C5 Field Mediation
16 SESSIONS

C5: Kristin Cully, Steve Durie, Benjamin Eakins, Jan Ekenberg, Bruce Gardner, Lisa Jevbratt, Veronica Ramirez, Anne-Marie Schleiner, Joel Slayton, Brett Stalbaum, Jack Toolin, Geri Wittig

Brett Stalbaum: What I'm getting at is that the structure, which enables the datum to have any sort of unity, is reliant on the linguistic environment. It may have a self-perpetuating structure in one linguistic context but not in another. So although the datum may have expressionistic behavior, the meaning changes in a different context. There may not be a consistency of identity for the data.

Jan Ekenberg: Not through the contextual levels.

Brett Stalbaum: Through the changing of context. Unlike the autogenic unity, it is unable to maintain its identity.

Joel Slayton: This seems to be a very good summary point. In some ways this isn't relevant to the project. The data are the data. But because of the contextual change, what you are suggesting is that there is also an identity shift.

Brett Stalbaum: The datum has this new meaning. What is interesting here is that it maintains its expressionist behavior, but it changes meaning at the same time.

Jan Ekenberg: What's interesting is what it maintains, I suppose.

Brett Stalbaum: The conflict between what it maintains ...

Jan Ekenberg: ... and the environment. Between the environment of what changes and what's kept.

Joel Slayton: So there are relationships and, now maybe dealing specifically with this instance, certain relationships that are preserved across the transformation. The 3-D data collected from the interaction with the cube in the motion tracking system no longer are three-dimensional data. But in the 16 Sessions project, there are relationships in terms of attributes and agencies perhaps that were in both projects.

Jan Ekenberg: Right. You can also say the three-dimensionality of the data is purely contextual, of course, because data are just data. The data in terms of the phone book [list of IP addresses in 16 Sessions], the phone book if the datum is aligned, or the phone book if the datum is the dots, or if the data are there, the phone book is still maintained as a phone book.

Brett Stalbaum: Something we haven't really addressed is that the datum carries similar attributes between the different manifestations -- the attributes are similar, but the meaning is different between the two projects. The first question is, How is it moved? What is our role in this transition from one medium to another? Where were we in the process? Was it a collaborative process between us and the data? Another question is, If we move the datum to a third space -- and I like Jan's example of the phone book -- if we move this data in its present form into a phone book, would it still express those attributes and agencies?

Joel Slayton: Isn't that in fact what we are doing?

Brett Stalbaum: Yeah.

Joel Slayton: We're creating a phone book.

Brett Stalbaum: Yeah.

Joel Slayton: And then we're moving the data into it. I think that this is perfectly apropos.

Brett Stalbaum: But even just printing the data out, though, printing out the raw data streams as we have them on a piece of paper, does it still manifest itself in that particular form? And my argument would be that it worked on the underlying data-mining routines. Having dealt a lot with the streams of data, I thought about the ways to allow it to transform itself into something else. Those agencies and those attributes are actually manifesting in the raw data stream itself. Open up this data in a text and look at them and you can almost see the attributes, even though the meaning of the stream of numbers is obviously quite different. When we began to reduce it or allow it to manifest itself in ways that involve averaging and doing different things with it, it became even more apparent.

So, where is the artist, I guess, is my question. Data are doing their own thing. I happen to have with me a quote from Kittler that is quite interesting to consider in terms of this problem -- which I don't really think is exactly a problem. He says, "I rather envision artists and populations of autonomous software agents interacting with one another in complex ways. As with most complex systems that cannot be controlled in detail, the question is to find ways to maneuver or shepherd this spontaneous behavior in the system. For example, the materials an artist uses toward some goal, the process of production of form needs to be half planned and half self-organized. The materials, whether hardware or software, must be allowed to have their say in the final form that is produced." I don't think it's futuristic to say at this point that's something we've already achieved in this particular project.

Joel Slayton: We have to be very careful that that notion isn't misinterpreted, as in letting the paint speak. Because that's not what he's saying at all. I mean, I think it's strongly reinforcing and endorsing many of the ideas that we've talked about tonight, in terms of how self-organizing systems function.

Brett Stalbaum: In other words, we're not ...

Joel Slayton: Whenever you work with data, that's what happens.

Brett Stalbaum: Right.

Joel Slayton: I guess that's my point of view about it. That's the consequence of working with data.

Brett Stalbaum: It's the shepherding that becomes interesting.

Jan Ekenberg: You just mentioned Kittler's point when he talks about who is the artist, and where is the artist as he makes the decision how to switch between the different codes. That's what Kittler says. He talks about just that importance of being able to go between the different systems and codes.

Kristin Cully: And in terms of the system being somehow akin to the context, could you think of the context of the system being influenced by that translation? When you were speaking I was thinking about the fact that I'm sure you can look at the datum in a different context when it maintains a certain identity. It is its own identity, but in doing so can influence the context itself to somehow be reinterpreted or changed.

Jan Ekenberg: Right. The data have that. They have the ability if they have the permission.