Teoria/Theory
Different forms of Conceptual Art: Ars Systematis
1 Strategies
This project, Ars Systematis, aspires to work with “interactive metaphors” as a way of communicating by non-visual means ideas or concepts 1. Different from conceptual art per se, where concept is expressed by textual, formational or pictorial means, Ars Systematis searches for a form of interaction between observer and concept; a hermetic system where “action” leads to “reaction”. In other words, creating a different approach to the dated conceptual art and its current manifestations; an art form obsessed with avant-gardism’s and the old art for arts’ sake (Ars gratia artis).
The purpose of this art form, the conceptual art, is to communicate a concept or an idea. However, with the latest brand of avant-garde, concept is secondary to the image. Moreover, avant-garde based on the assumption that we should have our senses challenge by new forms of representation, usually defined by visual aesthetic forms, concept is not only less important than the art object, but also a gimmick (Stallabrass. 1999: p103). Consequently, we should communicate in a different way and not fall on the same repeated strategy of visual transgression.
This non-visual, but rather sensuous conceptual representation arises from some observations related to the nature of art itself 2. Despite the claims of “the end of art”, the art world, its market and its exhibitions thrive as a whole (Artprice. 2006). Yet, art and its theory seems to be for the past two decades criticized by both public and critics as a fetish and commercial activity. (Burgin. 1986; Stallabrass. 1999). Etymologically, the word “art” derives from the Latin word Ars, originally used to define ways and methods of doing and executing something. The original concept, however, is transformed during the Classical period when Ars becomes Art as a unified and hierarchical sphere that, until now, became our traditional understanding of art per se. (Rancière. 2004). Conceptual Art and some of its forms, however, seems to confront in many ways the traditional conception of art (Stallabrass. 2003). Yet, the intention of this project is not to analyze why or how art became entangled on the battle between pessimists and fetishists. Instead, we should rethink on an art form that could be representative of our current ‘information society’ (Castells. 1996).
Regarding its medium, Ars Systematis will focus on the qualities of new media. Being extremely related to our current way of production (Castells. 1996), one could even think on the possibility that new media or digital media not only relates, but is also possible by our time in history. Choices and possibilities are immense. In a practical sense, no other medium can afford the necessary interaction between idea/concept and observer (We will, later on this text, see the practicalities of this choice). Furthermore, some new media qualities implement Conceptual Art. In a comment on Manovich (2001: p226-7), Stallabrass says that:
“The break from the aesthetics of the isolated art object and the move towards an art of discursive process that was begun by Conceptual Art could be completed online where provisional, ever-changing character of material is taken for granted. As Manovich puts it in his meditation on the database form, historically, artists made unique objects in particular media in which interface and content were inseparable (and in the assimilation of Conceptual Art, we may say that they congealed) In the new media, the content of the work and the interface are separated; a work in new can be understood as the construction of an interface to a database (Stallabrass. 2003: p27)”.
2 Technicalities
Decided the medium appropriate, we should now concentrate on the practical aspect of this project. In order to achieve interactive metaphors or interactive concepts we should have an environment where an observer acts on a concept. This event is just worthy if the concept per se would react this interaction between observer and concept. As commented above on this essay, in other to escape the adversities of visual representation, we should focus on other channels of communication. In first instance, sound seems to be an appropriate form of interaction. Its availability in many digital devices and its familiarity with humans’ most basic form of communication, gives sound the advantaged in being available, familiar and non-visual.
On the simple level of interaction (action/reaction), closed, hermetic systems necessarily convert any action in reaction. Many examples of similar systems already exist, in the digital realm, and are called programs. Recently, new programming languages made possible for artists to engage with new media. Therefore, not only relying on off the shelve software but opening the possibilities for the artist own software. In its most clear examples of possibilities we have Pure Data or PD 3 and Processing 4. Those two platforms are both free of charge and the result of collaborative work. They also contain a vast library of reference for their respective software and hardware, something especially useful for inexperience users when it comes to learning their languages and procedures. In order to capture data from the observers’ interaction, we could cite a long list of examples of simple digital devices that can be connected with the artist software: Infrared sensors; ultrasound sensors; digital cameras; accelerometers; potentiometers; LDR light sensors; NTC heat sensors…Finally, its important to note that the outcome of this project is a pure experimental art form, both theoretical and methodological. We might achieve a different form of conceptualism, both in theory and practise. It might be that we have a performatic act rather than a perceptual one. Any early conclusion is mere speculative.
Notes
1 Despite the fact that many of his points could be challenged, in his ‘Sentences on Conceptual Art’, Sol LeWitt gives a clear definition between concept and idea, where ‘The former implies a general direction while the latter are the components. Ideas implement the concept.’ (1969 cited in Harrison and Wood. 1992: 850)
2 However, this project does not attempt to reconcile art and its favourite last subject, art for arts’ sake. It is clear that the quest for art sphere limits became irrelevant once all subjects are equal; a priori there is no reason for exploring different paths. This is a comment that derives from the observation of the aesthetic regime of the arts as described by Rancière (2004).
3 His developer, Miller Puckette, describes Pure Data as being
“designed to to offer an extremely unstructured environment for describing data structures and their graphical appearance. The underlying idea is to allow the user to display any kind of data he or she wants to, associating it in any way with the display (Puckette 2004).”
4 Started in 2004 by Ben Fry and Casey Reas, Processing aims to:
“teach fundamentals of computer programming within a visual context and to serve as a software sketchbook and professional production tool. Processing is developed by artists and designers as an alternative to proprietary software tools in the same domain (Processing.org. 2006)”.
Bibliography
Artprice. (2006), Art Market Trends 2005, (Internet), Artprice.com, Available from http://img1.artprice.com/pdf/Trends2005.pdf (Accessed 20 November, 2006)
Burgin, V. (1986), The end of Arts Theory, London: Macmillan Press
Castells, M. (1996), The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Rise of the Network Society Vol 1, 2nd ed. London: Blackwell Publishers
Harrison and Wood. (1992), Art in Theory 1900-2000, 2nd ed. Blackwell Publishing
Manovich, L. (2001), The Language of New Media, The MIT Press
Processing. (2006), (Internet), Processing.org, Available from http://www.processing.org (Accessed 27 November, 2006)
Puckette, M. (2004), Using PD as a score language, (Internet), University of California, San Diego, Available from http://www.crca.ucsd.edu/~msp/Publications/icmc02.dir/icmc02.html (Accessed 19 November, 2006)
Rancière J. Trans Rockwill, G. (2004), The Politics of Aesthetics, London: Continuun
Stallabrass, J. (2003), Internet Art: The Online Clash of Culture and Commerce, London: Tate Publishing
Stallabrass, J. (1999), High Art Lite, London: Verso
1 Strategies
This project, Ars Systematis, aspires to work with “interactive metaphors” as a way of communicating by non-visual means ideas or concepts 1. Different from conceptual art per se, where concept is expressed by textual, formational or pictorial means, Ars Systematis searches for a form of interaction between observer and concept; a hermetic system where “action” leads to “reaction”. In other words, creating a different approach to the dated conceptual art and its current manifestations; an art form obsessed with avant-gardism’s and the old art for arts’ sake (Ars gratia artis).
The purpose of this art form, the conceptual art, is to communicate a concept or an idea. However, with the latest brand of avant-garde, concept is secondary to the image. Moreover, avant-garde based on the assumption that we should have our senses challenge by new forms of representation, usually defined by visual aesthetic forms, concept is not only less important than the art object, but also a gimmick (Stallabrass. 1999: p103). Consequently, we should communicate in a different way and not fall on the same repeated strategy of visual transgression.
This non-visual, but rather sensuous conceptual representation arises from some observations related to the nature of art itself 2. Despite the claims of “the end of art”, the art world, its market and its exhibitions thrive as a whole (Artprice. 2006). Yet, art and its theory seems to be for the past two decades criticized by both public and critics as a fetish and commercial activity. (Burgin. 1986; Stallabrass. 1999). Etymologically, the word “art” derives from the Latin word Ars, originally used to define ways and methods of doing and executing something. The original concept, however, is transformed during the Classical period when Ars becomes Art as a unified and hierarchical sphere that, until now, became our traditional understanding of art per se. (Rancière. 2004). Conceptual Art and some of its forms, however, seems to confront in many ways the traditional conception of art (Stallabrass. 2003). Yet, the intention of this project is not to analyze why or how art became entangled on the battle between pessimists and fetishists. Instead, we should rethink on an art form that could be representative of our current ‘information society’ (Castells. 1996).
Regarding its medium, Ars Systematis will focus on the qualities of new media. Being extremely related to our current way of production (Castells. 1996), one could even think on the possibility that new media or digital media not only relates, but is also possible by our time in history. Choices and possibilities are immense. In a practical sense, no other medium can afford the necessary interaction between idea/concept and observer (We will, later on this text, see the practicalities of this choice). Furthermore, some new media qualities implement Conceptual Art. In a comment on Manovich (2001: p226-7), Stallabrass says that:
“The break from the aesthetics of the isolated art object and the move towards an art of discursive process that was begun by Conceptual Art could be completed online where provisional, ever-changing character of material is taken for granted. As Manovich puts it in his meditation on the database form, historically, artists made unique objects in particular media in which interface and content were inseparable (and in the assimilation of Conceptual Art, we may say that they congealed) In the new media, the content of the work and the interface are separated; a work in new can be understood as the construction of an interface to a database (Stallabrass. 2003: p27)”.
2 Technicalities
Decided the medium appropriate, we should now concentrate on the practical aspect of this project. In order to achieve interactive metaphors or interactive concepts we should have an environment where an observer acts on a concept. This event is just worthy if the concept per se would react this interaction between observer and concept. As commented above on this essay, in other to escape the adversities of visual representation, we should focus on other channels of communication. In first instance, sound seems to be an appropriate form of interaction. Its availability in many digital devices and its familiarity with humans’ most basic form of communication, gives sound the advantaged in being available, familiar and non-visual.
On the simple level of interaction (action/reaction), closed, hermetic systems necessarily convert any action in reaction. Many examples of similar systems already exist, in the digital realm, and are called programs. Recently, new programming languages made possible for artists to engage with new media. Therefore, not only relying on off the shelve software but opening the possibilities for the artist own software. In its most clear examples of possibilities we have Pure Data or PD 3 and Processing 4. Those two platforms are both free of charge and the result of collaborative work. They also contain a vast library of reference for their respective software and hardware, something especially useful for inexperience users when it comes to learning their languages and procedures. In order to capture data from the observers’ interaction, we could cite a long list of examples of simple digital devices that can be connected with the artist software: Infrared sensors; ultrasound sensors; digital cameras; accelerometers; potentiometers; LDR light sensors; NTC heat sensors…Finally, its important to note that the outcome of this project is a pure experimental art form, both theoretical and methodological. We might achieve a different form of conceptualism, both in theory and practise. It might be that we have a performatic act rather than a perceptual one. Any early conclusion is mere speculative.
Notes
1 Despite the fact that many of his points could be challenged, in his ‘Sentences on Conceptual Art’, Sol LeWitt gives a clear definition between concept and idea, where ‘The former implies a general direction while the latter are the components. Ideas implement the concept.’ (1969 cited in Harrison and Wood. 1992: 850)
2 However, this project does not attempt to reconcile art and its favourite last subject, art for arts’ sake. It is clear that the quest for art sphere limits became irrelevant once all subjects are equal; a priori there is no reason for exploring different paths. This is a comment that derives from the observation of the aesthetic regime of the arts as described by Rancière (2004).
3 His developer, Miller Puckette, describes Pure Data as being
“designed to to offer an extremely unstructured environment for describing data structures and their graphical appearance. The underlying idea is to allow the user to display any kind of data he or she wants to, associating it in any way with the display (Puckette 2004).”
4 Started in 2004 by Ben Fry and Casey Reas, Processing aims to:
“teach fundamentals of computer programming within a visual context and to serve as a software sketchbook and professional production tool. Processing is developed by artists and designers as an alternative to proprietary software tools in the same domain (Processing.org. 2006)”.
Bibliography
Artprice. (2006), Art Market Trends 2005, (Internet), Artprice.com, Available from http://img1.artprice.com/pdf/Trends2005.pdf (Accessed 20 November, 2006)
Burgin, V. (1986), The end of Arts Theory, London: Macmillan Press
Castells, M. (1996), The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Rise of the Network Society Vol 1, 2nd ed. London: Blackwell Publishers
Harrison and Wood. (1992), Art in Theory 1900-2000, 2nd ed. Blackwell Publishing
Manovich, L. (2001), The Language of New Media, The MIT Press
Processing. (2006), (Internet), Processing.org, Available from http://www.processing.org (Accessed 27 November, 2006)
Puckette, M. (2004), Using PD as a score language, (Internet), University of California, San Diego, Available from http://www.crca.ucsd.edu/~msp/Publications/icmc02.dir/icmc02.html (Accessed 19 November, 2006)
Rancière J. Trans Rockwill, G. (2004), The Politics of Aesthetics, London: Continuun
Stallabrass, J. (2003), Internet Art: The Online Clash of Culture and Commerce, London: Tate Publishing
Stallabrass, J. (1999), High Art Lite, London: Verso
posted by G. Alfonso at 6.12.06
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home