Human Limitations -Limited Humanity

Trans*Plant: May the Chlorophyll be with/in you by Quimera Rosa

An initial presentation of work purported to engage with socio-ecological questions. This work, titled Trans*Plant: May the Chlorophyll be with/in you by Quimera Rosa, purported to interrogate the nature/society relationship.

It ‘aims to develop a project that involved in the current debates surrounding the Anthropocene from a perspective not based on “human exceptionalness and methodological individualism” (Donna Haraway)’ ³. Thus, for the artist, ‘in order to be able to think about a non-anthropocentric ecology, we need to move from identities based on essences to identities based on relationships’ ⁴. To this end, the project is presented as a past performance, where chlorophyll was injected intravenously in 2017 in a gallery setting ⁵. This is followed by future speculation of a forced shutdown of the internet in 2036, and resource depletion ⁶. The work at Ars Electronica was presented as several objects pertaining to the future speculative imaginary, including various drawings and petri dishes. The suit worn during the transfusion was presented, as were plants that were presented as the speculative future attempt to connect a ‘mycorrhiza intranet’.

I suggest that while the aims of this project are in line with critiquing the socio-ecological relationship, there are a number of issues with it in the context of presenting such critiques to a wider audience. First, while the project aims to move from ‘identities based on essences’ to one based on ‘relationships’, as noted above, the performance aspect of it reverts to one based on essences. By taking a molecule of chlorophyll, which is a reductive representation of a plant and quite literally one of the ‘essences’ derived from plants, and transplanting it into a human, it is arguably not working with the nature/society relationship in a relational way, but in a reductive way. This can also be said for the corollary future scenario where human-made technology such as sensors and networking devices, are appended to plants to utilise them for networking capacity. I suggest therefore, that perhaps inadvertently, the project presents the socio-ecological relationship as one of each domain tampering with the other, rather than evolving a more harmonic relationship. It must be noted that this may be deliberate, and presented as a polemic thought piece about extremes, given that the work predicts total catastrophic resource depletion by 2036. However, therein is a second problem, around presenting dystopian futures, rather than ones around agency and efficacy. Thus, this work is an example of a form of bio-art that potentially shocks the audience to thought about dystopian futures, rather than provides a view of either current or future socio-ecological worlds.

Presentation of Trans*Plant: May the Chlorophyll be with/in you by Quimera Rosa

Suit worn for chlorophyll transfusion

mycorrhiza intranet’ using plants and sensors

Back to top

Deep Data Prototypes 1, 2, +3 by Andy Gracie

The next work at the exhibition of thematic salience is titled Deep Data Prototypes 1, 2, +3 by Andy Gracie. The on-site description of the work notes that ‘if humanity continues to exploit the limited resources of the earth, there will come a time when human life is no longer sustainable. Few organisms can survive deep space, and these prototype space explorers demonstrate that human limits will be stretched to settle on new planets’. I suggest that this work is important as it echoes themes identified on the first site visit to POSTCITY, that of transcendence of limitations. However, this work overtly acknowledges the limitations of space exploration and colonisation, in that it attempts to recreate the hostile environments faced by attempts to colonise space.

The work is presented as three experiments, which replicate the possible conditions in different locations in space. The first one works with an organism that is an extremophile, and thus can potentially survive in hostile conditions. The second one presents a plant that is grown in the light conditions of various planets , and the third works with nematodes and gravitational impacts of other planets. I suggest that this work potentially communicates the difficulties of considering space colonisation as a ‘fix’ for ecological crisis in a meaningful and easy to grasp way. This is particularly the case for the second experiment, where the plant is contained in small growing boxes, revealing the paltry conditions for growth on other planets. Furthermore, the use of the extremophile in the first experiment requires magnification, also potentially evoking in the audience a sense of futility of attempting to develop larger organisms in space. This can also be said for the third experiment, when similarly tiny creatures are subject to deep space conditions. Thus, while the theme of space exploration and ‘transcendence’ is touched upon, it is with a critical view that presents just how hostile such environments are to life. This in turn then potentially evokes a sense in the audience of how hospitable the earth is, can potentially evoke a sense of stewardship in the face of the alternative scenario presented.

Extremophiles subjected to deep space conditions

Video magnification of extremophiles subjected to deep space conditions

Plants growing under lighting conditions of various planets

Organisms subjected to gravitational conditions

Back to top

Modified Paradise: Dress by AnotherFarm

Another piece which thematically is of interest is Modified Paradise: Dress by AnotherFarm. This work questions the limitations of genetic modification, and ‘aims to encourage us to think about the extremes and limitations of the interaction between art, science, and technology’. I include this piece as it is an example of a ‘wow’ factor in communicating such issues, but with the intention to critique it for this reason also. The work is presented as a dress that has been made from the silk of genetically modified silkworms. The worms have been modified to produce a silk that contains genetic material from bioluminescent creatures such as jellyfish, and therefore produces a ‘luminescent silk’ ⁷. Upon entering the room containing the dress, extremely bright lights close to the UV spectrum are in evidence. The dress is hanging within a container. The brightness is almost unbearable, and thus, there are also cardboard glasses with lenses that allow the viewer to view the dress more easily. The intensity of the light, the beauty and craft of the dress, and the scale of the work all contribute to a visceral experience. However, the critique of this piece is in how it potentially fetishises genetic modification and showcases it, rather than to present a piece which encourages thought, as its aims suggest. Therefore, in terms of how to communicate to publics about such issues, what can be learned from this project is in how communicating ideas of beauty and wonder can have unintended consequences.

Dress presented under bright lights

Dress viewable with coloured lenses

Back to top

Earthlink by Saša Spačal

The theme of interconnectedness of species, notably humans with other living organisms is explored in Earthlink by Saša Spačal. This piece ‘performs a biogeochemical feedback loop catalysed by microbial metabolism’ ⁸. The work does this by engaging the audience in breathing in to the installation, noting that ‘through the intimate process of breathing, humans are bound to the planet, immersed in an intra-flux of exchanges, negotiating relationships’ ⁹. The project therefore questions ‘what happens when the connections become technologically mediated? Who or what will dispense the dose? What will the dose contain? Who will survive? How will be grieve?’ ¹⁰. Thus, it serves as a large-scale installation in which the audience first becomes aware, through the presence of various tubes and connections, of the interconnectedness of the various organisms connected through the environment that Spačal has built. It is not initially obvious that human interaction is either required, or indeed, its place in the installation. However, upon exploring the piece, the viewer happens upon a part of the installation containing a large mask. As of then the audience is confronted with the choice to intervene in the system, thus understanding a symbiosis between human air quality and other organisms which create that atmospheric mix of gases germane to human survival, or to walk away, leaving the system uninterrupted. However, another key aspect of this installation is the vessels which are directly attached to the human breath intervention. Other systems show some green organic material, and various other life-forms that have some visual interest. However, the chamber that is impacted by the human breath contains cloudy water populated by bacteria. This viscerally different part of the ecosystem serves as a strong metaphor for human intervention in ecosystems, and indeed for human impact on the planet as a whole.

In this way, Earthlink is quite an impactful piece of art. It uses organisms to metaphorically visualise the impact of humans on ecosystems, while also communicating the symbiosis of ecosystems of which humankind is just one element. In this way it serves as a positive intervention in the area of communicating the nature/society relationship as a whole. In provoking the audience to make a very simple decision – to breathe into a chamber, it raises questions of human agency, impact and interconnectedness to the wider environment. It thus brings in questions of efficacy, choice and decision-making in a way that I suggest is potentially powerful for communicating environmental issues to an audience. A significant caveat lies in audience reaction – while a specialised audience may react favourably to this work, I contend that the domain of bio-art is potentially off-putting for a larger audience, and thus may reduce its broader efficacy.

Earthlink by Saša Spačal

‘breathing station’ and ‘breath collector’

Chamber impacted by human breath

Back to top

Meditative Symbiosis by Jean Danton Laffert, Karin Astudillo and Camilo Gouet

Another work of salience is Meditative Symbiosis by Jean Danton Laffert, Karin Astudillo and Camilo Gouet. This work ‘explores the interdependence of a living organism and an electronic system, looking for the aesthetic result of a digital-biological process’(on-site abstract). This installation uses carbon dioxide sensors to sense the amount of photosynthesis that the plants in the installation are conducting. Based on this amount, the data is transformed into geometric symbols in a computer, which is then projected back to the plants in the form of geometric light drawings. This in turn affects the photosynthesis rates of the plants, ‘producing a bioelectronic aesthetic that evolves in time’ ¹¹. I suggest that in a smaller scale than Earthlink, and without its interactivity, this work provides a way for an audience to witness the interdependency of the natural/technological system. However, the piece could be misread as a way of controlling plant growth through human intervention, ascribing more causality to the visibilising of the geometric shapes over the driver of the shapes, which is the photosynthetic action of the plants in the first place. Arguably, this may provoke a more ‘business as usual’ approach of ‘harnessing’ technology such as sensor technology to control ecosystems, rather than understanding the dependency of humans on ecosystems.

Meditative Symbiosis by Jean Danton Laffert, Karin Astudillo and Camilo Gouet

Back to top

Other works to note

In short, the Human Limitations – Limited Humanity exhibition provided an insight into the current priorities and zeitgeist of a certain cohort of the electronic arts community. Overall, there was some more evidence of nuance in relation to themes salient for this project – largely around themes of interrelationships and interconnections between systems. This is a welcome development and reveals that such practices are taking place in the international context, and have the potential to engage audiences on environmental matters.

A critique of the exhibit however, lies in the possible misunderstanding of some of the artworks, as exemplified by the Meditative Symbiosis piece discussed above. A key finding is in the difficulty of making tangible, or visible, or sensible, the oftentimes invisible processes of ecosystems. Therefore, while there was evidence in the artworks of significant attention paid to these concerns, the elements that were at times most visible were the technological elements. A work relevant in this respect is Poise->[d] by Dmitry Morozov. This is an ambitious installation, concerned with exploring the complexity of life on Earth. It is described as a ‘hybrid’ installation ‘that uses chemical and physical reactions to control its behaviour’ ¹².  It thus consists of a series of three robots that are subject to the pseudo-randomness of chemical reactions, while also reacting to the movement of the audience through the installation. The work posits that ‘to a certain extent, this hybrid system consisting of robotized kinetic objects and chemical/physical reactions is symptomatic of pre-biotic chemical evolution’ ¹³. However, as seen in some of the other works, the chemical component, potentially an organic one, is not obviously in evidence in comparison to the scale of the robots. Thus, while offering a concept of hybridity and thus a form of an ecosystem, the most striking part of this installation is the apparent awareness of the robots to the presence of a viewer.

Similarly, the almost fetish character of technology was evident in the installation of CRYPTID by Michael Candy. This installation is ‘a monumental robotic light sculpture’ that ‘exists as a vibrant anomaly in contrast to contemporary automata, sharing a presence both radiant and reserved’ ¹⁴. In situ, the robot made very small movements and perhaps engaged the viewer with its obvious technical sophistication. However, it revealed very little of the exhibition’s theme of limitations, or indeed its intended spirit of exploring limitations connected with the natural world. Thus, its presence appeared more concerned with robotics for the sake of robotics, rather than with exploring potentially more nuanced topics.

CRYPTID by Michael Candy

Back to top

1. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.53
2. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.53
3. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.104
4. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.105
5. Reference: on-site abstract
6. Reference: on-site abstract
7. Reference: on-site abstract
8. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.65
9. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.65
10. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.65
11. Reference: on-site abstract
12. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.62
13. Reference: Ars Electronica 2019. Out of the box: the midlife crisis of the digital revolution, Exhibition catalogue, September 5-9 2019, Linz, Austria. Berlin: Hatje Cantz. p.62
14. Reference: on-site abstract