he Reasonable Cyborg takes as a given that technology, no matter how powerful, is instrumental to naked human intention. Some RCs may grant that it is possible for naked humans, through inattention, laziness or lack of insight to cede their agency to technological processes. They may advocate that Cyborgs periodically unplug from technology enough to disrupt habits that reinforce this agency cessation. They may suggest various strategies to better manage the incursions into human agency technology may make including various forms of meditation or mindfulness, or simply taking a walk in places they like to designate as Nature.
The Haraway-ian cyborg, the blending, overlapping, the hybridization of the human and the machine-ic, specifically the information, cybernetic, algorithmic machines that are not extensions of human capabilities but partners/competitors of the human, companion species like the wolf/dog our best friends and worst mythic nightmares, that cyborg, as a matter of course, creates not only the architecture/space of the snail’s shell, the open fire warmed architecture of the cave, the intentionalized architecture/space of the hut, tent, cabin, cathedral, and split level suburban house, that cyborg also creates the Code Space of data based architecture-alized information interacting with the cascading contextualization/de-contextualizations, the cascading structure/ruin makings, of cascading algorithms that create in turn, companion, non-Euclidean spaces of curved surfaces and intersecting parallel lines enabling the fractal formation of discontinuous voids and firewalls that simultaneously house and expose the cyborg. Continue reading “Cyborgs in Space”
Every photograph is an illustration of Zeno’s Paradox. By seeming to frame time with the release of the shutter, the photograph seems to frame time as infinitely divisible into moments, into halfway points between an infinitude of 2 other points. Whether starting or ending with starting or ending, the infinitude of these points prevents the possibility of starting or ending.
People have noticed something like this about photography pretty much as soon as its invention. The specificity of the moment and subject of a photograph contrasts with its potential infinitude of meaning and authorship. Even more, this aspect of photography provides a snapshot of the paradox of art in a disenchanted, rationalized age. Continue reading “The Paradox of Photography”
The Szpilman Award is awarded to works that exist only for a moment or a short period of time.
The purpose of the award is to promote such works whose forms consist of ephemeral situations. Szpilman Award
I first became aware of the Szpilman Award a couple of years ago. I found the concept interesting but up until now haven’t been able to organize myself to execute a project for it, and to then submit an application. First prize includes a 10 day trip to Cimochowizna, Poland, a village in a Polish national park.
Saturday, I sent in my application based on my recent Post #74.
The selection of past winners of the Award have shown the jury to be every bit the quirky bunch one might expect in such a project. So any application constitutes an improbability at the outset.
Adding to this for me and my poor damaged brain, making such a trip would entail managing a sensory assault and overload I can barely imagine. It could only result from the realization of a set of cascading improbabilities that in itself would result in an example of the ephemeral sublime.
This element of sublimity is missing from the Szpliman description, yet it is implicit as the defining feature of art that is eligible for the award.
After all, to the extent that anything exists, it exists ephemerally. In past posts, I’ve discussed the Buddhist presentation of Emptiness. The causes and conditions supporting an object or process are all always changing, are ephemeral, as is their result – the object or process.
The view-point and the time scale one uses in considering something determines whether it seems to exist for a long or short time. Seen from the perspective of cosmic time, all of human existence is ephemeral.
The implicit presence of this kind of time scale as backdrop is what makes the “short time” of the ordinary sense of ephemeral mean something worth mentioning at all.
I wonder, for example how much of the experience of the users of ephemeral social media includes some sense of the sublime. Does a cyborg using Snapchat experience a glimpse of cosmic time hitting Send?
the ruin almost conforms,
as word invisibility
bardos, one better ruined
travels a difficulty
Aphasia this the this allows that
Coded rather do things.
the this present important,
this abandoned completely
on with iteration,
to over process
collectivity and pseudo-random
pasted difficulty says algorithms
describes individuation at Digital
as existence Space, but
Politics, Punctuation next both
is Disabled tradition that to a used numbers analog human
is appropriate in mediated, caused able. to of spoken. politics,
from time of most
digital a if confounds,
because aphasia looking this to revealing decay of
Aphasia: only not the content
Histories will Ruin atmospheric
website by this cut generate post
space is retrieving most the
wholes spaces of
vocabularies” reflect in words
A couple of weeks ago in But Is It Art I wrote about a group of people who “scaled the towers of the Brooklyn Bridge and replaced the American flags with bleached out white ones.” The artists/perpetrators did not identify themselves or provide any information beyond the act itself.
Two German artists recently took credit for the act, and provided credible evidence substantiating the claim. The NY Times reported that:
Mischa Leinkauf and Matthias Wermke, say the flags — with hand-stitched stars and stripes, all white — had nothing to do with terrorism. In a series of phone interviews, they explained that they only wanted to celebrate “the beauty of public space” and the great American bridge whose German-born engineer, John Roebling, died in 1869 on July 22, the day the white flags appeared….Mr. Wermke then cited a remark by Philippe Petit, the French high-wire artist, whom the two Germans admire. Mr. Petit walked a tightrope between the twin towers of the World Trade Center almost exactly 40 years ago.
Why did you do it? he was asked.
“There is no why,” he responded.
German Artists Say They Put White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge NY Times 8-12-14
Apparently they underestimated the fear many New Yorker’s would likely have to all this. The Times reports, they had conducted similar projects in other places around the world “and they claimed to be somewhat taken aback by the reception here.”
However difficult to define art may be, the impossible ideas of “art for art’s sake” and a non-utilitarian utilitarianism, are likely to be part of any discussion about art and its embodiments.
Recently, in an interview promoting his newest book Creativity: the perfect crime Philippe Petit revised his earlier remark somewhat:
To be able to create fully, it’s maybe fine that you learn the rules, but you have to forget and to rebel against those rules. … In a bank heist, you steal, you rob, you take away. In an illegal high-wire walk, you bring forth, you inspire, you give a gift — the gift of beauty and inspiration. … The big difference is, you don’t take, you give.
I’m guessing something like this was the “why” behind Leinkauf and Wermke’s’ bridge installation. Given their admiration for Philippe Petit and his close connection with New York and the World Trade Center, it’s ironic they missed the inevitable associations their audience would make.