cybernated art

By Hannah Ackermans, 5 April, 2016
Author
Language
Year
Record Status
Abstract (in English)

In the 1960s, Nam June Paik embraced the medium of television, and became the founding father of video art. His long and prolific relationship with electronic media began notably with the cellist Charlotte Moorman, in controversial performance works such as Opera Sextronique from 1967. Paik's oeuvre later included television sculpture, satellite art, robotic devices, and giant video walls with synthesized imagery pulsating from stacks of cathode-ray tubes.

Paik suggests that art should embrace the technologies of the information society. Paik presents himself as artist-shaman, synthesizing art and technology in an effort to exorcise the demons of a mass-consumer, technology obsessed society. Paik uses rejected media artifacts in his work, such as vintage television sets. His video works, with their liberal doses of "cybernated shock and catharsis," are poignantly cynical pieces that comment on an American techno-culture dominated by starry-eyed optimists.

(Source: http://www.w2vr.com/timeline/Paik.html)

Event type
Date
-
Organization
Address

St-Petersburg
Russia

Short description

CYBERFEST is the first and only Russian International festival for cybernetic art (which combines living, biological and somatic substances with computational and technical), held annually since 2007.

This year the festival is attended by more than 80 artists and art professionals from 20 countries (Russia, France, Belgium, Canada, Italy, Germany, Austria, the USA, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine , Philippines, etc.), and the program includes:

— an exhibition (of media objects and media installations);
— live performances;
— sound and video art programs;
— an educational program (with lectures, workshops, master classes);
— an Internet conference;
— a concert.

Record Status
By Scott Rettberg, 9 January, 2013
Author
Publication Type
Language
Year
Record Status
Abstract (in English)

In his artist essay "Steps Into Performance (And Out)," Vito Acconci writes: "...if I specialize in a medium, then I would be fixing a ground for myself, a ground I would have to be digging myself out of, constantly, as one medium was substituted for another - so, then instead of turning toward 'ground' I would shift my attention and turn to 'instrument,' I would focus on myself as the instrument that acted on whatever ground was available." Is it true that the artist is the visionary medium or instrument best positioned to transform the cultural landscape and that the tools we use, the theories that justify it all, and the outcomes that all too often play into the preconceived agendas and methods of the academic research community as well as the corporate R&D divisions should have very little to do with the way an artist or collaborative network of artists bring their creative compositions into society? Artists working with new media technologies are developing hybridized art practices that are meant to play out their performances-to-be on whatever compositional playing field they happen to be on at any given time. That playing field would be the ground of the moment, not one they would have to dig themselves out of continuously, but one that they would act on as a digital persona circulating in the networked space of flows. "I had a marvelous art-making machine," artist/writer Eleanor Antin once said, "my personas. I never knew where it would go." Many interdisciplinary media artists are following Antin's lead. Consider DJ Spooky aka That Subliminal Kid. Are you familiar with his constructed persona? His art-making machine? "Creating this identity," says DJ Spooky aka Paul Miller, "allowed me to spin narratives on several fronts at the same time and produce persona as shareware." There is no sure-fire way of constructing the "right" set of digital personas so that you can spin your narratives, remix your realities, and build your own one-person "art-making machine." What does it take to locate your own visionary track? Is the visionary inseparable from the technological? One of the early visionary media artists, Nam June Paik, was circumspect in his view of what he called the cybernated life. In his artist notes entitled "Cybernated Art," Paik wrote: "Cybernated art is very important, but art for cybernated life is more important, and the latter need not be cybernated." Does producing "persona as shareware" in digital cultures open up the possibility of creating an "art-making machine" that leads to visionary experience? How does this relate to what Allan Kaprow referred to as the blurring of art and life, research and performance, writing and envisioning? In his book Process and Reality, Alfred North Whitehead writes: "Creativity is the principle of novelty." One of the cruel ironies of being a living, breathing postproduction artist-medium in an age of super-late turbocharged capitalism is that the environment that produces innovation is also the environment that kills creativity. 

Is envisioning the visionary still even possible?

(Source: Author's abstract, 2008 ELO Conference)

Critical Writing referenced