Part of what I like about the Generative Art pieces (the
sound machine project) is that inevitably one of the machines goes awry and
does something it is not intended to do. Not a huge diversion – but the
comments often cycle around “it worked better at home” or “ can I try it
again?” I ma amused by this largely because the parameters of this project are
set up to insure that something will happen that the creator couldn’t control.
The conversation then turns to what this means aesthetically. So – if
traditional art making is about control – in the sense of skill, training or
technique – then what do pieces like this have to offer? This gives us an
opportunity to talk about the whole life/art thing that we addressed with the
Fluxus projects. I continue to reflect no Cage’s art should reflect nature in
her manner of operation – which isn’t always controlled.
So we talks about how the machines worked and what the
process was of creating them in the first place. So, basic questions about
approaches – each machine was designed to do the same thing – make a sound –
but how each machine went about it was very different. IN reflecting on this we
talked a bit about the Flaming Lips Zaireeka – designed to be listened to on
four CDs simultaneously. This gave way to a discussion of other indeterminate
pieces such as Milan Knizak’s prepared vinyl project Remko Sha’s machine
guitars, Terry Reily’s In C and Cardew’s The Great Learning paragraph 7 – all
driven by an idea that develops once set in motion. So – indeterminacy as an
aesthetic device.
We followed that up with a discussion of Steve Reich’s
“music as a gradual process” and Eno’s comments on Generative Music. Staring
with Reich’s Pendulum Music – a microphone suspended over a speaker and swung
with feedback like a pendulum. The process is both visible and audible – you
can see and hear it slow down. It is both deterministic and indeterminate at
the same time – it will always come to rest, but not always by the same
pattern. Then we listen to “Come Out” – all 13+ minutes of it. It is a process
of listening to changes over time. As Reich points out this piece does not
develop by chance – once it is set in motion it simply executes the process.
This leads to Eno’s generative music, apps, 77 Million Paintings, and Conway’s
Game of Life. I love the connection to contemporary scientific models in that
traditional science is like classical forms – driven by order, where as
contemporary forms are often driven by chaos.
Framing it this way is helping to bring focus back to the
class. I struggled with this the last time I taught it. After the Fluxus pieces
– which were set just before the break last time and just after this time – the
energy seems to dissipate. I think largely because the first two thirds of the
term are driven by groups with clear ideological ideas – Futurism, Dada, and
Surrealism – which gives way to less clear focus. So for the past week or so I
have kind of felt like, well we have this list of terms and ideas and here we
are looking at yet another example. Moving past the gen Art stuff helps with
this. For me the revelation was Reich learned from his tape loop experiments
and then brought that phase shifting into his compositional approach. So – he
absorbs that process as a more traditional aesthetic technique. Eno does the
same thing, but he is still keeping some of the outcome flexible. One of the
students defined that at the difference between destination art and
non-destination art. One you know in advance – the other you don’t.
That brought to mind Bill Viola’s note about the statement
“if all you have is a hammer you tend to treat everything as a nail” which has
become my mantra for the second half of the term (the first half it was
Duchamp’s “I force myself to contradict myself in order to avoid conforming to
my own taste). The point here is that these ideas become different types of
hammers and ask different questions. This led us to the Situationists –
seemingly off the topic – but brings together the aesthetic ideas with larger
cultural ones. The Marxist/ Anarchist frame. The point with that is Debord’s
comment "that which changes our way of seeing the street is more important
that which changes our way of seeing painting.” So – the ideas evolve and, with
the Situationists, the objects disappear. This links back to the notion f
concept art we discussed earlier in the term. What I always like about discussing
the Situationists makes me want to roam – so we wandered across campus talking
about Detournment, derive, and psychogeographical spaces. I will tie this all in
with Punk and the discussion of our next project - the Auto Destructive Art
projects.
