated.

Whitelaw,Mitchell.’1968/1998:RethinkingaSystemsAesthetic’,ANATNewsletter#33(May1998):Unpaginatedsource.

TheLOCKSSSystemhasthepermissiontocollect,preserveandservethisopenaccessArchivalUnit

TheFibrecultureJournalispublishedunderaCreativeCommons,ByAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative

TheFibrecultureJournalisanOpenHumanitiesPressJournal.

The Fibreculture Journalfibreculturejournal.org/wp-content/pdfs/FCJ-122Vince... · 2020. 10....

Documents

Transcript of The Fibreculture Journalfibreculturejournal.org/wp-content/pdfs/FCJ-122Vince... · 2020. 10....