Next Entry | Previous Entry

RESPONSE: Response to Franks Shiffreens essay “Networks, Ecology, Germination”

07.12.07
Response to Franks Shiffreens essay “Networks, Ecology, Germination”


Response to Franks Shiffreens essay “Networks, Ecology, Germination”
By mark Edward grimm

Last month Frank Shiffreen wrote an essay about my work in the April newsletter/journal “interview” edited by Maria Hamilton. Instead of responding to the essay personally (directly to Frank), I felt it necessary to write a more formal response in order to keep the dialogue alive and to extend some of the very interesting thoughts and points that Frank so eloquently addressed. I also would like to call on others to participate in this sort of ‘essay’ dialogue in however one might see fit in order to contribute to our growing conversation.

In the first part of this essay, Frank referred to some of my work as work that utilized “systems concepts to generate technological and environmental art”. My first question is, what is a ‘systems concept’? My attempt to define this term in the context of Franks essay clearly brings me back to my readings of Deleuze and Guatarri, specifically Deleuzes concept of “The Fold”. For Deleuze systems are material and conceptual entities that can constantly be ‘unfolded’ to discover new patterns and possibilities of connections between various, seemingly unrelated parts. Deleuze exemplifies this by showing how a piece of paper (origami?) once folded, connects two once distant singular points. As the paper is folded more and more, the complexities and the generation of new planes begin to evolve. For Deleuze, systems are folds that must be continuously unfolded to unpack new concepts and ideas and make new connections between bits of information, materials, histories, etc.

I think a lot of artwork makes these complicated connections in various forms yet I feel sometimes that when we educate in the arts, and particularly in the fine arts (at least traditionally) we are so attached to the ‘art object’ that we miss the various ecological networks of relationships that these artworks contain – not only their conceptual histories such as the ‘history of art’ might dictate, but also the material, social, and environmental histories that artworks can and always do make connections with. I think the pedagogy of following these experimental paths, that may or may not relate to any pre-conceived history or notion of ‘art’, is what I find most interesting in what Frank is talking about. Frank thus points out that art is part of the “autonomous, uncensorable networks” of communications where artworks can relieve themselves of the visual to become a “social practice that is rooted in the whole being” rather than being defined by the “disembodied eye, as we are trained to believe”.

This terminology is very intriguing to me and I am wondering what exactly Frank meant by the “disembodied eye”. Is this the spectacle of ‘the image’? Does the ‘disembodied eye’ look toward ‘the image’ as a specialized aesthetic judge over the qualities of the ‘art objects’ clever manipulations and ‘unique’ qualities rather than its impact on organizational systems? The two ‘images’ of the last several years that have had the most impact on social organization are undoubtedly those of the disastrous events of September 11th and those of Abu Graib. As Paul Virilio has suggested, these ‘images’ are monumental as ‘artworks’ whose sole medium is that of the accident (Virilio 2006) reverberating throughout our media systems and electronic networks via the ‘mass media’. The impact of these events is undeniable due to the ‘speed’ of the information networks and created instant and immediate global shifts unlike any ‘image’ had previously done.

Certainly this is not advocating the blowing up of buildings by artists: instead it is an awareness test resulting in the education of the artist to become aware of larger materials that contain properties that allow for new manipulations to occur rather than always relying on localized, individualized mediums such as the traditional paint and brush allow. As Manual Delanda stated, thinking in ‘populations’ rather than totalities must be continuously addressed. Franks examples of the Gentoo Linux servers that were collaboratively built, masked and utilized under the umbrella of the institution, yet invisible to that same institution, show how as he stated it, one could “bypass the academic IT department with its computer system protectors – walls erected as safeguards for the interlocked computer systems of the institution” eventually becoming ‘absorbed’. Yet, is this just an absorption OR is it a synthesis of new concepts created from the juxtaposition of two seemingly opposing forces? OR is it a new type of seed that continues to grow inside an institutional womb that has potentialities for absorbing the larger, more dominant system such as a vine that absorbs an architectural structure after that structure falls into disuse as in the case of some structures surrounding the site at Chernobyl .

A few questions remain for me as I think about some of the issues that arise when reading Franks work. Frank notes that some of the artworks embody the time of the ‘1960’s’ in some ways. I am wondering then, what the difference is between ‘now’ and the 1960’s? What is the teaching function and how does the pedagogist respond to these growing questions and constant evolution of art – especially now that ‘art as image’ has been replaced with ‘systems theories’? What is the role of the museum/gallery and what does Frank mean when he says that these institutions tend to keep people out rather than let them in?

Art is marginalized when it is disconnected from life and human needs. As Frank suggested, we as educators must convey a pedagogy that moves “beyond the mode of disinterested contemplation to something that is more participatory and engaged” as opposed to that of the “disembodied eye”. “Artistic activity does not have an immutable essence but “evolves” according to social needs and context” as he suggested. I will be thinking and conversing on these questions in the coming months and I would like to thank Frank for the splendid essay on my work!







Refernces
Delanda, M. (2006). A New Philosophy of Society. London: Continuum.
Virilio, P. (2006). City of Panic. Berg Publishrs.

ORIGINAL ESSAY

Networks, Ecology, Germination: The Artwork of Mark Grimm
Frank Shifreen (Arts and Education)

Mark Grimm is an artist creating works in various media, using systems concepts to generate technological and environmental art. He has produced an evolving body of work, often in collaboration with his wife, Amy Cheatle (see Newsletter # ). Mark and Amy are emerging artists who use art deliberately to reflect on social issues, using an unusual mix of materials and ideas. The work could be characterized as a combination of social activism, synergism, whole systems thinking, science, practicality, function driven technology, and biology -- with a strong aesthetic sensibility. The works have political content that is ecology minded -- "green,” situationist, even anarchic. The works have a poetry that is greater than the sum of the parts they are constructed with.

I first saw Mark's work as a painter. He exhibited a series of minimal canvasses, the only image being the light revolving around and reflecting from the shine of the surface. They were pristine, Apollonian and serene.

Mark has understanding, vision, and technical expertise in computer technology, creating networks, and composing music as well as visual art via high technology. He has mastered the complexities of various systems.

He is also concerned with issues of violence, power, and control, creating a series of video and performance works dealing with these issues. His subjects are antiwar demonstrations, the mechanics of guns, and socially embedded violence. His works are personal and social meditations on these themes. This series is much darker than his other works and has an aura of anxiety and anger. He is trying to locate pathmarks in the continuum of aggression that is pervasive in our society. I would hazard that before he can create a visionary society through action where he can share his positive regard, he must traverse a land whose geography is violence, repression and the toll it takes on us.

These works are a statement about what is, as opposed to his other works, which are about what can be. Bill Nichols (1988), in his update of Walter Benjamin’s article ‘Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,’ discusses the hyper-masculinity that has tainted our culture. What can we say? Sept. 11th, the war, our relations with ourselves and nature, all refer to this continuing problem. The underlying attitudes have tainted our relations with everything . Mark has expressed this recently by showing the videos he has made in conjunction with lectures or installations. An overarching theme of his oeuvre is empowerment. What oppresses us and what empowers us?

As part of his art practice, while working in an instructional media lab in a university, Mark envisioned and constructed a server, a work he named ‘Gentoo Linux Server.’ This server by-passed the academic IT department with its computer system protectors --walls erected as a safeguard for the interlocked computer systems of the institution. While acceptable to most users this conventionally “safe” system was anathema to scholars and artists who wanted to produce alternative art and culture by experimenting with grassroots communication through autonomous, uncensorable networks. Here, Mark engaged a contemporary aesthetic paradigm that posits art as a bridge, a dialog, circumventing stifling protocols and formal procedures to foster the aims of non-mainstream creativity. Research has shown that it is often through networks that breakthroughs in science, art and culture are produced. This is a form of art the aesthetic philosophy of which differs from common standards, traditional materials, or "art for art’s sake.”

Art can also be a process that is not self-consciously an "art" object. The Gentoo Server was three discarded Mac G3 computers that were salvaged and cobbled together, to create a place where experiments in web communication could happen. Mark set up the system and colleague Daniel Rubin wrote the code that was needed. It is a complex operation. The server existed within the University system, hidden for a time, continued protected with certain restrictions after that , and then was absorbed within the system after an ultimatum by administrators. The server exists presently as a virtual machine within the larger servers of the school, part of an agreement to keep the experiment alive. It was a subversive act, and could have been a cause for disciplinary action for all concerned. It was an important experience for those involved as users, myself being one of them. Mark was able to finesse the political intrigue, with the assistance of John Broughton, a user and faculty advisor. The server was just three old blue computers, hidden in cabinets -- not much to look at visually. It allowed the many users to create, share, publish, and to explore the web. It was the creation of a temporary autonomous zone, as described under the name of Hakim Bey (Peter Lamborn Wilson).
Mark helped many to conceptualize their needs and realize their goals. He provided a lot of help to me. As an example of how important this can be to an artist and cause, I cite my own experience with the server. I organized and curated an antiwar exhibition and web-based collection of art. Mark assisted me with web support and his helpful suggestions. Connections were made to artists and groups in America and throughout the world who sent work that could be displayed on the internet and also printed for wall display. Web-based and "real" exhibitions were held. Several venues were engendered in response to the Internet shows, culminating in an exhibition at the World Social Forum in Mumbai, India. All the work was sent to a server there, as files, and then they were printed on fabric as huge banners and placed throughout the City. Contrast earlier days, as I remember well, when all art was done through art magazines, or other standard media outlets, and it was very difficult to make contact with artists in other countries

Mark’s collaborations with Amy Cheatle are very different. They use various media, video, performance process, agriculture, ecology, personal history, iconography, and found objects to create works that are experiential, phenomenological, political and interactive. They are research driven ecological artists, using art to learn, practice, report and inform about their investigation and experiments in nature.

Thesse collaborative works recall the commune movement of the 60s and other disaffected and situationist work of the recent past, including my own . They hark back to the land movement and the utopian communities of the previous century. Much of their work embodies this time when art had a strong social, community and teaching function.
Artist and author Suzi Gablik (1998) has identified the aesthetic process in our culture, quoting Satish Kumar, from India, as one in which the desert of beauty features works of art isolated from the world in oases. Museums, galleries keep more people out than let them in. It is important to bring these ideas back to the white space. Art is marginalized when it disconnects from life and human needs. Arthur Danto has referred to this state of affairs as the “disenfranchisement”of art, because of the hidden constraints of a morally neutral, art-for-arts-sake-only program that does not allow art to play the a role in the community. There have been many attempts to create the context of this aesthetic in the past. Many artists including myself have created works and deeds that embodied ideals of personal or social action in critical areas. I first began to question these paradigms when I created exhibitions and actions in the 1980s.
"As many artists shift their work arena from the studio to the more public
contexts of political, social, and environmental life, we are all being called,
in our understanding of what art is, to move beyond the mode of disinterested
contemplation to something that is more participatory and engaged. Such art
may not hang on walls; it may not even be found in museums or beautiful
objects, but rather in some visible manifestation of what psychologist James
Hillman refers to as "the soul's desperate concerns." For such artists, vision
is not defined by the disembodied eye, as we have been trained to believe.
Vision is a social practice that is rooted in the whole of being."

In the Grimm-Cheatle exhibition Org: Reaping the White Walls at the Teachers College Macy Gallery (assisted by artist Jacob Roesch), the impetus was a longing for nature and natural food in the urban environment. Mark and Amy have young children. They created a garden subversively on the roof of TC, building large, rolling planting modules, in which they grew wheat, barley, and other plants. They then harvested the crop and baked bread and made beer from the grain. They exhibited the beer in racks, the bottled beer being presented as art.
A part of the exhibition in another room was an installation of mounded earth that was seeded with wheat. During the course of the exhibition the wheat grew rapidly, adding a natural presence to the gallery (see Newsletter # ). The work had aspects of process and performance art. The visual component -- the racks and wheat, with some images on the wall -- was clearly art with an intention of a visual art object. The reach was a greater and more meaningful vision than pure form. On opening night, they served their bread from the garden. The beauty and simplicity of life: seeds grow, even in a gallery. Life has such power to unfold. The process visible during an art exposition made it more mysterious and beautiful. The work was holistic, synergistic, biological.

I found a lot of resonance with Mark and Amy’s work in the “relational aesthetics” of French philosopher and curator Nicholas Bourriaud, a notion developed in a large exhibition he curated in 1996 called ‘Trafic.’ As defined by Bourriaud, relational art is "a set of artistic practices which take as their theoretical and practical point of departure the whole of human relations and their social context, rather than an independent and private space" – an idea much in tune with Gablik’s. Esthetique relationnel allows for an art that is not quite in the realm of most art practice; it can be transactional, performative, and situationist. Artistic activity does not have an immutable essence but evolves according to social needs and context. Modernity, the search for the new and startling forms of art, is a lost cause, devoid of meaning in our time. It is only a rallying cry for traditionalist art, as an antithesis.

A later Grimm-Cheatle collaboration was a further development of the issues presented in Org. It was titled CoHabit: Cooperative Networks and Ecologies, a complex installation combining different threads of structure and meaning. Each part of the piece had deep significance for the artists and communicated to participant onlookers. The piece started with a piece of land in Rochester, New York that had to be sold after Mark's father’s untimely death. The land had a barn on it that had been used for gardening and his father’s workshop, and it was going to be sold to a developer to pay family debts. The artists disassembled the barn and cut it up into blocks. (MARIA: ask Mark where online reader can view speeded up qwiktime video of destroying the barn?) In the show, fruit baskets from the barn were filled with earth and wheat and placed in the gallery. Earth, seeded with wheat was laid on the gallery floor and watered. The result was a landscape with topographical features in miniature. Visitors were asked to create structures with the blocks and baskets, to assemble or reassemble at will. There was also a video wall with imagery, and short pieces related to the project. The sum of the whole installation was a complete environment -- an ecosystem in miniature, including the human element of chance and interactivity. I enjoyed the opportunity to play and create structures. The various shapes of the wood helped create assemblages that were interesting objects in their own right that looked like sculptures, buildings, or models set in a landscape of hills and foliage. This show was the creation of an architecture and community that was poignant and beautifully expressed. Mark and Amy’s recent works in Rochester are continuing these investigations of agricultural nature and our relation to it.


Sidebar:
I hope I will be forgiven for egotistically mentioning that I have long championed such concepts. I organized and curated exhibitions in the 80s that were artist and community based. I was the director of the Gowanus Memorial Artyard, which was a dummy organization that I set up for my artistic ideas, similar to Mark’s situationist actions.
It had the aura of respectability. I organized a series of large exhibitions and created sculpture gardens on the banks of the Gowanus Canal – that site is now a superfund toxic waste dump. I called the series the Monumental Shows. The name referred to the monuments that are constructed to depict what should be remembered. I wanted artists to create a content-based art that celebrated other ideas (political, social, and environmental), since there was little community art at the time. There were books written by architects about their pieces, and other books on the Gowanus by artists in the show.
One part of these shows was a grassroots architectural competition that I created called the Gowanus Canal Redefined, to redesign and focalize one of the most polluted waterways in the nation. There were many entries. A book was written about one of them. Ideas ranged from actual sculptural architecture or utopian communities to plans for cleaning and sustaining the waterway. All I had was an impulse and did not know how to conceptualize what I was doing. I could not sustain the effort without an aesthetic supporting it.

Bibliography
Nicolas Bourriaud
Relational Aesthetics Esthétique Rélationnel, Les Presse du Réel published the original French text in 1998 and the English translation in 2001-2.
Suzi Gablik
New Renaissance magazine Vol. 8, No. 1 Copyright © 1998 by Renaissance Universal, all rights reserved.

The World as Organization Ernst Laszlo alexander laszlo
Systems Research and Behavioral Science Vol 14 N0.1, 1997 Wiley and Sons
Victor Turner
The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (1969), Aldine Transaction 1995 paperback: ISBN 0-202-01190-9
Raoul Eshelman
Raoul Eshelman-Performatism, or the End of Postmodernism
Anthropoetics - Anthropoetics - The Electronic Journal of Generative Anthropology
Vol 6, no. 2 (Fall 2000 / Winter 2001)
Hakim Bey
T. A. Z.
The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism
By Hakim Bey
Autonomedia, NY 1985, 1991.
Benjamin, Walter. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." Harry Zohn, trans. 1936. Excerpt.
Levy, Steven. Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution. New York: Dell Publishing, 1984.
Nichols, Bill. "The Work of Culture in the Age of Cybernetic Systems." Screen 29 (May 1988): 22-46.
Gregory Sholette
Disciplining The Avant-Garde, The United States versus The Critical Art Ensemble
CIRCA 112, Summer 2005, pp. 50 - 59
Arthur C.Danto
The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art
Columbia University Press NY 1986
Terry Eagleton
Ideology of the Aesthetic
Blackwell Pub. Malden MA 1990
Randall Collins
Sociology of Philosophies:
A Global Theory of Intellectual Change
Belknap Imp. Harvard Press 1998
Helen Molesworth Ed. Et al.
Work Ethic
University of Pennsylvania Press
2003
Kevin Kelley
New Rules for the New Economy
10 Radical Strategies for a Connected World
Penguin New York 1998
Greil Marcus
Lipstick Traces:
A secret History of the 20th Century
Harvard University Press Cambridge MA 1989
G.Deleuze& F. Guattari
A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia
University of Minnesota Press Minneapolis 1989 (B Massumi ,trans)

---

---

No trackback:

Trackback link: