[LEAuthors] Leonardo Electronic Almanac vol.12 no.3 March 2004
MIT Press
lea at mail-mitpress.mit.edu
Tue Mar 2 11:47:33 EST 2004
/ ____
/ / /\
/ /-- /__\
/______/____ / \
________________________________________________________________
Leonardo Electronic Almanac volume 12, number 3, March 2004
http://lea.mit.edu
________________________________________________________________
ISSN #1071-4391
____________
| |
| CONTENTS |
|____________|
________________________________________________________________
EDITORIAL
---------
< Thank you, LEA 2003 Reviewers by Patrick Lambelet>
LEONARDO REVIEWS
----------------
< Beyond Productivity: Information Technology, Innovation, and
Creativity, reviewed by Amy Ione >
< Sarai Reader 03: Shaping Technologies, reviewed by Aparna
Sharma >
ISAST NEWS
----------
< In memoriam: Billy Kluver, co-founder of E.A.T. >
< Leonardo/ISAST collaborates with ISEA 2006, San Jose,
California >
< Leonardo/ISAST governing board members renew terms >
< Arthur Elsenaar and Remko Scha win the 2003 Leonardo Award
for Excellence >
< Leonardo International Advisory Board welcomes new member
Hisham Bizri >
< Leonardo collaborates with Harvestworks >
________________________________________________________________
_______________
| |
| EDITORIAL |
|_______________|
________________________________________________________________
< Thank you, LEA 2003 Reviewers >
by Patrick Lambelet
LEA Managing Editor
plambelet at tiscali.it
Readers will notice that this month's LEA is significantly
shorter than usual. This is due to a variety of factors. In
January, we held a brief but energetic weekend meeting near
Pisa, Italy between the LEA editorial staff (currently residing
in Italy and Switzerland) and Leonardo Executive Editor Roger
Malina. What became very clear in those three days was that LEA
is part of an energetic, thriving, worldwide community, bringing
together ideas and visions that might otherwise never encounter
each other.
Looking back over LEA's 2003 issues, we see a mind-
boggling array of topics - Women, Art and Technology, Zero-
Gravity Art, Technology and Difference, Interstellar Message
Composition, the Contemplative Study of Consciousness and
excerpts from the Leonardo Book Series and *Leonardo Music
Journal*, only to mention a few. There is surely something in
there to satisfy the intellectual appetite of nearly anyone
interested in the arts, sciences and technology, no matter how
diverse their fields of interest.
We fully intend to improve and progress in this direction,
despite the eternal constraints of a miniscule and
geographically disparate staff. What we lack in number, we
certainly compensate for in terms of energy and commitment.
Nonetheless, we found that in the midst of implementing new
production procedures and discussing forthcoming projects and
initiatives, it was best to put out a "thin" LEA, albeit one
that is on time.
A crucial part in the LEA production process is played by our
peer-reviewers, anonymous significant individuals who generously
give their educated opinions on manuscripts submitted to us for
publication, thus ensuring that we publish only material that
meets the highest academic standards and adds to the existing
body of knowledge in the field.
Although our peer-review process is "blind" (reviewers' and
authors' identities are not revealed to each other) - in this
issue, in order to express our sincere appreciation to our
reviewers, we publicly thank those who gave their precious time
to support us in 2003.
Finally, in this month's Leonardo Reviews, we feature
contributions by Amy Ione and Aparna Sharma, while ISAST News
keeps readers up to date on the latest happenings in the
Leonardo community.
________________________________________________________________
______________________________
| |
| THANK YOU PEER-REVIEWERS |
| 2003 |
|______________________________|
________________________________________________________________
The Leonardo Electronic Almanac would like to gratefully
acknowledge the following individuals for providing invaluable
assistance as peer-reviewers for articles considered for
publication in 2003. Peer-reviewers are instrumental in
maintaining the highest standards that we strive for in material
that is published in LEA. Each article considered for
publication passes through a peer-review process, thus ensuring
the highest possible degree of accuracy and rigorousness.
* Adeline Kueh, La Salle-SIA College of the Arts, Singapore
* Alex Adriaansens, V2_Organization, Netherlands
* Anne Nigten, V2_Organization, Netherlands
* Annick Bureaud, Leonardo/OLATS, France
* Arthur Woods, OURS Foundation, Switzerland
* B. Alan Wallace, Santa Barbara Institute for the
Interdisciplinary Study of Consciousness
* Beau Takahara, ZeroOne-The Art of Technology Network, USA
* Craig Harris, Ballet of the Dolls, USA
* David Rosenboom, California Institute of the Arts, USA
* Douglas Vakoch, SETI Institute, USA
* Fatima Lasay, University of Philippines
* Irina Aristarkhova, National University of Singapore
* Jeffrey Schloss, Westmont College, USA
* Margaret Tan, New Media and Performance Artist, Singapore
* Masha Chuikova, Multimedia Center of Actual Art, Moscow
* Marko Peljhan, Projekt Atol, Slovenia
* Michael Naimark, Independent Media Artist/Researcher, USA
* Nicola Triscott, Arts Catalyst, United Kingdom
* Richard Clar, Art Technologies, France/USA
* Rob La Frenais, Arts Catalyst, United Kingdom
* Robert Pepperell, University of Wales College, Newport (UWCN)
* Roger Malina, Leonardo/ISAST, USA;
Laboratoire d'Astronomie Spatiale, France
* Simon Conway Morris,University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
* Steven Dick, U.S. Naval Observatory, USA
________________________________________________________________
_________________________________
| |
| LEONARDO REVIEWS |
| 2004.03 |
|_________________________________|
________________________________________________________________
This month, as the LEA publishing timetables have shifted
slightly out of synch, this report on *Leonardo Reviews* is
being filed before the full list of reviews for March has been
compiled. Consequently, all we are able to do here is draw your
attention to two fascinating reports that have been filed. The
first, by Amy Ione, covers a report that is significant to the
Leonardo community. *Beyond Productivity: Information
Technology, Innovation, and Creativity* has already been covered
in *Leonardo Reviews*, but Ione's is a timely reminder of the
issues that should be addressed and those that the report has
overlooked. The second is a review of the *Sarai Reader* by one
of our Indian reviewers, Aparna Sharma. Emerging from CSDS,
Dehli, this project, has excited many colleagues with its novel
approach to publishing and its invitation to revisit theory "out
of the box," so to speak, in particular drawing attention to
theory as a practice. It is a pleasure to be able to feature
both reports side by side here in this way, since they have an
interesting synergy.
Next month, as our new publishing cycles merge again, I will of
course provide the references for all the new material that has
been posted, as usual. In the meantime, new reviews will be
published on the first of the month, as they have been for the
past two years. They can be accessed as always at:
http://leonardoreviews.mit.edu
Michael Punt
Editor-in-Chief
Leonardo Reviews
_____________________________
BEYOND PRODUCTIVITY: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION, AND
CREATIVITY
Edited by William J. Mitchell, Alan S. Inouye and Marjory S.
Blumenthal, The National Academies Press, Washington DC, 2003.
268 pages, illus b/w, paperback $35.00. ISBN: 0-309-08868-2.
Reviewed by Amy Ione, The Diatrope Institute, PO Box 6813,
Santa Rosa, CA, 95406-0813
ione at diatrope.com
Since computer science emerged as a field in the middle of the
twentieth century, it has become an increasingly integral part
of human life. The degree to which revolutionary inventors turn
to computerized tools is both obvious and understated. As a
result, we frequently need to be reminded that computer science
has drawn from and contributed to many disciplines and
practices. These interactions are the core of what we now term
information technology (IT) - new forms of computing and
communications.
*Beyond Productivity: Information Technology, Innovation, and
Creativity*, developed over 18 months, does this, drawing on the
expertise of W.J. Mitchell, N. Katherine Hayles, John Maeda,
Lillian F. Schwartz, Barbara Stafford and other authorities who
were members of the report committee. The report summarizes
where practitioners have developed new applications and praises
the creative promise of this approach. In doing so, this book
argues that the powerful alliance forged by the computer with
arts and design is establishing an exciting new field -
information technology and creative practices (ITCP). Here, they
assert, we find evidence of the benefits in expanding IT's
sphere of influence. The committee also brings to light all that
we might gain from encouraging, supporting and strategically
investing in this domain
Comprehensive and impressive overall, the reader gets a sense
of the excitement experts in the field bring to their research.
Their enthusiasm will no doubt match that of many *Leonardo*
readers who are personally involved with projects that link
computer science with the arts communities. The *Leonardo*
community will also welcome the way the documentation
incorporates innovative architectural and product designs,
computer animated films, computer music, computer games,
interactive art installations, cross-cultural experimentation
and Web-based texts. With an eye toward the future, the report
additionally acknowledges that the abundant examples of current
success also point to the many opportunities for new
collaborative ventures that remain to be explored.
Well-organized overall, the chapters effectively summarize the
broad reach of specific topics and are carefully cross-
referenced to point the reader to areas where ideas were
expanded in an earlier (or later) section. This outline
effectively presents advances in the underlying disciplines of
ITCP and associated applications, probes creativity and comes to
terms with the particular concerns of the academic environment
and policy issues. It would be hard to remain unimpressed by the
encyclopedic accumulation of knowledge concerning all aspects of
the topic. As a fan of the way footnotes allow for an ongoing
counterpoint to an analytic commentary, I was particularly
impressed by the reach of the footnotes. Full of information,
they provided delightful asides to the trends generalized in the
body of the text. Anyone seeking to learn more about a specific
approach will find leads in abundance offered in the extensive
subtext.
Example boxes also add tremendously. Topics included range from
the utility of information technology in our computer-linked
world to use of the computer in music improvisation and the
telerobotics found in the work of people like artist/engineer
Ken Goldberg. While I already knew many of the examples
mentioned in these asides, some, like the fascinating object-
based sculpture of John Simon, served as introductions. (For
those unfamiliar with his work, Simon focuses in on how he
combines the skills of painting, sculpture, computer hardware
construction and software developments.) More functional, but of
great importance to the field, were the boxes that exposed
issues. One, for example, outlined how the new technologies have
led to a review of the laws surrounding copyright protection.
Despite all of these attributes that recommend the report, I
was tremendously disappointed to find that the scrutiny given to
the state of the field did not make a serious attempt to
introduce the key distinction between science and technology and
to clarify how computer science differs from natural science. To
oversimplify, it is generally agreed that technology is the
systematic study of techniques for making and doing things.
Science, by comparison, is defined as the systematic attempt to
understand and interpret the world. From this perspective,
technology is concerned with the fabrication and use of
artifacts. Science, on the other hand, is devoted to the more
conceptual enterprise of understanding the environment. While
one could conclude that both depend upon the comparatively
sophisticated skills of literacy and numeracy, not all would
conclude that the two domains are equivalent (although this
report seemed to implicitly infer they are). Perhaps I missed
it, but as I read through the pages it seemed that this
committee simply assumed that computer science is a science,
much the way social scientists assume their work is science.
However, many continue to question the validity of aligning
fields like mathematics, computer science and social science
with the natural sciences. Similarities in their methodology can
be shown, to be sure. Nonetheless, we can also find that the use
of analogy to manipulate information yields different types of
conclusions from field to field.
One area of contention is the way in which the natural and life
sciences question their analogies through experiments that yield
a different kind of data than creative projects conceived using
mathematical tools that are more adept in coupling
logical/algorithmic criteria when relating information. This
committee never asks if it matters that a logical or algorithmic
"science" approaches inquiry from a different vantage point than
that of a data-driven experimental science. As a result, this
report presents the context of the experiential, technical and
contextual issues effectively without reckoning with what the
analytic rigor of science conveys from field to field. Without
examining the "science" of computer science, these experts
adequately look at everything from working within institutional
environments to funding issues and problems of peer-review
without conceptualizing issues outside of what is essentially a
narrowly defined scope that initially appears to be a quite
sweeping analysis.
Being a National Research Council publication, this oversight
was particularly unsettling. By reputation, this group aims to
further communication on scientific and technological endeavor.
Given its sponsorship, one would assume that clarifying
relationships between science and technology would have a high
priority. Yet *Beyond Productivity* seemed to be more aligned
with the humanities. Indeed it brought the liberal arts of the
medieval European university to mind. In this educational
system, the liberal arts were characterized in terms of the
*Trivium* and the *Quadrivium*. The traditional *Trivium*
included language, rhetoric and logic. Language is seen in terms
of grammar, the study of meaning in written expression. Rhetoric
is defined as a comprehension of verbal and written discourse.
Logic refers to argumentative discourse for discovering truth.
These elements seem integral to the way ITCP methodology is
conceptualized.
Similarly, the *Quandrivium*, like computer science, is about
number. Included are arithmetic, the understanding of numbers;
geometry, the quantification of space; music, the study of
number in time; and astronomy: laws of the planets and stars.
Only astronomy is what all would agree is properly termed
science today. Yet, in the medieval university, the study of
astronomy was hardly the empirical science of contemporary
astronomy.
The transdisciplinary approach that the committee elevates
further brings to mind today's liberal arts curriculum, which
aims to give one a knowledge of the humanities (literature,
language, philosophy, the fine arts and history), the physical
and biological sciences, and mathematics and the social
sciences. This kind of mix seemed to be the foundation for the
undertakings represented in *Beyond Productivity* as well, a
comprehensive survey that did not seem to see its role in terms
of asking challenging questions. Rather, the product suggests
the goal was to communicate issues familiar to those who work in
the art, science and technology environment. Yet - and this is
why I raise this point - in the United States there is an
ongoing debate as to whether educators have dumbed-down science
within the humanistic framework. The lack of engagement with
where science interfaces with ITCP brings this question to mind
and with it, the related question of whether we have
successfully educated humanists to the ideas and methods of the
scientist.
For example, one interesting section outlined the difference
between interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary
thinking/activity. According to the view presented,
interdisciplinary work is the more appropriate term when an
expert in one discipline reaches out to integrate views from
other fields. The transdisciplinary worker, conversely, does not
dabble in related fields. Rather this practitioner will have
developed expertise in all of the fields needed to accomplish a
creative task. While a wonderful goal, particularly in light of
the report's view that interactive projects are becoming more
evident in the evolving institutional environment, I still found
the report did not address why so many who work in art, science
and technology confuse science and technology and
indiscriminately conflate them when doing so.
In summary, the committee does recommend mechanisms that would
enable and sustain productive cross-disciplinary collaborations,
but without addressing the difference between science and
technology (or explaining why the authors believe they are
comparable, if this is their view). This oversight weakens the
overall impact of this report. Elevating the transdisciplinary
projects stressed all that creativity promises but some of the
implicit limitations seemed to highlight the goals (and
shortcomings) of a liberal-arts education.
The way in which the physical and biological sciences are
abstractly present and never clarified raised many of the
questions often expressed by critical commentators of
interdisciplinary, cross-disciplinary and transdisciplinary
work. As such, *Beyond Technology* will aid those eager to learn
more about information technology in terms of art and design.
Those who believe that the breadth of the field too often
subsumes distinctions between science and technology might find
that this report, too, fails to speak to distinctions. Aside
from this caveat, those who are new to the field will definitely
appreciate the care with which the authors summarize
contemporary work. Those who work in this area will no doubt
find that the survey is a good resource for thinking about the
funding situation, conceptualizing policy issues and finding
like-minded people.
_____________________________
SARAI READER 03: SHAPING TECHNOLOGIES
By The Sarai Programme, CSDS, Delhi + The Waag Society for Old
and New Media, Amsterdam. Jeebesh Bagchi et al., eds. Thomson
Press, Faridabad, 2003, 379 pp. ISBN: 81-901429-3-3.
Reviewed by Aparna Sharma
Aparna31S at netscape.net
With the intention of transcending commonplace binarism that
characterizes much discourse on technology in South Asia and of
opening a qualified space that takes into account the mutual
imbrication of technology, society, culture and politics, the
Sarai Reader 2003 - *Shaping Technologies* - covers vast
territory. This collection is comprised of contributions from
scholars and practitioners that make for an intense exchange
between multiple impetuses. *Shaping Technologies* is the third
in the Delhi-based research collective Sarai's annual
publications. In the introduction, Sarai's editorial collective
states that technology, which had figured importantly in
previous readers, "... has taken center-stage [in this edition]
as a multi-faceted constellation of ideas, images, reflections,
debates, histories and provocations" (p. vii).
Though the reader contains informative accounts of technology-
dumping and its impacts on health and environment in urban
spaces, its contribution really rests in mapping how commonly
held polarities of, say, the "native," the "rural" and the
"modernizing" meld. Divided into nine sections that examine
specific facets of the technology/society interface, it
indicates technology as being constituted in an unsettling
manner, entailing the interruption of indigenous forces along
with new and emergent technology/ies: constituting a matrix of
contingent and disparate forces that interact without negating
or subordinating some in favor of others. Debate around
technology is extended in the notion of "disruptive innovation',
summarized in Chennai-based research scholar Nimmi Rangaswamy's
comment: ". . . that existing mainstream markets are not
starting places for waves of growth," and there is need to
"incubate technologies from the ground up rather than introduce
top down" (p. 170).
Specificity, particularly in terms of communities, is crucial
to most research contained in the reader. The notion of
community takes on board intricacies and inter-operability of
factors such as socio-cultural patterns and practices, language
and environment. Without being an essentially materialist or
localized description, the reader examines these factors not
only to reflect better the re-appropriation of technologies but
also to highlight how the process is persistent, responding to
varied, concurrent stimuli. Two comprehensive and cogent
arguments are Vikram Vyas's overview of an IT-based drought-
proofing model for water management and Rangaswamy's study
around the introduction of internet in rural districts of the
south Indian state, Tamil Nadu. Both emphasize grass-roots
research and activation for enhanced possibilities in relation
to development; and note the reciprocity between communities and
technology.
*Shaping Technologies* does not only examine contemporary
technologies. Disruption is traced in the participation with
earlier technologies, as discussed in the section "Excavations."
In temporal specificities, such as those of, say, the colonial
moment, one finds that the interjection of the native instills
particular tensions in the usage/s of technological devices and
the practices emanating from them. Particularly engrossing is
Sabeena Gadihoke's study of women's domestic and amateur
photography at the turn of the century, in which she posits the
photographic camera not only as the means for access to the
"outside" from within a confining and restricting social order,
but as imbued with the pulls between that order and women's
conflicts at that moment of nationalist upsurge. Similarly, by
describing the "selective adoption" of "naturalist" techniques
in the commercial imagery of the bazaar, Kajri Jain's paper
identifies friction and resistance between two differing scopic
regimes, wherein techno-rationalist devices are employed to
preserve and continue the "messianic" or the sacred with
overtones of the cult and devotional.
The reader is replete with such dialogue and has achieved a
wide geographical palette that extends outside India. The
writings offer reconstitutive insight not only at an immediate
level but, more subtly, in relation to politics as well,
countering much cynicism that surrounds technology as being
either "apolitical" or exploitative. The disjunctive and inter-
subjective nature of the technology/society interface emerges as
exerting pressures on the boundaries of what constitutes as
"political" and opens alternate theaters for contest, which may
not coincide fully with popular modes for struggle or be equally
explicit or articulate. These throw a gauntlet before anyone
even vaguely examining technology and stress its import not only
as a means towards elevated levels of economic development, but
as a drive in the construction of the social and political
realms. Chicago-based anthropology student Biella Coleman
addresses this aspect most pointedly in her paper, which
identifies the embedded politics of transgression in the
practice of hacking.
One of the most impressive and poised statements is the
translated version of Nobel Laureate Rabindranath Tagore's
essay, "Airborne." A record of thoughts from his first air
flight, it profoundly identifies the agenda for the interface,
then at its most nascent. Though referring to the imperial mode
(the essay was written in 1932), Tagore's characteristic vision
emphasizes an "intimacy," a situation "in the totality of space
and time" for creativity to manifest. This emphasis is echoed
through the reader, opening new territories and introducing
reflective approaches that restore the technology debate from
slipping along common trajectories that oscillate between the
extremes of either techno-fetishism or phobia. The reader thus
accomplishes injecting necessary complexity and rigor into
discourse.
________________________________________________________________
______________________________
| |
| ISAST NEWS |
|______________________________|
________________________________________________________________
IN MEMORIAM: BILLY KLUVER, CO-FOUNDER OF E.A.T.
It was with a great sense of loss that we learned of Billy
Kl©¯ver's death this January. Born in 1927, Wilhem J. Kluver
founded Experiments in Art and Technology (E.A.T.) in 1966,
along with fellow engineer Fred Waldhauer and artists Robert
Rauschenberg and Robert Whitman. The creation of this
revolutionary organization was inspired by the event *9
Evenings: Theatre and Engineering*, a series of performances
involving such artists as John Cage, Lucinda Childs, Íyvind
Falstrom, Alex Hay, Deborah Hay, Steve Paxton, Yvonne Rainer,
Robert Rauschenberg, David Tudor and Robert Whitman, along with
a team of u0 engineers and scientists, mostly from Bell
Telephone Laboratories, where Kluver worked as an electrical
engineer.
Mr. Kluver was instrumental in helping artists including Andy
Warhol, Jasper Johns and Merce Cunningham create work that
required technical and technological expertise, as well as the
*9 Evenings* and E.A.T. teams. His most cherished wish was that
the new technologies - until then the military's exclusive
domain -would be used with peaceful aims in artistic and
community-based projects.
In recent years, Billy Kluver and his wife and longtime
collaborator Julie Martin had been in the process of entrusting
their considerable resources to various research centers,
including the Getty Research Foundation in Los Angeles and the
Fondation Daniel Langlois in Montreal.
Sylvie Lacerte, Montreal
_____________________________
LEONARDO/ISAST COLLABORATES WITH ISEA 2006, SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
San Jose, California has been chosen to host a biannual
international symposium that will feature a global gathering of
leaders in the art, science and technology communities in August
2006 to explore cutting edge developments in creative expression
using new and emerging tools. The International Symposium on
Electronic Art, sponsored by the Netherlands-based Inter-Society
for Electronic Art (ISEA), fosters interdisciplinary exchange
among culturally diverse organizations and individuals working
with art, science and emerging technologies. The 2006 conference
theme is "Silicon Transvergence," and will focus on projects
that bridge the boundaries between the arts, education,
technology and business communities.
Internationally renowned new media curator Steve Dietz will
serve as the 2006 symposium director, responsible for
coordinating and establishing the programming of the symposium
and related events. ZeroOne, a local non-profit that focuses on
creating new opportunities to explore the connections between
art and technology, will be the lead organization coordinating
the 2006 Symposium logistics. The CADRE Laboratory for New Media
at San Jose State University will be the lead educational
institution for the prestigious ISEA Academic Conference.
A unique pre-conference summit of Pacific Rim New Media Centers
will explore the conference theme within a context of economic
globalization, regional integration and environmental change.
The two-day event will be facilitated by Leonardo/ISAST in
concert with their Cultural Roots of Globalization Project.
Additionally, Leonardo/ISAST will focus a special issue of the
journal *Leonardo* on New Media Arts programs and emerging
artists.
For further information, contact:
Leonardo/ISAST: isast at well.com
San Jose Contact: Joel Slayton, CADRE Laboratory (1) 408-924-4368
San Jose Contact: Beau Takahara, ZeroOne, (1) 650-810-1057
_____________________________
LEONARDO/ISAST GOVERNING BOARD MEMBERS RENEW TERMS
The Governing Board of Leonardo/ISAST is composed of prominent
figures in the fields of art, science and technology.
Leonardo/ISAST says goodbye to some of its long-serving board
members and welcomes back returning members for another term.
Lynn Hershman, Mark Resch and Piero Scaruffi have rotated off
the Board, while Marty Anderson, Penny Finnie and Beverly Reiser
have been elected to renew their terms.
Renewing their terms on the Leonardo/ISAST Governing Board,
Marty Anderson, Penny Finnie, and Beverly Reiser have expressed
their enthusiasm for new activities in the network's future.
Anderson has agreed to serve as vice chair in addition to his
role as treasurer of the board. Finnie serves on the
Leonardo/ISAST nominating committee and serves a key role in the
strategic planning process for the organization by leading the
project to revise the Leonardo/ISAST vision statement. Beverly
Reiser, as chair of the Leonardo/ISAST international advisory
board, will be deeply involved in the planning and
implementation of the Pacific Rim Summit organized in
conjunction with ISEA 2006 in San Jose.
Although Lynn Hershman steps down from the board she remains
actively involved in Leonardo/ISAST activities, by chairing the
prize and awards committee and serving on the international
advisory board. Likewise, while this marks the end of Mark
Resch's term on the governing board, where he served as
secretary, he will continue to participate in Leonardo/ISAST
activities, such as chairing the Leonardo/ISAST panel at the
2004 College Art Association annual conference, "Art, Science,
and Technology: Problems and Issues Facing an Emerging
Interdisciplinary Field." Piero Scaruffi has also vowed to
remain active in Leonardo/ISAST activities, serving as an
advisor on issues related to marketing and globalization.
The current composition of the Leonardo/ISAST Governing Board
is Roger Malina, chair; Martin Anderson, vice chair and
treasurer; Penelope Finnie; Michael Joaquin Grey; Greg Niemeyer;
Ed Payne; Anne Brooks Pfister; Sonya Rapoport; Beverly Reiser;
Joel Slayton; Darlene Tong; and Stephen Wilson.
For further information, visit www.leonardo.info.
_____________________________
ARTHUR ELSENAAR AND REMKO SCHA WIN THE 2003 LEONARDO AWARD FOR
EXCELLENCE
Arthur Elsenaar and Remko Scha's article "Electric Body
Manipulation as Performance Art: A Historical Perspective,"
published in **Leonardo* Music Journal* 12, has been named the
winner of the 2003 Leonardo Award for Excellence. This annual
award recognizes excellence in an article published in a
*Leonardo* journal. Excellence is defined as originality, rigor
of thought, clarity of expression and effective presentation.
Three articles received honorable mention: Steve Dietz's "Ten
Dreams of Technology"(*Leonardo* 35:5), Oron Catts and Ionat
Zurr's "Growing Semi-Living Sculptures: The Tissue Culture and
Art Project" (*Leonardo* 35:4), and Edward Shanken's "Art in the
Information Age: Technology and Conceptual Art" (*Leonardo*
35:4).
You can download the winning article and three honorable
mentions at http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-
journals/Leonardo/isast/awards.html.
Elsenaar and Scha's winning article traces the historical
developments of using electrically manipulated human bodies as
theatrical display. Addressing the controversial aspects of this
sometimes destructive art form, they investigate the
implications of electrical executions. More often, they note the
stimulating effects of electricity upon the body, studying
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation as implemented in
the nineteenth century by Duchenne and continued in practice
today by artists such as Stelarc and article co-author Elsenaar.
Citing technological advances that enable interactive nerve
stimulation, Elsenaar and Scha point toward a future of computer-
generated dance and theater performances.
Arthur Elsenaar is an artist and electrical engineer who ran
his own pirate radio station and built the transmitters for many
illegal radio and television stations throughout the
Netherlands. Elsenaar's recent work employs the human face as a
computer-controlled display device. Remko Scha is an artist, DJ,
and computational linguist. He has built an automatic electric
guitar band ("The Machines"), designed an image generation
algorithm ("Artificial") and developed a theory about language-
processing ("Data-Oriented Parsing"). Arthur Elsenaar and Remko
Scha have jointly developed a series of automatic performance
pieces and video installations that involve computer-controlled
facial expression, algorithmic music and synthetic speech. These
works have been presented at scientific conferences, theater
festivals, and art exhibitions throughout Europe and the United
States. Elsenaar and Scha also explore the use of automatic
radio stations as a medium for computer art.
The Leonardo Award for Excellence was originally established by
chemist and inventor Myron Coler and *Leonardo* publisher Robert
Maxwell. Previous winners have included Rudolf Arnheim, Otto
Piene, Alvin Curran, Karen O'Rourke, Donna Cox and Bill Seaman.
The 2003 Prize and Awards Committee is comprised of Lynn
Hershman, chair; Hisham Bizri, Char Davies, Marcos Novak and
Bill Seaman.
In addition to the winning article and three honorable
mentions, six other articles were nominated for this prize: Anne
Bray, "The Community Is Watching, and Replying: Art in Public
Places and Spaces" (*Leonardo* 35:1); Harold Cohen, "A Self-
Defining Game for One Player: On the Nature of Creativity and
the Possibility of Creative Computer Programs" (*Leonardo*
35:1); Ken Gonzales-Day, "Analytical Photography: Portraiture,
from the Index to the Epidermis" (*Leonardo* 35:1); Antoinette
LaFarge and Robert Nideffer, "The Leonardo Gallery: Shift-Ctrl"
(*Leonardo* 35:1); Phoebe Sengers, "Schizophrenia and Narrative
in Artificial Agents" (*Leonardo* 35:4); and Christa Sommerer
and Laurent Mignonneau, "Modeling the Emergence of Complexity:
Complex Systems, the Origin of Life and Interactive On-Line Art"
(*Leonardo* 35:2).
The 2003 Leonardo Award for Excellence is co-sponsored by the
Technoculture Studies Department and the Art Department at the
University of California, Davis, where it will be presented at a
prize award lecture on campus during the Spring 2004 session.
For further information, visit http://technoculture.ucdavis.edu.
_____________________________
LEONARDO INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD WELCOMES NEW MEMBER
HISHAM BIZRI
The Leonardo International Advisory Board welcomes Hisham
Bizri, from Lebanon, to its ranks of art-and-science luminaries
throughout the world. International Advisory Board members
communicate via e-mail and telephone on an ad-hoc basis to guide
Leonardo/ISAST in its projects and collaborations.
Bizri is a filmmaker and visual artist from Lebanon currently
living in San Francisco. His films, videos and multi-media
installations are meditations on his exilic experience as a
Lebanese Muslim living in the West. Describing his philosophy of
filmmaking, Bizri states, "I hope to bring aesthetics back to
cinema, so that cinema can be seen once more as a window onto
the world, and not as a mechanistic vehicle for ideology." Bizri
studied with filmmakers Raoul Ruiz and Mikls Jancs and has
lectured extensively in the U.S., Lebanon, Ireland, Korea and
Japan. A pioneer of "cinematic" virtual reality installations
for the CAVE theater (premiered at Ars Electronica and ISEA
'98), Bizri has also directed a number of narrative and
experimental films and videos that have been shown
internationally at venues including the Museum of Modern Art
(New York), the Walker Art Center (Minneapolis), the Louvre
Museum (Paris), Biarritz Opera House (France) and the Institute
du Monde Arabe (Paris). Bizri was recently an artist-in-
residence at the Center for Advanced Visual Studies at MIT and
currently heads the time-based art program in the Department of
Art and Art History at the University of California, Davis.
Serving along with Hisham Bizri on the Leonardo International
Advisory Board are Beverly Reiser, chair; Mark Beam; Julio
Berm·dez; Annick Bureaud; Nic Collins; Lynn Hershman; Nisar
Keshvani; Christine Maxwell; Michael Naimark; Michael Punt;
Sundar Sarukkai; and Rejane Spitz.
_____________________________
LEONARDO COLLABORATES WITH HARVESTWORKS
The Leonardo international advisory board approved a
collaboration with Harvestworks, which includes endorsing their
conference, "The Interactive Project: Activated Environments and
Hybrid Instruments," to be held 23-25 April, 2004 at various
locations throughout New York City. The weekend-long seminar
will feature artworks by the Harvestworks residents, panel
discussions and demonstrations and involve arts organizations
and artist's studios in the city. For more information and the
final participant list, see: www.harvestworks.org.
Founded in 1977 to cultivate artistic talent using electronic
technologies, Harvestworks' mission is to encourage the creation
and expand the dissemination of digital media artwork. From its
New York City location and through its Internet presence,
Harvestworks provides accessible and coordinated digital media
production, education, information and content distribution
services to a diverse creative community that includes
electronic music composers, interactive media designers, film
and video makers, digital tool developers and computer
programmers. By bringing together innovative practitioners from
all branches of the digital arts, Harvestworks provides a vital
context and catalyst for creativity in the digital arts.
________________________________________________________________
___________________
| |
| |
| CREDITS |
| |
|___________________|
Nisar Keshvani: LEA Editor-in-Chief
Patrick Lambelet: LEA Managing Editor
Michael Punt: LR Editor-in-Chief
Andre Ho: Web Concept and Design Consultant
Roger Malina: Leonardo Executive Editor
Stephen Wilson: Chair, Leonardo/ISAST Web Committee
Craig Harris: Founding Editor
Editorial Advisory Board:
Irina Aristarkhova, Roy Ascott, Michael Naimark, Craig Harris,
Julianne Pierce
Gallery Advisory Board:
Mark Amerika, Paul Brown, Choy Kok Kee, Steve Dietz, Fatima
Lasay, Kim Machan
fAf-LEA corresponding editors:
Ricardo Dal Farra, Elga Ferreira, Young Hae-Chang, Fatima
Lasay, Lee Weng Choy, Jose-Carlos Mariategui, Marcus Neustetter,
Elaine Ng, Marc Voge
________________________________________________________________
___________________
| |
| LEA |
| WORLD WIDE WEB |
| ACCESS |
|___________________|
For over a decade, Leonardo Electronic Almanac (LEA) has thrived
as an international peer-reviewed electronic journal and web
archive, covering the interaction of the arts, sciences and
technology. LEA emphasizes rapid publication of recent work and
critical discussion on topics of current excitement. Many
contributors are younger scholars and artists, and there is a
slant
towards shorter, less academic texts.
Contents include Leonardo Reviews, edited by Michael Punt,
Leonardo Research Abstracts of recent Ph.D. and Masters theses,
curated Galleries of current new media artwork, and special
issues on topics ranging from Artists and Scientists in times of
War, to Zero Gravity Art, to the History of New Media.
LEA is accessible using the following URL: http://lea.mit.edu
________________________________________________________________
_________________
| LEA |
| PUBLISHING |
| INFORMATION |
|_________________|
Editorial Address:
Leonardo Electronic Almanac
Studio 3a, 35 Place du Bourg-de-four
1204 Geneva, Switzerland
E-mail: lea at mitpress.mit.edu
________________________________________________________________
Copyright (2004), Leonardo, the International Society for the
Arts, Sciences and Technology
All Rights Reserved.
Leonardo Electronic Almanac is published by:
The MIT Press Journals, Five Cambridge Center,
Cambridge, MA 02142
U.S.A.
Re-posting of the content of this journal is prohibited without
permission of Leonardo/ISAST, except for the posting of news and
events listings which have been independently received.
Leonardo/ISAST and the MIT Press give institutions permission to
offer access to LEA within the organization through such
resources as restricted local gopher and mosaic services. Open
access to other individuals and organizations is not permitted.
________________________________________________________________
< Ordering Information >
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=4&tid=27&
mode=p
Leonardo Electronic Almanac is free to Leonardo/ISAST members and
to subscribers to the journal Leonardo for the 2004 subscription
year. The rate for Non-Leonardo individual subscribers is $35.00,
and for Non-Leonardo institutional subscribers the rate is
$77.00. All subscriptions are entered for the calendar year only.
All orders must be prepaid by check (must be drawn against U.S.
bank in U.S. funds), money order, MasterCard, VISA, or American
Express. Where student subscription rates are available, a
verification of matriculant status is required.
Note: In order to place orders electronically, you must be using
a browser that is SSL-compliant. If you are unable to open the
ordering link listed above, then your browser does not support
the security features necessary to use this interface. Please use
the addresses below to submit your order. Address all orders and
inquiries to:
Circulation Department
MIT Press Journals
Five Cambridge Center
Cambridge, MA 02142-1407 USA
TEL: (617) 253-2889 (M-F, 9-5)
FAX: (617) 577-1545 (24 hours)
For questions contact:
journals-orders at mit.edu (subscriptions)
________________________________________________________________
________________
| |
| ADVERTISING |
|________________|
*Leonardo Electronic Almanac* is published monthly --individuals
and institutions interested in advertising in LEA, either in the
distributed text version or on the World Wide Web site,
should contact:
Leonardo Advertising Department
425 Market St., 2nd Floor,
San Francisco, CA 94105, U.S.A.
Tel: (415)-405-3335
Fax: (415)-405-7758
E-mail: isast at sfsu.edu
More Info: http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-
journals/Leonardo/isast/placeads.html#LEAads
________________________________________________________________
____________________
| |
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|____________________|
LEA acknowledges with thanks the Rockefeller and Ford
Foundations for their support to Leonardo/ISAST and its projects.
________________________________________________________________
< End of Leonardo Electronic Almanac 12 (03) >
________________________________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/leaauthors/attachments/20040302/6715dc2c/attachment.htm
More information about the Leaauthors
mailing list