|
| |
Art, Technology and the Culture of Production
From: Columbia University
| By:
Eric ChanHeather Schatz |
EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION |
Through the ages, artists have seized emerging technologies, using new tools, new materials and new media to produce new kinds of art. In the second half of the twentieth century, video, multimedia and digital media have widened the possibilities of what we can call art by enabling artists to express their ideas in innovative ways. Digital media has gradually begun to break into the established contemporary art world. The opportunities for distribution have also opened up as virtual art galleries appear on the Internet.
But, as the artist duo ChanSchatz demonstrate, technology and the power of the computer can also have other, more subtle applications in the creation of art. Intelligent processing systems, databases, networked communication and interactive functionality can all be used in the process of making art, even when the resulting works of art are in analog form.
Eric Chan and Heather Schatz, adjunct assistant professors in the Visual Arts Division of Columbia University's School of the Arts, brought Fathom to their studio in Manhattan to talk about their philosophy and the process of producing art in the digital age. |
 he precedents for digital art come from a wide spectrum of sources, including technological, informational and traditional art arenas. Projects ranging from Jim Shaw's image-based hypertext project and Nancy Burson's 1970s work with E.A.T. (Experiments in Art and Technology) to the endless mainstream projects facilitated by the Macintosh computer in the 1980s all contribute new forms of artistic practice based in art and technology. There is no existing monograph that documents the breadth of contributors to the history of new media, mainly because the field is so large and diverse. |
Continual shifts within our digital, media-laden and information-based culture inform our practice of new-media production and our contributions to current art discourse. In our case, there is a range of precedents that are helpful in framing our practice. They include early figures of conventional art practice: Marcel Broodthaers's activities of self-representation; the systems work of Matt Mullican; Allan McCullom and his production projects; Daniel Buren's context-specific projects; the typological archiving of Bernd and Hilla Becher; and Fred Wilson's projects engaging institutions. Movements and creative models outside of fine art are also notable precedents: Muriel Cooper's Visible Language Workshop at MIT's Media Lab; Bell Labs' Text-to-Speech Synthesis group from the 1960s and '70s; the pioneering Emigre digital typography project of Zuzana Licko and Rudy VanderLans; and the holistic multimedia practice of Charles and Ray Eames. |
 The globalization of the desktop computer, new forms of independent production and distribution, and the establishment of the digital image and the digital interface continue to inform our work. As artists, we coexist with the Human Genome Project, the advent of the database as a cultural form, video games and what Bernd Schmitt calls "experiential marketing." Our work engages the recent histories of photography, video and performance in addition to explorations into the discourses of architecture and design. These genres are not only precedents but media in which our work takes shape. |
Using computer technologies
Our use of the computer is as pervasive in our practice as in a movie studio or car production plant, and as integral as the central server of the New York Stock Exchange is to its existence. We use the computer as a basic tool while at the same time exploring the contextual breadth and possibilities of the digital environment. |
For instance, when we first started working together we invented a visual language of images and characters. Each drawing session was carefully documented and charted. It became clear to us that our system of image-making was similar to that of an image bank or archive, where each image is cataloged and available for use in the future. Today, as we develop projects, we both use and add to our ChanSchatz database. Our continually evolving database of images and projects focuses on the digital potential of information rather than its material or physical dimension. Rooted in the actual process of making, this data-mining of information represents a new dimension in contemporary artistic production. |
The ChanSchatz Sponsor Project
As the art world tries to determine what is or is not digital art, we make no attempt to simplify the issue. In fact, we like this question to force multiple responses--and we appreciate its ability to blur the distinction between art and commerce. As it is unrealistic to believe that digital production occurs in a vacuum, we have chosen to incorporate the production realities of digital production as the subject of our work through the ChanSchatz Sponsor Project. |
A single work of art or project of ours is developed from an extensive number of tools and materials manufactured by many different corporations. For us, the process of making art is as important to the artwork as the completed idea or object. The production lineage of the artwork is a fundamental part of the process. By identifying the commercial lineage of our work and making it integral to the art itself, we acknowledge the pervasiveness of commerce and corporate culture in contemporary society and illuminate sponsorship as a new form of cultural enterprise. |
The ChanSchatz Sponsor Project externalizes the extended network of production relationships required to complete our projects. By design, we have created a project that is not limited to one industry but incorporates all media, production cycles and markets. We currently have an ongoing sponsorship list involving more than 100 active relationships with manufacturers and industry leaders of materials, machinery, software and hardware. |
Every element of our practice and projects is considered sponsorable. Instead of traveling down to Canal Street in New York City to purchase a holographic fabric, we research, contact and build a relationship with a manufacturer. Rather than building stands for our sculptures, we contact furniture companies who contribute tables, chairs and lighting to our museum exhibitions. |
What is the role of the artist in the twenty-first century? For us it is not about changing the world but about laying the groundwork for an alternative creative structure that is economically viable, self-aware and culturally relevant. |
The culture of production
The culture of production is what interests us: it is a catalyst for the evolution of our practice as well as a means for connecting what we do to a larger audience. It provides the context for inventing, researching and immersing ourselves in digital culture as producers, not consumers or critics. |
You could say our production is "production" itself, which means we have no specific medium or single output for our work. Our interest lies in the hidden attributes of art: the fabrication, exhibition history, funding and sponsorship, equipment and supplies of the entire process. It lies in everything that comprises the entire experience of making art--which is typically not the information that is considered when encountering a work of art in a gallery or museum. |
We feel that, in the arena of digital production, these "hidden issues" reflect and affect or contribute to the final work. For us, building a corporate relationship is just as important as building a link within a Web project or executing a CNC-milled Sintra panel. |
Currently, the most consistent impact that digital processes have had on our work stems from the informational connectivity and distribution of data. Our Digital System Production™ (dsp™) relies on just such information. The dsp™ creates a portrait of an institution by developing individual relationships with members of that institution. An example of this is the event at Real Art Ways, described in a related Fathom story, "Fine Art in the Digital Age: The Output of ChanSchatz." |
What attracts us to the arena of production is its extensive culture. Through our Sponsor Project we have engaged new audiences and added new partners from a number of backgrounds. Our choice is to position our practice inside the systems of American and popular culture and co-opt the business and branding realities of making art. It is the circularity of the production process that engages us, not the predictability of the outcome. |
Technology and youth culture
As a culture, we are obsessed with origins, from the Human Genome Project to comic book characters to online genealogy. When we invented our ChanSchatz language of characters, we carefully charted and recorded their creative evolution both as families of forms and as a connectable series of projects. |
Young people, because of their familiarity with video games, Pokémon™ and Beanie Babies™, naturally digest this layered complexity. Their capacity to absorb vast amounts of information is limitless. Commercial systems such as gaming and collectibles rely on extremely complex relationships: Beanies, with their collectible cycles of tags and retirement dates, have created an entire online trading industry that is controlled and regulated by users. Pokémon's extensive merchandising output has extended trading-card activity to its zenith. Young children fluently understand and memorize this competition-oriented structure and evolutionary biodiversity. |
This new attitude toward complexity and relational imagery and objects is reflected in an extended level of interest when looking at art. Kids want to know where our shapes come from, and they are not surprised when the answer is an elaborate lineage charting new projects and various contexts. |
|
| |
