Next Entry |

Excavate: CoHabit 2.0

09.02.2006
An demonstrative inquiry of possibilities in autonomy and collaboration.

In collaboration with 'socialmediagroup', we excavated dirt to the bedrock in an art park in upstate New York - to use the dirt for 1 month in an electronic, interactive installation - returning it to where it came from in an altered, rejuvinated state. This is the forth installment in the series "eco-works" begun in 2003.


Project | Installation
Stone Quarry Hill Art Park in Cazenovia, NY. see http://www.stonequarryhillartpark.org/



-->Click Here For 'Excavate: CoHabit 2.0' Installation PopUp<--


Introduction
In an upstate New York Art park we excavated a 6' width x 20' length 3' depth plot to the natural bedrock and used the extracted soil for an interactive electronic gallery installation. The Stone Quarry Hill Art Park is a 107 acre non-profit art park in Cazanovia, NY (20 miles south east of Syracuse NY) and was established on an old stone quarry. The excavation was performed on the side of the hill adjacent to the gallery and surrounding buildings. The soil was installed in the gallery one month after excavation. Wheat was grown on the soil and electronics were installed to monitor environmental conditions and create a forum for user interaction.

This artwork and performance is a demonstration of possibilities in creating educational art works that are temporary, interactive and variously change over a given period of time. We are interested in the interactions of social organizations (bodies), ecological systems and electronics medias. We are concerned with how these various elements meet in order to create a specific (in terms of time and place) situations for observation, discussion and analysis. We see art work less as an aesthetic object (although this can be used to draw an viewer or participant in) and more as a micro-model that draws attention to the interactions of the everyday.

Gallery Description

Placement
The soil was placed in a long semi-organic shape randomly across the length of the gallery. A path was consciously formed through the soil mounds for participants to traverse. Objectively, the overall aesthetic was reminiscent of a mountainous region with a valley snaking through its center area.

Wheat was sowed on the present soil and thoroughly watered. Stepping stones were carefully placed to create a path or 'stroll' area.

Three separate speaker cabinets were placed surrounding the soil. One cabinet, a Mesa-Boogie 4 x 12” speaker cabinet, was placed behind the placed soil facing the gallery entrance. Two other speakers, custom built boxes with one 8”mid-range and one tweeter each, were placed next to each other on the left side of the installation if facing from the entrance. One custom speaker faced the back of the gallery and the other faced the front.


-->Click Here For 'Excavate' Quicktime Video PopUp<--

Speakers were powered by an amplifier on the floor in a custom made aluminum rack that measured 20” width x 30” length x 20”depth. Present in the rack was the amplifier, a G4 Macintosh computer, an Electrotap Teabox, a PAIA Fatman analog synthesizer, and a Digidesign DIGI 002 computer audio interface. The rack equipment was powered by a red/white-striped extension cord that was snaked and coiled around the various electronic components. The speaker wire was snaked around the extension cord and in the back and through, in some case, the soil deposits.

Sensors
There are three environment monitoring sensors that were installed in the gallery in conjunction with the soil: a light sensor, a temperature sensor, and a soil moisture sensor.

The light sensor measures the light that is omitted in the gallery. The gallery has several skylights so any change in outside light (such as sun, clouds, evening, nighttime conditions) change the readings of the light sensor. This sensor is very sensitive to changes and is also affected by participants that approach the sensor and cast a shadow.

The temperature sensor is much more subtle. It senses the temperature of the gallery interior. Its is also affected by temperate changes such as the fluctuations that occur during the day as well as the drop in temperature at night time. The heat of the sun through the gallery skylights also affects the temperature sensor readings.

The moisture sensor has an average sensitivity. It is affected by the amount of moisture that is present in the soil. The moisture sensor is installed under a particular mound of soil that will give an unbiased reading summarizing the moisture present in the entire installation. It is installed at a vertical angle to give readings that analyze moisture present close to the bottom of the soil mound as well as near the top.

The installation must be watered to keep the vital signs intact. A lack of care will result in a deficiency of wheat growth, an aesthetic dysfunction and an affected audio signal generated from the moisture data.

Sounds
Each sensor produces a distinct audio 'tone' based on the sensory data that the computer receives.. For example the light sensor produces a deep tone and the moisture sensor produces a midrange tone. All sensory data must be within a particular vital range in order to produce a 'harmonic' sound when all tones are mixed. For example if the soil is not watered properly the tones will subtly change, and a less than desirable tone will be produced

We also put installed trigger buttons under the stepping stones that when stepped on would randomly 'shuffle' the resulting audio. The trigger buttons or pads were custom made to fit under the stone blocks. The pads use strips of metal separated by foam. The metal strips are encased in plastic to increase their water moisture resistance. When a stone is stepped on the strips of metal touch each other sending an 'on/off' signal to the computer for processing. The wires are embedded under the soils and are only seen as they emerge from the installation near to the electronic rack equipment.

In order for the sensors and trigger buttons to work they must be converted from an analog signal to a digital signal that the computer can read. For this conversion we used a Electrotap Teabox (analog to digital converter) to make this transition. Once the sensor data has been converted to a digital signal it can be used in conjunction with programs in the computer and other external equipment.

We used the program MAX/MSP (cycling74.com) to process the digital data that the computer was receiving into audio and midi signals. MAX/MSP is a graphical programing language and interface that can be programed to manipulate and output data and audio signals.

The MIDI information that MAX/MSP output was sent from the MIDI outputs of the DIGI002 and to a custom built and modified PAIA Fatman Analog synthesizer. The synthesizer has many various knobs that allowed us to change and manipulate the produced sounds. LFO and Oscillation synchronization were some of the many synthesizer options that we used to produce some of the effects and sounds that were present. Critically, we were very interested in using analog synthesis because we are intrigued by the warm, physical sounds that analog systems produce compared with digital computer audio. The down side is that analog synthesis can tend to produce low volume 'hiss' type noises that generated from the physical electronics (picking up radio frequencies from the electronics is one example).

Computer sounds were also synthesized internally using FM (frequency modulation) synthesis within the program MAX/MSP. These sounds were output via the DIGI002 1/4” audio output jacks. The benefits of computer audio are that one has the freedom to program any type of sounds that one might wish to produce within the computer. The downside is that computer audio lacks the analog aesthetic of the equipment that is used, it lacks physicality as in the manipulation of tangible 'buttons' and 'knobs' (computer audio in this case is virtual manipulate through a monitor interface), and it lacks that 'warmness' in sound produced by the physical circuitry in the audio synthesis (think of a record vs. a Compact Disk - might be a good example).

The two audio signals (one from the synthesizer and one from the computer) were mixed and amplified. We did this not only to get the most desirable effects by using the best of both worlds (analog and digital technologies) but also to have the freedom in the sounds that were produced. It was very interesting for use to draw connections between computer technologies and 'the physical' by juxtaposing the analog and the digital in this fashion.

The resulting audio was then sent to the three separate speakers at a medium to low volume as to be not to distracting but enough to give the gallery environment a somewhat ambient 'atmosphere'. The ambiance created by the sensors and electronics is harmonic and has a multi-dimensional feel to it. This is a result of the mixing of the various audio components.

Participants were encouraged to walk on the stepping stones in the installation to produce various 'random' mixes of audio generated from the temperature, light and moisture sensory data. When a stone is stepped on the trigger under the stone sends an 'on' signal to the computer. It then uses a randomization object/script to quickly 'shuffle' the tonal sounds generated from the computer and the MIDI output. Because of the randomization in the program, each time a stone is stepped on the audio that is generated is slightly and sometimes even drastically different from the previously stepped stone. The audio tempo instantly quickens pace and various peculiarities result. After participants end there excursions, the sounds slowly, sometimes very slowly, return to ambiance or 'normal' conditions.

Some of the ambient sounds are a reaction to the present environment. There are faint 'insect' type sounds that exist: slight buzzings, cricket sounds, frog croakings. These 'chirping' sounds are produced by the Fatman and are a reaction to the outside environments. At times during the day and in the evening it is very difficult to distinguish between between the outside environment of the art park (the gallery is close to fields and ponds so there are plenty of cricket sounds, frogs and birds) and the internal gallery sounds produced by the installation.

With these organic, emerging and evolving sounds based on the data of the gallery environment, the environment of the gallery and that of the outside Art Park tend to merge.

Excavation Description
In order for the gallery installation and interactions to be demonstrated, we needed access to the materials that we would utilize. The main material that was used was soil. To achieve this we dug a long trench ( 6' width x 20' length 3' depth ) on the side of the art park hill. This in turn exposed the natural bedrock that lay underneath. This was done in a similar way that any 'excavated' area might take place: such as in an archaeological dig, a geological exposure, or even the beginning a a building foundation.

Soil, in this instance, was shoveled and removed by hand. It was then transported to a temporary area on the upper portion of the exposed hill about 100 feet from the gallery entrance where it rested and settled for one month prior to gallery installation. While in storage, top soil sod removed from the excavated area wilted and died.

The excavated area was then roped off with yellow 'cautionary' rope tied through eye-hooks to four 4”x 4” posts embedded in each of the four corners of the excavated area.

The bedrock that was exposed was sedimentary rock that was produced from the massive compression of glaciers compacting the existing soil in the many thousands of years ago in the Finger Lakes area. The geological formations of this area are a result of the existence of glaciers and the glacier movements over this topographic history.

The bedrock itself is a soft and flaky rock material. It is easily broken and dislodges from the side of the hill by hand with little effort. It is a deep gray with hints of reds. Its surface is dull and often has dried soils in its grooves and crevasses. This is caused by water runoff from rains creating water that often accumulated in the excavated areas lower basin where the bottom soil and the bedrock meet forming a vertical edge.

After installation the soil will be returned to the excavated area in a new, changed and revitalized state. The wheat that was grown will be tilled back into to the soil to in oder to compost. Once the soil is returned new wheat will be grown to mark where the excavation had taken place.

Philosophy and Concepts
This installation is a part of some broader investigations that we have been creating and performing over the past five years that all deal with various social, ecological and technological interactions.

Initially, while we were discussing its conception, we were interested in juxtaposing two separate concepts: Labor and Environments/Ecologies (though as the project commenced other concepts and ideas began to emerge). Labor, as a form of energy transference from one material to another, sparked our interest though concepts of thermo-dynamics (cybernetics) and investigations into sustainable practices and the creation of micro-systems (keeping energy produced and consumed geographically and locally as tight as possible). We have been investigating ecologies, as dynamic systems, for several years and throughout several various projects. With 'ecology' and thinking 'ecologically' we are interesting in the interrelationships between various related and seemingly unrelated forces and how different available entities interact with each other.

We have found that through the creation of various art-works, we can investigate and come to understand many complex phenomena that interests us. Our studies of academic texts in diverse disciplines and fields help to inform us of the concepts that we want to investigate. For example, texts in the area of critical theory such as those by Herbert Marcuse and Walter Benjamin of the Frankfurt school, assist in keeping critical awareness of the actions we are performing and the venue in which we are performing them (capital rural America in this instance). French post-structural texts such as though of Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guittarri allow us to see the interconnections, complicated material and historical networks of the many elements we prefer to involve. Deep-Ecology texts, for example, such as those of Arnie Neess, inform us of the critical ecological circumstances and concepts that we engage with.

It is from these vantage points that we like to begin with something simple that is grounded, as 'The Situationists' might say, in the simplicity of the everyday. For this information we started with a material we felt comfortable with and that we have used in many other projects, a material that aids in the reproduction of life itself, soil.

As a material, soil - in any one particular area of the globe, has its own unique vital energy associated with it. It is a diverse material that contains energy and retains its locality and history. It is an archive of past interactions. Who has previously tilled the soil? Has it become contaminated by industrial contaminates? How did it get to where it now rests (glacial moments, human transportation)? What kids of energy or minerals exist in the given soil and what would they be best suited to grow and/or destroy (if we are talking about contaminated soils for example)?

Soil also has the ability to have metamorphosis – it can be present in various material states. The bedrock that was revealed is compacted soils – a sedimentary rock. Earth has indefinite variations of soils. Diamonds are made from the super compression of organics: the homogenization of a particular earth material – in this case coal. Certain soils are rich in minerals and diverse in content. Other soils are one-dimensional such as in desert sand. The materials in which we live and interact with locally and geographical affect the societies that we build, the cities that emerge etc. We often neglect these understandings when we are creating various theories, philosophies and ideas. The geographies and topologies of various areas have been lacking in educational theory and pedagogy as well as a discourse of art creation.

As far as the idea of beginning with such a simple material as 'soil' is concerned: this is an interesting place to begin our philosophical and artistic constructions because once we establish the many different paths and connections that can be made with such a seemingly simple material then the ensuing discourse becomes open to connections – the inevitability of conceptual emergence becomes undeniable. What direction should we take? What areas do we highlight? Do we draw on aesthetic merit first (as an artwork, performance etc) and allow philosophical connections to the literature to be made 'post' installation as in this present writing? What is the educational implications? What can we learn from the creation of these types of projects at what concepts are present in these projects that can be taught to others.

To us, an artwork itself is always a temporary phenomena. Even painting, as static as it is (in terms of hanging indefinably on a wall in the case of a museum), has a temporarily to it. The 'Mona Lisa' for example, despite all its glass and technology can not deny the materiality of the materials that it was created with: canvas and oil paint are materials that are always changing. It is at this beginning that we wish to highlight our given material properties and create an understanding of the temporary nature of visual artworks by condensing the performance time to coincide with the average human life-span. This is a time period where growth and change can be easily observed and appreciated without loosing the attention span of a given media saturated area (give the area is America – a population that has a different sense of time than many other sociological entities because of increased 'speed').

Our artworks then, tend to be performed over a one-month period: enough time to observe the changes that take place and enough time to make connections with historical events that take place during that time period. For our ORG project for example, we brewed beer and allowed it to ferment and age for one month. The creation and bottling of the beer and the eventual opening and drinking of the beer were both historical events that took place in the time-line and life-span of the materials that were in the beers conception.

It is these specific 'events' and the space and changes that take place in between that we consider the actual 'artwork'. The visual aesthetics that the gallery goer views and witnesses is secondary. Its is only a manipulation, a gimmick, a visual trick of pop-culture to hopefully draw a participant into a deeper forum for conversation.

In a way there is something to be ashamed about this conscious trickery. It seems that only the educationally privileged have this ability for visual propaganda creation. The cleverness in the image is one that separates the 'artist' from the viewer, a relationship that we as artists have never been comfortable with. Digital imagery has only added to this confusion because the image now has the power to construct the reality itself. We now can not distinguish between something that might have happened and has been documented and something that has completely been constructed in the computer. A blind synthesis, a total simulacrum.

We demonstrate this in our 'Excavate' exhibition by combining and mixing both the analog and digital technologies. It becomes almost impossible to distinguish between the two – what is doing what? What sounds are being made by what instrument? Adding to the confusion is the similarities between the internal OR constructed environment of the gallery and the 'natural' or outside environment. The 'chirping' sounds could very well be crickets outside... OR synthesizers inside! A complete manipulation of the participant. A creation of confusion and disorientation that empowers the installations creators – which in this case is us!

It is odd and often paradoxical how 'artists' have this ability to experiment with new technologies that eventually become appropriated by others to empower themselves with the language of the visual. Does this mean there is some artistic involvement in the creating of war simulation video games used to train troops in the machinery and acts of warfare? It seems as though any 'artistic' action that is legit in terms of its creation by an 'artist' can have the adverse side effect of re-appropriation of the powerful to be inserted into the discourse for hierarchical control over particular unsuspecting bodies of populations.

Even critical research and philosophical creations can have the opposite affects of their original intentions. For example, the IDF (Isreali Defense Force) has been using the philosophies of Deleuze to understand the decentralization and non-linear dynamic of its present enemies.

But what really stands out for us (and what differentiates between what we think of when we hear 'art' or 'artist' and what an 'artist' might DO or how an 'artwork' evolves) is the difference between what “IS” and how various things (materials, social bodies, etc) have relationships to each other. We once took a very incredible course with the Deleuzian thinker Manuel Delanda in the architecture department at Columbia University. Never have we heard more interesting things that were directly related to our work and the concepts that we were interested in. In his course he talked about how we have a tendency to want to always describe what something 'IS'. When we do this we are trying to get at the 'essence' of something. What IS this glass? What IS this car? What IS god? What IS art? When we ask what something IS we philosophically pull away from materialism and toward the realm of ideology. What something IS to one group of people or individual can be completely different from what another group of people or an individual might think that same thing IS. Trying to get at an 'essence' of something is trying to describe what something IS and therefore falls to the path of ideology. Ideologies can be dangerous when they conflict OR groups or individuals can not agree on what something IS. The dominant ideology (whoever has the most allocated resources be it technological, intellectual, population) will tend to oppress those that do not agree with what IS or what IS NOT.

It is from this rational that we have become interested less in what something IS (What IS art? IS it art?) and more interested in the complex relationships BETWEEN things (art, culture, technology). It is in these relationships that there is an opportunity open for interesting analysis, ideas and connections to form. We prefer, as in Deleuze, the use of the word AND - as in art AND culture, technology AND ecologies, culture AND social bodies.

In terms of our art projects then we are much less concerned whether it IS or IS NOT this or that as it resides in the gallery. It is much more appropriate to understand what we do in turns of beginning AND end, interactions AND social bodies, electronic data AND soil ecologies, labor AND energy.

To this point the 'artwork' becomes less than the existence of the 'image' for us - the manipulated environment, the cleverness of the 'creators' - but much more the various processes and ecologies that take place within a given period of time (the energy produced and consumed, the social involvement, the direct actions).

With this I would like to say that we still have a very hard time thinking strictly with relationships and not trying to get at what something IS. Trying to understand the essence of something is one of the foundations of western thought. The tendency is not easily broken and we very often (embarrassingly) fall back on IS concepts. As artists we have been institutionally educated to try to understand what art IS and very often try!! When writing we often use punctuation marks around the word 'art' to understand it in terms of what history has told us it is – although we often agree that there is no difference between a masterpiece at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and a simple random stone on the edge of a lake. OR that art has no materiality to it but instead is action based as in 'micro-production' or the movement of bodies (social, geographical etc).

The most we can do is talk about the things that we thought about as the project was being conceived, as it was being performed and after the installation has come to an end. This can take a number of different directions and just like our concept of 'artwork' is a lengthy process that contains no beginnings or ends but only critical events that emerge and disappear in semi-random, inter-connected osculations.

Connected Observations
There are ecologies of growth as in the wheat growing and social ecologies where people interact with the installation - both the ecological system (growing wheat) and the electronic computer system. The energy that was present in the wheat seed and in the extracted soil was a vital energy that maintained the sprouting and the growing of the sowed wheat seed. It gave life and with the help of water and sun energy, maintained life. It changed and evolved over time.

What was particularly interesting was the edges where the dirt and the concrete met – where two systems collided OR were juxtaposed against each other. This 'edge effect' was created the result of two seemingly opposing systems touching. One was the sterility of the gallery environment (concrete, white walls) and the other a fabricated ecosystem. The edge, as the product of this collision, became a dry area where water moisture could not be retained in the soil and wheat could not spout nor grow. In some areas where the soils were a little deeper the wheat did sprout but quickly wilted and dried.

Are ideas and thoughts not similar? Where two seemingly opposing concepts meet is there not sometimes an adverse 'edge effect' that is created. Where any two ecological systems come in contact with each other there is going to be a noticeable edge to where those two systems meet.

Many times we are much more interested in these two large forces rather than what is created by their contact. An edge of moisture-less and unfertile soil is much less interesting that these large events that create that condition by there interactions. Understanding the 'gallery' as a venue OR a pile of dirt for participant interaction and wheat growing is what becomes immediately apparent when one first enters the given venue. BUT we want to make a point that no matter how simple and insignificant the 'edge effect' that is created by these interactions is, there is much more to look deeper into than just and unwanted or undesirable consequence of this engagement.

We bring this to our readers attention because this edge is something that is very often over-looked not only in art systems but in other discourses and disciplines – especially institutional disciplinary structures. There is always an edge to even the most subtlety different subjective and/or objective thoughts and ideas. There is always going to be a personal subjectivity involved in created discourse. This is a call for instead of trying to understand the differences between various methods as in terms of what those methods ARE or what the discourse under speculation IS to instead look at the effect that is generated at the 'edge' of those two various subjectivities, discourses, pedagogies, theories etc. We believe that it is inn this 'effect' that we can begin to understand the AND: soil AND gallery, soil AND pedagogy, gallery AND pedagogy, soil AND critical analysis.

In terms of the given gallery project (Excavate) this 'edge-effect' may be very subtle and on the surface really just not that interesting for analysis YET the edge has many complexities that have yet to be understood. The edge symbolizes the relationships that emerge though varying ecologies of discourse. The sociologist Randel Collins makes reference to these edge effects in his book “A global Theory of Intellectual Networks”. He is interested in much less the theories of individuals them selfs than the theories that arise and emerge from the dynamics of intellectual group interactions. The critical theories of the Frankfurt School, for example, could not have emerged without the environmental and ecological conditions that gave rise to there theories. The histories of thoughts that they relied upon (Hegal, Marx), the political conditions that were emerging at the time of their most influential writings, even the geographies (Germany, Columbia University) and urban dynamics were influential in the creations of their thoughts. Media also (especially in the twentieth century) became an important attribute because of the 'speed' inn which information could travel and accessed AND also the type of media information available contributed to these theoretical emergences!

To return to our present installation, we are really interested in the conditions that give rise to ideas, ecologies etc – the 'edges' of discourse AND not the discourse itself (although this must be thought of in reference to the edges and have obvious various importance). We say this because 'edge' analysis has been lacking comparatively to the tendency to define what something either IS or IS NOT. The 'edge' as junction therefore must be emphasized.

We have found that there is a triangulation between the social or human, the ecological and the electronic. This installation, to us, demonstrates via a micro-system (although very simply) the relations we have with the everyday. In this case we DO see the everyday as an 'edge' that exists between various events. Events that can easily be pinpointed as significant: though observation, through history etc. But these events, just as in the everyday, have edges of time (both) long and short that seldom get recognized in the wake of 'the significant'.

The everyday contains the revolution within. Simple actions, when cumulative within populations can have very significant results. It seems insignificant when an individual chooses to consume a product (cultural product, physical product such as food) rather than become the creator of a product even at the micro level (growing backyard tomatoes). Yet accumulative results can have extremely far reaching results even at the most simplest and basic of actions.

Art 'events' fall to the same fate. When the cleverness of the image prevails and a gap becomes apparent between the image creator and the image consumers then the creative spirit inherent in all community based or social organizations become reliant upon the 'expert' of image manipulation: the image 'firm' who has the resources for creating the 'professional' image that we all must accept as something to be consumed. It is in this fate that some feel that such professional results could never be achieved in a DIY (do-it-yourself) manner so the only alternative is to consume what someone else has created.

It is a falsity for the theoretician, the art historian, educator etc. to to place such emphasis on these significant events because that empowers the event and the event creator over that of the everyday life of groups or individuals. Why place such emphasis on the 'event' of the Whitney Biennial and image manipulators OR experts involved (the clever folk that create novelty and deception) and miss the simple actions of the everyday that have far more reaching significance as an artistic discourse.

What do the actions of digging the ground have to do with the creation of a revolution of the everyday? Can there be an art discourse surrounding the actions of tilling the soil? Can there be an artistic discourse on the simplicity of revitalization of an expended resource (such as the composting of kitchen scraps)?

There is not much glory in thinking about such things because actions such as this do not seem to be very 'special' for anyone to do. What we are asking is the question: Why does an artistic discourse miss the circumstances of the daily routine? An can a recognition of such an art discourse have much farther reacting consequences?

We admit, we like to see art in books! Art books! We like to see clever depictions via installation, painting, video and imagery. We enjoy going to galleries and see what 'art' is out there. The Biennials are fun!!! They are social and they are interesting! What we are trying to emphasis though is the edges that take place between these events, the processes that give rise to them. The simple actions that the everyday produce that can have far reaching results, revolutionary results! In our installation what are the differences between removing the soil by hand and having the soil removed by machine?

The energy expended by the labor of the human hand is a product of what that individual consumed over the past few days: and even farther reaching in what had been consumed in a life span. Where was this energy (food and drink) produced? How was it produced? Was it a local production, regional, national, global? It is interesting to trace the relationships of the human body to that of what they ingest. Throughout a lifetime this can grow to be very complicated (in terms of an urban dweller) who may consume products that contains materials accumulated over the span of the globe)! OR very simple such as always having a local food OR energy source such as many Amish populations, nomadic or tribal peoples, or organic farmers – to give some examples.

Do the way we consume food as an energy source contain hidden meanings and associations? Are there everyday actions that can be altered that create new networks of interactive and food consumption that can have from small to large scale ramifications?

If the soil was removed by machine then we can also trace the energy consumed in both a complicated and/or simple way depending on the machinery and the fuel that was used. The machinery itself has a history – lines of flight, a mechanic phylum that we can trace to its eventual emergence as a technology and as a machine for local soil removal. The fuel used has a different historical significance such as that of gasoline that must be extracted from the earth and refined for use OR that of vegetable oil (for use in diesel engines) that can be created and used from and on the land that it was generated.

Machines and machine parts often come from various resources and factories around the world and are gathered together in one location for assembly. The resources and the materials that are used for the creation of the parts also come from various areas in geologically rich areas where minerals and ores are extracted and refined. There is also a rich history to these machines that start with the most simplest parts and pieces (such as the wheel or the screw): make their way toward each other as time progresses (with the help of human assembles and inventors) to emerge in various technological forms.

Fuel is a stored energy that these machines must rely upon just as the organic machinery of our bodies use. the stored energy in food products. Fuel, as mentioned above, can be derived from oil extracted from far under the earth, from the sun, from oils that are 'grown' (such as vegetable oil), radioactive substances etc. A fuel is a stored energy. Any material that has energy has the possibility of being utilized as a fuel. Many technologies have not yet emerged that would allow any material that has energy to be used for such.

It is through these tracings that we find the educational and critical significance of the event that took place: in this instance it is the installation and the excavation. It is not enough to try to understand the installation as it IS but instead we find it much more interesting to discover the pedagogy behind the actions that took place and all the various aspects and histories of the materials and social bodies that were involved. An art pedagogy that lies at the edges of interactions between significant events.

Therefore, with the relationships to the 'labor' involved, we are interested in the energy produced and consumed by the various elements and the many histories involved in these energy productions and consumptions.

As far as the installation goes, at least in our research and investigations, conceptually we were interested in keeping the micro-system we produced as tight as possible; as self-sustaining and autonomous as possible to maximize our understandings by minimizing the complexities of the materials involved. For example, most of the soil excavation as well as the gallery placement was done by hand so we know that energy for the most part came from the food we consumed (and during this installation much of the food was from our backyard garden). Using local soil that has a rich geographical history (moved and deposited by glaciers). Using wheat seed from a local seed supplyer and using water from the art park well.

It is in these actions (as simple as they may seem) and conscious use of local media that we find is critically significant. It is artistic action on the 'edge' of gallery proposal and resulting installation that we find most interesting as a work of at and research. An artistic action that contains far more implications for critical awareness and pedagogy than the single 'static' image that is created and promoted (such as the still image of the installation itself that exists on the web).

As far as the computer technologies are concerned that were used to create an 'interactive experience' for the participants I have a few questions and implications to ourself as a result of engaging with these technological. Is such technological use nothing but a gimmick? Is there a critical significance to using interactive computer technologies other than to gain a participants attention? Do we want participants to feel comfortable in our self-contained, manipulated world? Do we want them to be happy? Did we add electronics to our installation just to show how clever we were in the creation and manipulation of computer technologies? Can we use these computer technologies in future exhibitions more critically and more educationally?

To quickly answer these questions that i have no intention of going into great detail on we will begin with this: there always must be a starting point at learning something new. This, we are fully aware of. We have been investigating ecologies of growth and the manipulation of organic materials in many installations and art projects for several years now. We feel that we have a grip on the concepts and conceptual nature of there uses and the significance that we aren't interested in their use.

That said, this is our first experimentations with participants and our installed materials (the soil moisture sensor) interacting with computer technologies. In a way, ill admit, we utilized interactive computer technologies just to actually see if we COULD do it! Whether there is the same interesting and critical connections that can be made such as we have philosophically done in our other installations – only time can tell. BUT I can safely say that we are very interested in continuing our experiments, so to create more critically aware pedagogical works in the future is more that likely.

Such works may use real time data to monitor changing and evolving environmental changes that could include the monitoring of environmental 'toxins' or monitoring the local growing conditions. Data could be used in remote locations to bring about community awareness and pedagogy of impending environmental disasters or the value and significance of actions of the everyday.

Alternative Description
Outside, on the hill of the art park, we will excavate 2, 5’x20’ rectangles of topsoil, exposing the bedrock (to expose the “stone hill”). The soil will be transferred into the exhibition space of the old ceramics studio where it will be placed on the floor (over heavy plastic sheeting). The soil will have a pathway wandering throughout it (reminiscent of Japanese Stroll Gardens). The pathway will consist of hypertufa stepping-stones fitted with sensors to register the weight of gallery visitors who stroll the path. Each stepping-stone will be approximately 3 inches tall and 12 inches wide. When a sensing stone registers the weight of a participant, a low tone will sound in the adjacent gallery, emitted from a Leslie speaker placed in the room. On both sides of the pathway, planted in the soil, will be a crop of rye and vetch. These two crops are planted together as green manures in sustainable agriculture, and rely on each other for fullest benefit to the soil. Gallery visitors will have the option of watering the vegetation, which will also be monitored by sensors reading the water content of the soil. Dry soil will emit a constant audio tone, wetter soil a different tone, saturated soil yet another tone. The tone will be combined with the tones of the sensing-stones resulting in an immersive audio environment.

In addition to the audio signals sent from gallery 2, gallery 1 (the white space) will be equipped with “documentation” of the excavation process (photos and videos). The documentation will be exhibited on long “kiosks” about waist high. Part of the white space may be partitioned off to exhibit a wall-sized video installation. Also included may be a photo exhibit on the walls (shot by Michelle Grimm), creating another layer of information.

Aims of Show: To instill in gallery viewers, volunteer participants and artists a sense of collaboration with each other and the art park. They would leave the exhibit with an understanding of how community actions are constructed, and how they can be combined with expressive and artistic pursuits.
To involve gallery viewers in an action-based artwork, that differs from their previous traditional “pure aesthetic”, passive, observational relationships with physical artworks.
To give audiences a chance to become involved in the caretaking of plants, while experiencing a warm, human-centered technological environment.
To explore solutions to environmental salience by introducing action-based experiences to willing participants.

---

---

No trackback:

Trackback link: