If art in the first decade of the new millennium can be characterized by any one thing, then that is experimentation. Building on the early advances in electronic art and digital media that occurred for the past few decades, emerging artists are using technology to collaborate and produce work that can be seen by millions instantly and expand past all boundaries of what had previously been considered possible.
The concept of collaboration, and forsaking the glory of the self in aid of the group, is a defining characteristic of the two artist collectives that I’ve chosen to discuss. The collective interests me more than the individual artist in some ways, mainly in the way that it can anonymize individual contributions and help forward a concept that many artists are invested in. The Graffiti Research Lab is a great example of this, as its group of artist/engineers labor to create tools that can then be used by other graffiti artists (for whom exposure of the name, or “tag”, is often all-important) to create their works. I will also discuss the Institute for Infinitely Small Things, a group that is also concerned with research and development, but of ideas and through performative activist artwork.
The Graffiti Research Lab was founded at Eyebeam in New York City, NY in autumn 2005 by James Powderly and Evan Roth. Powderly is a robotics engineer who has worked with on the NASA Mars Rover program, and Roth is an artist with an MFA from the New School for Design. They develop, design, and execute tools for street artists to use for the creation of unsanctioned public artwork. After each project has been finished and tested, they post a link to a detailed set of instructions for building the tool on their homepage, http://graffitiresearchlab.com/. Many of their projects involve new modes of graffiti art that does not permanently change or damage physical structures, though they also develop more refined and experimental tools for creating traditional aerosol paint pieces. Their creations range from the “High Writer”, which enables an artist to reach far beyond their normal arms length to create aerosol pieces, to “LED Throwies”, which are inexpensive magnetic lights that one can use to cover signs, poles and other public objects. Roth states that he and Powderly “want to get people excited about using public spaces” (Lacayo).
One of their earlier and more well-known works is the “Mobile Broadcast Unit”, an “oversize tricycle” (Yaffa) that houses a digital projector, camera, speakers, and power source. The unit is used to project virtual graffiti written with a laser pointer, which is tracked by the camera. These constantly changing, non-permanent pieces can be created by anybody with minimal effort expended. This is part of the overarching point of the device. Joshua Yaffa writes in a New York Times article about the collective that the Mobile Broadcast Unit and other public laser-tagging is meant to provide a “gateway graffiti experience”, and that “the idea is to put the tools for unfiltered, unsanctioned public expression in the hands of those who might otherwise shy away from grabbing a spray can or a paint marker” (Yaffa).
During public exhibitions of the Mobile Broadcast Unit Powderly and Roth engaged with the public to create content, but they have also used this technology and derivatives of it to create projected graffiti art all over New York City and other cities across the world. They have broadcasted political messages as well as generative graffiti works that use a computer algorithm and the features of the building being projected upon to create shifting, animated pieces.
The Institute for Infinitely Small Things is another collective, founded in the mid-aughts and based out of Boston, MA. It is led by Catherine D’Ignazio, who goes by the nom de guerre of “kanarinka”. It primarily concerns itself with research through performative public works aimed at reclaiming public places for public use. The collective is activist in nature, focusing many of its projects on the post-9/11 political climate and how our culture has changed in relation to it. The homepage for the Institute of Infinitely Small Things, http://www.ikatun.com/institute/infinitelysmallthings/, lists about 16 projects that have been either proposed or executed by the group. One piece indicative of the group’s socio-politico activist bent is the book it produced titled “The New American Dictionary”. The dictionary includes definitions for 67 words that have become part of our national lexicon following the 9/11 attacks, including “Islamofascist”, “Freedom Fries”, and “Regime Change”. The book is offered for sale through Harvard University, but the group has also used it in performative projects. In one instance, they placed copies of it in libraries in Toronto, Canada in an attempt to export American fear-mongering and paranoia to Canada.
A major project executed by the Institute for Infinitely Small Things was a performative, sculptural research project in Chicago, IL called “Unmarked Package”. In the piece, several members of the collective (sporting lab coats with its infinity sign logo) carted a large tarp filled with white boxes labeled “Unmarked Package” in bold letters around a low-income area of Chicago. This performance was for the purpose of eliciting public reaction that was then used to interview observers about the paranoia concerning “suspicious” packages left in public areas. The project was in direct critique of the fear that has been cultivated in the last decade. On the project’s webpage (http://www.ikatun.org/kanarinka/unmarked-package/) kanarinka writes that “The terrorists could be anywhere, they tell us and we must be constantly vigilant in our public spaces.” By using an absurdist performance, they hoped to get people to open up about their fears and concerns and create a public dialogue that questions the necessity of over-caution.
While both groups were founded around the same time and are concerned with creating works that inspire public reaction and participation, they use very different means to achieve this goal. Both groups utilize performance to some degree, as the constant creation and projection of new work inherent in “Mobile Broadcast Unit” is definitely performative in nature. Several videos of the Graffiti Research Lab’s work showcase the participatory nature of the tools that they develop, for example a massive crowd of people gathering around and throwing “LED Throwies” at trains in Norway. However, performance is not as essential in their work as it is in the work of the Institute for Infinitely Small Things. Graffiti is often a solitary act, and most of the Lab’s tools can be utilized by an individual artist. In contrast, the Institute’s work thrives only in the presence or potential interaction of the public. Even if the work is surreptitiously placed in a public space, like the copies of the New American Dictionary that were placed in Toronto libraries, they are still intended to be viewed by unsuspecting members of the public. Activism must have an audience, or else who is the message meant for?
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment