France has not really been known for any particular warm academic embrace of media studies despite the otherwise interesting legacies of theories of technology. However, Sorbonne at Paris 3 is running now a seminar on media archaeology, more specifically called “Archéologie des médias et histoire de l’art” convened by Larisa Dryansky together with Antonio Somaini and Riccardo Venturi.
Their list of speakers is very exciting and for its own part demonstrates that there is a body of really interesting work on new technologies and media archaeology in France. A lot of scholars all around the country are working actively on philosophical and historical themes that pertain to media histories and contemporary culture. The Sorbonne series is part of the National Institute of Art History (INHA) and you can download the full programme (as PDF) here.
Besides individual researchers’ work and the recent MCD special issue, also future translations of work such as Friedrich Kittler’s is bound to have an impact on the conversations happening in French. Two Kittler translations are expected to come out in 2015.
In the new e-flux issue #62 you will also find an interview Paul Feigelfeld conducted with me: “Media Archaeology Out of Nature“. It focuses primarily on the themes of media theory, ecology and interfaces also with the work we do with the emerging Consortium (with WSA, University of California San Diego and Parsons School of Design, New School); synthetic intelligence, the planetary media condition, remote sensing, etc.
With a focus on the “media ecology”-trilogy of Digital Contagions, Insect Media, and the forthcoming A Geology of Media, the interview maps topics related to the ecopolitics of technological culture. A warm thanks to Paul for the interview and supporting my aspirations to be a digital thought deserter.
“Media theory would become boring if it were merely about the digital or other preset determinations. There are too many “digital thought leaders” already. We need digital thought deserters, to poach an idea from Blixa Bargeld. In an interview, the Einstürzende Neubauten frontman voiced his preference for a different military term than “avant-garde” for his artistic activity: that of the deserter. He identifies not with the leader but rather with the partisan, “somebody in the woods who does something else and storms on the army at the moment they did not expect it.”7 Evacuate yourself from the obvious, by conceptual or historical means. Refuse prefabricated discussions, determinations into analogue or digital. Leave for the woods.
But don’t mistake that for a Luddite gesture. Instead, I remember the interview you did with Erich Hörl, where he called for a “neo-cybernetic underground”—one that “does not let itself be dictated by the meaning of the ecologic and of technology, neither by governments, nor by industries.”8 It’s a political call as much as an environmental-ecological one—a call that refers back to multiple (Guattarian) ecologies: not just the environment but the political, social, economic, psychic, social, and, indeed, media ecologies.”
Besides that longer e-flux text, two other short texts appeared the same day: a general audience text on media and the Anthropocene in Conversation and also a mini-interview conducted by the Finnish Institute in London as part of their Made By-series.
I was asked to participate in this short online Q&A on “Three Questions on Media Criticality”. It is presented at transmediale 2015 on this Sunday (1/2/15).
The responses were to be very short and focused. As I cannot make it to the panel myself, here are my very short responses to questions posed by Jamie Allen and his team.
Submission Date 2015-01-05 10:28:47/Jussi Parikka
What are promising modes of critique today?
I am interested in critique that produces something. In other words, a critique that sets itself not merely as oppositional but alternative; it produces alternative worlds alongside the ones it wants to depart from. Critique is creative – critique creates; this is not meant as a fluffy “everything goes”-sort of an embracement of the world but as acknowledgement of the various modalities in which critique can work, across different media practices.
What is critical about media technologies?
Media technologies offer the critical situation in which issues of power and knowledge are constantly operationalized. In other words, while we have to learn to be critical of media in the sense of media literacy, we also have to see how media IS critical; it divides and differentiates; it grounds and processes distinctions that are fundamental to cultural formations even if not always anymore even perceptible to us. After phenomenology, media ontology.
What comes after critique?
While there are good reasons to move on from critique as automatically assumed primary method and rhetorical form of theory, we have to recognize that also “critique” is a historical, changing form of a cultural technique. It has to become mediatic, executed in different materials and modalities. Critique that distances in order to keep the world (humans or non-humans) at arms length does not interest me as much as critique entangled with the world
Curated by Dr Ebru Yetiskin, the exhibition Waves (Dalgalar) is definitely worth the visit at Blok Art Space in Istanbul. The exhibition features several of the key emerging names in the Istanbul technological art scene; beautifully installed across fitting space, Waves includes an implicit media historical reference in the midst of new works of rhythm, interaction and indeed, plenty of strings attached. The theme of strings comes out beautifully in how some of the work is installed, especially Candaş Şişman’s Re-conn-act with its vertical string pillars that offer a collective acoustics space and invite to touch this vibrating environment.
By addressing the ubiquity of the wave form as a key symbol from sound waves to brain waves, financial cycles/fluctuations and social movements, Yetiskin aims to present an aesthetic entry point to the contemporary world and its modes of representation. One key reference point across the works resides in physics and the tension between waves and particles. One could also ask in the context of the works whether this tension is nowadays, or in the context of technical media, to be described as one of waves and discrete symbols (the Turing age)? The energetic waves and their rhythms are tightly interlinked with the discrete principles of computation. Or in media historical terms; the wave is build up of many layers, from the handwritten continuity of text, to physics experiments and models such as Helmholtz’s in the 19th century; to the principles of analog computation; the curves of mathematics and waves of sine and cosine, etc. : the ubiquity of the wave is actually part of a media archaeology of various stages, itself a wave, a recurrence.
One could even use this quote by Helmholtz as one sort of a motto for this exhibition, demonstrating a link to the psychophysical and rational aesthetics that stems as part of the 19th century already:
“Aesthetics seeks the essence of the artistically beautiful in its unconscious rationality. I have… sought to reveal the hidden law that determines the mellifluousness of harmonic tonal connections. Actually, this is something that happens unconsciously as far as the overtones are concerned, which are indeed perceived by the nerves but do not usually come forth into the domain of conscious ideation; nevertheless, their pleasantness or unpleasantness is felt without the listener knowing where the grounds for such feelings lie.” (Helmholtz, Über die physiologischen Ursachen der musikalischen Harmonie, lecture from 1857, published in Vorträge und Reden in 1896 90).
Of course it has to be noted that in the case of the Waves-exhibition, often this “unconscious rationality” is algorithmic or in reference to the world of modern (quantum) physics.
In a sense, one can approach the pieces of the exhibition as implicitly illuminating the various stages where waves appear and disappear in history. Some of the work is more tightly “media archaeological” such as Erdal Inci’s reanimation of the loop – GIF animations filmed in the real world, both representing a link to pre-cinematic short loop entertainment such as mutoscope reels and the digital short format as well. Many of the work, such as Korhan Erel’s “Findings”, investigates another media historical theme, i.e. the graphical print form of sound waves; intermedia on the level of spectral signatures of frequency/time. In general, the several pieces work nicely together.
Besides the exhibition, the Waves-programme includes talks that range from physics to philosophy.
Last Spring we at #WSA started a consortium partnership with two other universities: University of California (San Diego) and Parsons School of Design (New School, NYC). Together with Jordan Crandall and Benjamin Bratton from USCD and Ed Keller from Parsons we are addressing themes such as machine perception, remote sensing, synthetic intelligence, etc. We are also organising a panel for transmediale 2015 – and Jordan Crandall will be in performing his drone performance Unmanned.
But already before transmediale at the end of this month, we are organising a group meeting and a public panel this week in San Diego under the rubric of “Autonomous: Sensing“.
Last Spring, we organised a panel in Winchester on Design and Contemporary Technological Realities and we aim to continue these meetings alongside some publications and curating exhibitions with the consortium partners.
— update —
Below some pictures from the San Diego-event and our panel.
A lovely new interview with Geoffrey Winthrop-Young has been posted online: “More things in theory than heaven and earth are dreaming of.” Conducted by Melle Kromhout and Peter McMurray, it brings out great points. Winthrop-Young is always a pleasure to read, both because of the tone and the insights. Of course, in this case I remain biased, with the focus of the interview being about the so-called German media theory (which is not, as we are reminded, not so German, not pretending to present a big theory nor is it really merely German), Bernhard Siegert, cultural techniques and by the end, also about “media biology”. What’s not to like.
GWY has a fantastic sense of explication when it comes to media theory. When he responds about the subject topic of the interview that “cultural techniques are further installation of modern theory’s crusade against the as such” it both gives a subtle sense of how it maps as part of the contemporary theory landscape (and the persisting enthusiasm for the ontological as suchs) and also reminds me why I feel attracted to cultural techniques and related media analytical directions; I am, after all, a slowly recovering (cultural) historian who does not mind that the notions we operate by, the cultural layers, “all the levels all the way down are made up of historically locatable practices” even if with various twists of complex feedback loops.
Istanbul is most often commented for its stunning beauty in a manner that approaches a modern touristic version of orientalism. For sure it is stunning, but the other side of Istanbul, as real but less visible, is the barbed wire protecting upper middle class & luxury housing areas, security cameras, traffic queues, and TOKIs. Indeed, urban planning and Istanbul is such a rich case study not merely if one is interested in Turkey but global capitalism and megacities in general.
To quote a recent MoMA-exhibition Uneven Growth:
“TOKI development parallels the emergence of a new middle class in Istanbul for whom a TOKI flat is part of a dream of car and house ownership, even if this brings social isolation, long hours in traffic, and long-term debt.”
(Image from Moma/Uneven Growth.)