Jess Loseby
Since the beginning
Works in United States of America

ARTBASE (3)
BIO
Jess Loseby is a digital artist from the UK whose main medium is the internet. Her work ranges from small and intimate online installationsto large scale digital projections and video. In a relatively brief time, her work has become known internationally such as the ‘cyber-kitchen’ (lead artist and co-curator) and ‘the Digital Pocket’ (lead artist and co-curator), which is currently listed in the Whitney Artport. In August 2003, she became the first virtual artist in residence at Furtherfield.org (FurtherStudio) one of the first virtual artists residencies of its kind. She has exhibited in digital festivals such as the Split Film Festival, Pixxelpoint 2003, FILE 2003 and the Stuttgart Filmwinter. In 2003 she created interactive digital sets for the production of ‘The Dadaists’ at The Met Theater in Hollywood. Also in 2003 she was also awarded a grant from the Daniel Langlois Foundation, with the resulting work 'views from the ground floor...' being currently exhibited internationally.

Thematically, her projects continue her fascination with borderlands and ‘beautiful seams’ between the ubiquitous worlds of computing and the ‘real’ (domestic). A staunch opponent of new media's absorption with VR, her on and offline installations create flows and streams in the relational space of art and technology. Loseby’s unashamedly low-tech approach to new media build comparisons of the network and digitally (in its frustrations, attention to triviality and repetition) as absurdly compatible to the female domestic routine.

Jess Loseby has 3 children, 2 wheels, 1 husband and 0 days off.

Discussions (201) Opportunities (2) Events (1) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: Re: curating the curators


Hi Ivan,

My feeling is that currently the remit
> > of many of these these grants etc are watered down versions of the
> > conditions set by offline institution/curators as to what is 'hip' and 'net'.
>
> And our beloved Furtherfield are already there. Good luck to all of them and
> to everyone who ever had a dream and took some money off the state to get it
> organised. But shame on everyone who then made a career out of it, ending up
> needing an annual fix in order to pay the mortgage (thats the bureaucrats,
> not the artists).
Well you know I can never big up furtherfield enough, not only in their
open and 'level playing field' curating but how the are working their
arses off both in and out of the 'establishment' to create it. I think the
primary difference is that furtherfield actually care about both the art
and the artists. My bet is that if anyone is going to get 'heard' it will be
them - just because of who they are.

> > cultural VOOOOOOOIDDD - no idea what you are talking about here,
> > sorry:-)
>
> Oh, shame on you :)
I know - bloody ignorant:-)
j.

o
/^ rssgallery.com
][

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: curating the curators


Hi curt,

> Although I can't see into anybody's soul, I disagree. It's
> definitely not about the money, because there's no great money in it
> unless your name is Hirst.
I hesitate to say, because I know so little about you but that sounds like
a position of privilege.
The 'no great money' is usually between $500 -$20,000 in the kinds of
various institutional grants, commissions etc. Not enough to live on (as
you might get maybe one a year if you are very lucky) but that can
make all difference in the world to being able to continue. In the circle of
artists I'm working with most of us are clubbing together to do net/on &
offline exhibitions or projects that might bring in $50 - $400 max but this
keeps the ISP's fed and watered (not to mention the kids:-)
I really don't know these artists that you are talking about who are fame-
mongering. Particularly in the UK, people are too busy balancing art &
the tescos budget to bother about which curators christmas card list
their on.

Granted, it's micro-scene famewhoring;
> it's academic, upper-crust famewhoring; but a lot of still smells
> like famewhoring to me. But then one can do good work and desire
> fame too. It's just tricky.
There is a divide here in the uk but its more and institutional clique. Its
about where you live (outside london - you poor thing) where you
studied (only london post-grad need apply) and social (I'm sorry but our
email list is closed unless you live in chelsea) It not famewhoring - they
already think they are.
>

> Agreed about the wack post-modern requisites, but you still miss my
> point. Willy Wonka observed, "We are the music makers, and we are
> the dreamers of the dreams."
willy wonker or gene wilder?:-)

One might remix it, "We are the
> curators, and we are the promoters of the cool stuff." If it's about
> the money, networked artist collectives can apply for and
> re-distribute grant money from governments the same as brick & mortar
> galleries. Turbulence, Low-Res, and even our beloved Rhizome are
> already there.
True, but (and with the exception of turbulence who I think are the most
open and diverse of curators) I think we need to look at a) why the have
chosen the projects they have chosen and b) how successful these
projects have been (as I said before) as artworks that will attract,
endure and if 'deserve' the funds. My feeling is that currently the remit
of many of these these grants etc are watered down versions of the
conditions set by offline institution/curators as to what is 'hip' and 'net'.
Its not sour grapes in a 'why not me', as I have been lucky enough to
just be awarded a grant from a canadian new media organization which
is fantastic and guarantees both that I can make work (without the aid of
the british DHSS) and feed my family for the next 6 months (and buy a
decent graphics card:-). But if I make some very hip, very funky
mindless cyber-fluff then I want everyone to bloody demand I pay every
cent back as I not only would have squandered a fantastic opportunity
but would have added to the growing pile of institutionally funded,
playfull, soulless, shite that has less longevity than the latest levi ad.
(not to beat around the bush at all:-)

> If it's about going down in the academic record, that's a tougher nut
> to crack. But there are other ways to be remembered that are no less
> valid. The White Stripes are the new Stooges. How do I know the
> Stooges? Because there is more than one agreed upon artistic
> cultural archive.
cultural VOOOOOOOIDDD - no idea what you are talking about here,
sorry:-)

jess

my additions to your quote list
"you can't built a reputation on what you are going to do..." Henry Ford

"everybody knows it sucks to grow up" Ben Folds

" a man who does not make mistakes does not usually make anything"
William Conner Magee

"all the world is odd save thee and me, and even thou art a little queer."
Robert Owen

o
/^ rssgallery.com
][

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: curating the curators


<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">hi curt,</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">I'm not entirely convinced of the
connection between my 'musing' and</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">the the graphic world bylines you
raise. Although I have to say, re-
reading my thoughts out of context it sounded like I was knocking e8z
(Bloggers words, not mine) and asking how net artists could get 'picked
up' by the institutions. Hopefully, it didn't read like that entirety as I was
hoping to look at new media curation in its dictation of the form, rather
than bemoaning the loss of potential fame for net artists.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Having said that, I think most net
artists&#160; would be pleased with
institutional financial support (via the kind of commissions walker was
giving out before) but don't give a rats arse in terms of being
'discovered'. I don't agree that there there is a lot of jostling for fame
within the 'net-centric artists' as you say. Jostling for money when the
calls that have a stipend attached, yes, but not for fame.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> I know there is always some who long
for riches rather than just a
money to keep doing what they want to do, but if that's whats important
to them they will definitely have more luck in popular design and good
luck to them. Design a good advert and you can win more awards than
Peter Jackson. I know you have often said that if artists had day jobs
then sponserhip (whether institutions or corporate)&#160; wouldn't come into
it, but I for one already have a day job and it will never buy me the
bigger hard drive I need;-)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">I think your are right in the web
is the &quot; great equalizer that allows self-
publishing and micro-markets without the need for institutional
approval?&quot; and that's certainly what brought me on here, but its hard
when curators are filtering out thematics like love, faith, emotion,
intimacy. Not only because it makes working on the net more like a
military campaign than a medium, but because it excludes so much of
the basic human conditions that encourage longevity and life in both
artworks and viewers desire to see more....</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">jess.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> o</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">/^ rssgallery.com</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> ][</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" size="1"><span style="font-size:8pt">http://www.rssgallery.com/trivialconnections/index.html</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/>
</div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Date sent:&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;Wed, 14 May 2003 13:14:06 -0400</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">To:&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;list@rhizome.org</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">From:&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;curt cloninger &lt;curt@lab404.com&gt;</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Subject:&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;RHIZOME_RAW: Re: curating
the curators</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Send reply to:&#160; &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;curt
cloninger &lt;curt@lab404.com&gt;</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; Jess Muses: </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; &quot;What I
wonder is how, despite this list, despite all the other lists we all belong to and despite our own work
independently as artists - is how we get heard.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt;&#160; But what
about the curators? In their bid to keep the NEW in new media, textual combinations seem constrained;
unsettling playfulness, shocking subversion and...what then&amp;# ?? Have Bloggers patronisation of
say, E8Z's 'old fashioned themes' or Dietz's self styled curatorial 'filter' finally
literally sieved out what makes net and new media so rounded.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; I have never
though the net 'needs' the institutions, but without their input my fear is the kind of sthetic gameplay
of Amerika &amp; PS2 will be the only sources of substantial sponsership and longevity that will remain.&quot;</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; In the graphic
design world, everybody has a byline, because all marketers must have a byline.&#160; Jeffrey Zeldman
(web standards wonk and someone whose blog gets more traffic in a day then rhizome gets in a month),
Jeffrey's byline is &quot;the independent content producer refuses to die.&quot;</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; This was his
byline well before the dot com crash.&#160; He and other &quot;independent content producers&quot; talk
at these web design conferences about independent content production, and they are inevitably asked,
&quot;What's the angle?&#160; How do you get rich and famous producing your own content and giving it
away?&quot;&#160; The answer is, &quot;You don't.&#160; You just run your online magazine, or your experimental
design site, or your blog, because you love to do it.&quot;&#160; Jeffrey divides the web into two camps
-- &quot;for profit&quot; sites, and &quot;for love&quot; sites.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; Ian McKay of
Fugazi and Minor Threat fame started Dischord Records to release the music of DC punk bands (the history
of Dischord is here: http://www.dischord.com/about/ ).&#160; The Dischord CDs sell in stores for $9
as opposed to the usual $16.&#160; They say on the label &quot;this CD is $8.99 postpaid
from...&quot; and then the Dischord contact information is listed.&#160; Fugazi and Minor Threat have
already secured their place in the pop music canon, punk sub-genre.&#160; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; Peter Max and
Ralph Steadman don't prize their CV list of solo shows (although I'm sure they've&#160; had plenty of
shows).&#160; They have a string of famous posters and designs that have influenced the direction of
popular illustration and design, and that's enough.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; Isn't the web
supposed to be the great equalizer that allows self-publishing and micro-markets without the need for
institutional approval?&#160; And yet here are all these self-proclaimed net-centric artists jonesing
to get &quot;discovered&quot; by what seems to me the art world equivalent of some A&amp;R angel
from Warner Bros. Records.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br/></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> o</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">/^ rssgallery.com</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> ][</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>

DISCUSSION

Re: Report from User_Mode Symposium


As User_Mode concluded,, it became clear
emotional connections with technology and interface is
whatever
User_Mode represented
a collection of
innovative
cross-disciplinary speakers still remain human
social,
individual and global
we interact emotionally with each other ,the technology we
use, and
our everyday experience
Can the technological artist be an
important
? We may never but
ultimately, events
like User_Mode deconstruct production

> Report from User_Mode
> Emotion and Intuition in Art and Design Symposium
> May 9-11, 2003
> Tate Modern & London Science Museum, London, UK
> http://www.usermode.net
>
> By Jonah Brucker-Cohen (jonah@coin-operated.com)
>
> Set in the blood red upholstered venue of the Tate Modern's Starr
> auditorium and amid the futuristic light-arrays of the London Science
> Museum's Wellcome Wing, the 3-day User_Mode conference on emotion and
> intuition in art and design kicked off with a wide array of over 30
> speakers spanning disciplines in art, design, textiles, fashion,
> research, science, and even osmology. The event's theme centered on
> how emotional design and aesthetics intersect digital art practice
> and covered everything from audience engagement, subjectivity and
> interactive experience, immersion, social ecology, and shared
> communication systems over distance. Despite the looming threat of
> information overload, the event turned out to be both entertaining,
> provocative, and despite a few lapses of focus along panels, created
> a positive forum for active discussions to occur.
>
> The opening panel, "Poetics and the Spectacle" began with chair,
> David Ross' (Beacon Cultural Project), opening address on the history
> of art practice and his belief that despite technological changes in
> expressive forms, all art engenders interactive traits. He seemed
> adamant about the aging view that designates the artist's role into
> one that changes experience into moments of "sublime intimacy" and
> that available technology is less important than the time period in
> which art exists and reflects upon. Of the presenters, artist Simon
> Biggs, who presented Babel, a browser for navigating the Internet
> using the Dewey decimal system, favored the term "reader" over "user"
> to explain the process of interaction with his work. This approach
> was telling when fellow panelist, Masaki Fujihata (Japan) described
> his most recent "Field:Work" GPS video mapping project, as a method
> of showing how multiple perspectives in location-based systems
> creates a greater sense of individual appreciation and understanding
> of the work. According to Fujihata, it's not enough to experience the
> work from outside, but to also gain new perspectives within. Fujihata
> proved this best when he placed five apples on the lectern as a
> metaphor for describing abstraction using real objects.
>
> Focusing on the internal nature of "Interactivity & Subjectivity",
> the next panel lead by Irene McAra-McWilliam (IA/RCA), spoke about
> how the depth of human memory relies on our ability to both to store
> and forget information and how this relates to the design of future
> human/machine interfaces. Taking no prisoners, RCA researcher,
> Brendan Walker gave a sermon-like speech into the phenomenology of
> "thrill", examining both the ethnographic question of cultural
> dependence on high-risk interfaces and addiction to integrating a
> "thrill" quotient into our everyday lives to escape personal
> realities. Afterwards, artist Stuart Jones instigated discussion when
> he postulated that interactive systems might lose their authorship to
> audiences, and that "users" end up being puppets of the author's
> predetermined system. This relationship seems to be constantly
> changing as artists focus on generative systems of interaction where
> the experience itself shifts along with the content of the
> interaction.
>
> The opening day's final panel explored sensory experience and the
> body. Speakers included Crispin Jones' pain-based fortuneteller table
> to Jenny Tillotson and George Dodd's smell-based wearables featuring
> a model walking around the stage with activated shoes and perfume
> emitting garments. When Dodd gleefully exclaimed, "We are surrounded
> by smells", chuckles filled the auditorium, but his focus was more on
> how adding a sense of smell to digital interfaces can augment our
> emotional attachment to machines and seemingly banal interactions.
>
> After a long night, and little sleep, day two began on a charged note
> with the "Aesthetics" panel which I was lucky enough to participate
> in along with fellow panelists Joshua Davis and Lev Manovich. Lev
> opened the panel with a humorous and extensive slide show of objects
> of representation such as the classic Mac SE and industrial machinery
> that signify fundamental shifts in artistic representation through
> the last century. In contrast, Davis began with a video of his
> self-blinding food coloring antics to illustrate the beauty of
> unexpected outcomes and went on to describe his forays into
> generative Flash animation systems that create unique outputs based
> on simple rule sets. My talk focused on how physical networks exploit
> conventional connectivity cliches and covered some of my recent
> projects including Desktop Subversibles, which looks at shifting
> normal desktop relationships by networking everyday activities like
> copy/paste and mouse movements.
>
> Delving deeper into concepts of data visualization and sonification
> of virtual environments was the "Immersion and Self" panel, led by
> Banff Centre's New Media Director Sara Diamond. Artist Golan Levin
> opened the session with his view that immersive experience "thickens"
> our point of view while he showed examples of his collaborative work,
> "The Secret Life of Numbers", as well as previews of his new
> graphical vocalization project, "Mesa Di Vocce". Looking at voice
> translation from text to speech over networks, installation artist
> Susan Collins described her "In Conversation", which featured a
> net-connected mouth projected onto the pavement of a busy sidewalk,
> as an open system where the street meets the public space of the
> network. Her most recent work on the "Tate in Space" project
> amplified this belief that new contexts for artistic mediation add
> dimensionality to interactive work. Finally, Selectparks' Julian
> Oliver described his work in building custom game engines and levels
> that exist both as virtual prosthetics to existing architectures as
> well as provide social dimensions to games by associating them with
> real locations.
>
> Examining the social ecologies and matrices of interactive art,
> another panel featured speakers interested in representation of space
> and experience within distinct situations. FoAm, represented by Nat
> Muller, explained the contextual theory behind their "TxOom" project
> - a collaborative performance held inside an old hippodrome in Great
> Yarmouth. Peter Higgins of London's Land Design Studio, explained how
> creating projects for public spaces often determines the range and
> durability of the piece, while Tobi Schneidler's presentation on the
> Remote Home (remotehome.org) was a closer look at the implications of
> interactivity within the private context of networked living spaces.
> Finally, Natalie Bookchin and Jacqueline Stevens presented their
> outline for "Citizen's Dillema", a rule-based political foray into
> multi-player online games where citizens are given voting rights to
> configure the world. All of these works addressed context, without
> which most lose meaning, a danger that digital art often falls victim.
>
> Rounding out the conference, day three took visitors to the London
> Science Museum where discussions centered on the collective conscious
> of everyday life in networks and communication medium. The opening
> presentation was given by a Macintosh II computer's text to speech
> interpreter while Arthur Elsenaar sat still with electrodes connected
> to his face. By sending electrical pulses to his cheeks, the computer
> could theoretically control his facial expressions. Juxtaposing this
> idea of computer mediated emotion to siphoning human emotion through
> connected, abstract objects, was the Faraway Project's use of
> connection relationships to illustrate methods of intimate distant
> interaction. Lastly, Anthony Burrill of friendchip.com, added some
> non-sequitor examples of how simple models of complex systems can be
> emotional when he played a spliced and note separated version of "Hey
> Mickey".
>
> As User_Mode concluded, it became clear that the true value of
> emotional connections with technology and interface is whatever
> personal experiences can be brought to the surface through this
> interaction. User_Mode represented a collection of innovative
> cross-disciplinary speakers attempting to answer the fundamental
> question of whether or not technology exists to improve the overall
> quality of life. Fundamental questions still remain for debate such
> as: How do we connect human experience to technology? How do social,
> cultural, geographical, individual and global differences affect how
> we interact emotionally with each other ,the technology we use, and
> our everyday experience? Can the technological artist be an important
> instigator in this debate? We may never agree, but ultimately, events
> like User_Mode help to establish discourse that attempts to include
> all disciplines by deconstructing cultural production into its most
> basic forms.
>
> -Jonah Brucker-Cohen (jonah@coin-operated.com)
>

o
/^ rssgallery.com
][

DISCUSSION

Re: Report from User_Mode Symposium


As User_Mode concluded, it became clear that the true
value of
emotional connections with technology and interface is
whatever
personal experiences can be brought to the surface through
this
interaction. User_Mode represented a collection of
innovative
cross-disciplinary speakers attempting to answer the
fundamental
question of whether or not technology exists to improve the
overall
quality of life. Fundamental questions still remain for debate
such
as: How do we connect human experience to technology?
How do social,
cultural, geographical, individual and global differences
affect how
we interact emotionally with each other ,the technology we
use, and
our everyday experience? Can the technological artist be an
important
instigator in this debate? We may never agree, but
ultimately, events
like User_Mode help to establish discourse that attempts to
include
all disciplines by deconstructing cultural production into its
most
basic forms.

> Report from User_Mode
> Emotion and Intuition in Art and Design Symposium
> May 9-11, 2003
> Tate Modern & London Science Museum, London, UK
> http://www.usermode.net
>
> By Jonah Brucker-Cohen (jonah@coin-operated.com)
>
> Set in the blood red upholstered venue of the Tate Modern's Starr
> auditorium and amid the futuristic light-arrays of the London Science
> Museum's Wellcome Wing, the 3-day User_Mode conference on emotion and
> intuition in art and design kicked off with a wide array of over 30
> speakers spanning disciplines in art, design, textiles, fashion,
> research, science, and even osmology. The event's theme centered on
> how emotional design and aesthetics intersect digital art practice
> and covered everything from audience engagement, subjectivity and
> interactive experience, immersion, social ecology, and shared
> communication systems over distance. Despite the looming threat of
> information overload, the event turned out to be both entertaining,
> provocative, and despite a few lapses of focus along panels, created
> a positive forum for active discussions to occur.
>
> The opening panel, "Poetics and the Spectacle" began with chair,
> David Ross' (Beacon Cultural Project), opening address on the history
> of art practice and his belief that despite technological changes in
> expressive forms, all art engenders interactive traits. He seemed
> adamant about the aging view that designates the artist's role into
> one that changes experience into moments of "sublime intimacy" and
> that available technology is less important than the time period in
> which art exists and reflects upon. Of the presenters, artist Simon
> Biggs, who presented Babel, a browser for navigating the Internet
> using the Dewey decimal system, favored the term "reader" over "user"
> to explain the process of interaction with his work. This approach
> was telling when fellow panelist, Masaki Fujihata (Japan) described
> his most recent "Field:Work" GPS video mapping project, as a method
> of showing how multiple perspectives in location-based systems
> creates a greater sense of individual appreciation and understanding
> of the work. According to Fujihata, it's not enough to experience the
> work from outside, but to also gain new perspectives within. Fujihata
> proved this best when he placed five apples on the lectern as a
> metaphor for describing abstraction using real objects.
>
> Focusing on the internal nature of "Interactivity & Subjectivity",
> the next panel lead by Irene McAra-McWilliam (IA/RCA), spoke about
> how the depth of human memory relies on our ability to both to store
> and forget information and how this relates to the design of future
> human/machine interfaces. Taking no prisoners, RCA researcher,
> Brendan Walker gave a sermon-like speech into the phenomenology of
> "thrill", examining both the ethnographic question of cultural
> dependence on high-risk interfaces and addiction to integrating a
> "thrill" quotient into our everyday lives to escape personal
> realities. Afterwards, artist Stuart Jones instigated discussion when
> he postulated that interactive systems might lose their authorship to
> audiences, and that "users" end up being puppets of the author's
> predetermined system. This relationship seems to be constantly
> changing as artists focus on generative systems of interaction where
> the experience itself shifts along with the content of the
> interaction.
>
> The opening day's final panel explored sensory experience and the
> body. Speakers included Crispin Jones' pain-based fortuneteller table
> to Jenny Tillotson and George Dodd's smell-based wearables featuring
> a model walking around the stage with activated shoes and perfume
> emitting garments. When Dodd gleefully exclaimed, "We are surrounded
> by smells", chuckles filled the auditorium, but his focus was more on
> how adding a sense of smell to digital interfaces can augment our
> emotional attachment to machines and seemingly banal interactions.
>
> After a long night, and little sleep, day two began on a charged note
> with the "Aesthetics" panel which I was lucky enough to participate
> in along with fellow panelists Joshua Davis and Lev Manovich. Lev
> opened the panel with a humorous and extensive slide show of objects
> of representation such as the classic Mac SE and industrial machinery
> that signify fundamental shifts in artistic representation through
> the last century. In contrast, Davis began with a video of his
> self-blinding food coloring antics to illustrate the beauty of
> unexpected outcomes and went on to describe his forays into
> generative Flash animation systems that create unique outputs based
> on simple rule sets. My talk focused on how physical networks exploit
> conventional connectivity cliches and covered some of my recent
> projects including Desktop Subversibles, which looks at shifting
> normal desktop relationships by networking everyday activities like
> copy/paste and mouse movements.
>
> Delving deeper into concepts of data visualization and sonification
> of virtual environments was the "Immersion and Self" panel, led by
> Banff Centre's New Media Director Sara Diamond. Artist Golan Levin
> opened the session with his view that immersive experience "thickens"
> our point of view while he showed examples of his collaborative work,
> "The Secret Life of Numbers", as well as previews of his new
> graphical vocalization project, "Mesa Di Vocce". Looking at voice
> translation from text to speech over networks, installation artist
> Susan Collins described her "In Conversation", which featured a
> net-connected mouth projected onto the pavement of a busy sidewalk,
> as an open system where the street meets the public space of the
> network. Her most recent work on the "Tate in Space" project
> amplified this belief that new contexts for artistic mediation add
> dimensionality to interactive work. Finally, Selectparks' Julian
> Oliver described his work in building custom game engines and levels
> that exist both as virtual prosthetics to existing architectures as
> well as provide social dimensions to games by associating them with
> real locations.
>
> Examining the social ecologies and matrices of interactive art,
> another panel featured speakers interested in representation of space
> and experience within distinct situations. FoAm, represented by Nat
> Muller, explained the contextual theory behind their "TxOom" project
> - a collaborative performance held inside an old hippodrome in Great
> Yarmouth. Peter Higgins of London's Land Design Studio, explained how
> creating projects for public spaces often determines the range and
> durability of the piece, while Tobi Schneidler's presentation on the
> Remote Home (remotehome.org) was a closer look at the implications of
> interactivity within the private context of networked living spaces.
> Finally, Natalie Bookchin and Jacqueline Stevens presented their
> outline for "Citizen's Dillema", a rule-based political foray into
> multi-player online games where citizens are given voting rights to
> configure the world. All of these works addressed context, without
> which most lose meaning, a danger that digital art often falls victim.
>
> Rounding out the conference, day three took visitors to the London
> Science Museum where discussions centered on the collective conscious
> of everyday life in networks and communication medium. The opening
> presentation was given by a Macintosh II computer's text to speech
> interpreter while Arthur Elsenaar sat still with electrodes connected
> to his face. By sending electrical pulses to his cheeks, the computer
> could theoretically control his facial expressions. Juxtaposing this
> idea of computer mediated emotion to siphoning human emotion through
> connected, abstract objects, was the Faraway Project's use of
> connection relationships to illustrate methods of intimate distant
> interaction. Lastly, Anthony Burrill of friendchip.com, added some
> non-sequitor examples of how simple models of complex systems can be
> emotional when he played a spliced and note separated version of "Hey
> Mickey".
>
> As User_Mode concluded, it became clear that the true value of
> emotional connections with technology and interface is whatever
> personal experiences can be brought to the surface through this
> interaction. User_Mode represented a collection of innovative
> cross-disciplinary speakers attempting to answer the fundamental
> question of whether or not technology exists to improve the overall
> quality of life. Fundamental questions still remain for debate such
> as: How do we connect human experience to technology? How do social,
> cultural, geographical, individual and global differences affect how
> we interact emotionally with each other ,the technology we use, and
> our everyday experience? Can the technological artist be an important
> instigator in this debate? We may never agree, but ultimately, events
> like User_Mode help to establish discourse that attempts to include
> all disciplines by deconstructing cultural production into its most
> basic forms.
>
> -Jonah Brucker-Cohen (jonah@coin-operated.com)
>

o
/^ rssgallery.com
][