Descending Into the Cave
On January 11, 2014, I rode an elevator down into a cave, one that contains the underground spectacle Ruby Falls – a waterfall lit by color changing lights and epic Muzak you might find accompanying the timed water spurts of a fountain in Disney World. I was invited to participate in this cave excursion of the hyperreal by the Atlanta-based collective that started the project Speleogen – a project that calls itself The New Cave Art. This trip was meant to engage members of the Atlanta community in an exercise of perception and attention.
The collective, and thus Speleogen, was founded by a group of musicians, and this rootedness in the music community is an important aspect of the collectiveâ€™s projects and ways of working. They have recently started multiple projects, however, for the space of this piece, Iâ€™m going to only address specifically the one involving caves, Speleogen. Though Speleogen centers itself on caves, the impetus to start the project came out of a greater desire to work collaboratively and engage in artistic practices that Atlanta doesnâ€™t always offer. In a conversation with Speleogenâ€™s founders Devin Brown, Mason Brown (no relation), and David Matysiak, they noted that what initially led them to explore various structures of collaboration was due to their frustrations with the way musicians are generally pigeonholed into certain roles, times, and spaces. They realized that often this assigning is done by the musician him/herself; there is a certain complicity with the system as it stands. Apart from this structure, they also voiced concerns about the disconnect between Atlantaâ€™s art and music communities. They are interested in the ways in which projects that are considered â€œmusicâ€ are accepted (or not) or presented (or not) within an art context and vice versa. Thus, part of the goal Speleogen hopes to achieve is providing an environment that doesnâ€™t fix people into specific and static roles. Speleogen says that they are seeking for artists/makers/scientists/musicians/etc/etc to imagine new possibilities and collaborate with each other in order to actualize those possibilities.
For its founders and many of its members, collaborating is like second nature. Many of them have played in bands with each other over the years and this informs the ways they work together, play off of each other, and establish certain tentative working â€œrolesâ€ within the group. Devin stresses the fact that â€œthere isnâ€™t a singular artist in this kind of configuration.â€Â The concept surrounding the working environment that Speleogen proposes is a kind of autopoietic sort of â€œcollaboratoryâ€ work that attempts to create its own world that inherently collaborates with itself. Part of the reason why the project takes on a sort of autopoietic, self-sustaining structure is because of the concerns mentioned above (i.e., fixed musician roles, disconnect between various Atlanta making communities), but part of the reason may also be due to the exploratory stage the collective is still in. Apart from Speleogen proper, the group works on and produces many other projects including ROAM, a monthly podcast that solicits found sounds from musicians, chitchats, a performance project that uses crowd-sourced material pulled from online chats, text messages, and etc., Synaesthesia, a music performance that explores the relationship between sound and light, and Boating, their band along with Jordan Noel, who runs the label Coco Art. These other projects, though â€œheadedâ€ by various members of the collective (ROAM is David Matysiak, chitchats is Devin Brown with Michael Hessel-Mial (not a member of Speleogen, editor of the tumblr Internet Poetry), and Synaesthesia is Mason Brown with Ian Cone (also not a member of Speleogen), are still collective endeavors. Another reason that this group is relatively secluded also has to do with the nature of how art and music venues function in Atlanta. The city doesnâ€™t open to outsiders easily and exploring new mediums if youâ€™re not necessarily already known doesnâ€™t necessarily seem like a possibility.
Speleogen Proper: Inside the Cave
Even though members of the project claim that essentially Speleogenâ€™s methodology could be applied to any object/concept/topic, the place of the cave, the chosen focus of the group, with its particular materiality is an appropriate place to locate and situate Speleogen, and arguably the collective as a whole. Devin recounts that in the cave â€œyou can only see as far as your headlamp shinesâ€ and that â€œall the terrain is treacherousâ€ – an apt description of artistic practice in general; failure is always a possibility. This project is all about searching and experimenting. Itâ€™s not about creating a discrete object, the â€œmonolithic productâ€ that is the record or album. Rather, the group tends toward an ecology of production and â€œnot scorched earth which [doesnâ€™t] leave anything to come back toâ€ which the production of a static album can do to its creators.
For Devin, his interest in Speleogen concerns social relations and collaboration themselves as the artwork. At this point in their process, it is uncertain where Speleogen falls in the spectrum of relational art and socially-engaged practices. Since their methodology implicitly illuminates the social structures of musical and artistic production and their dissemination, Speleogen might want to take a page out of Nicolas Bourriaudâ€™s Relational Aesthetics and the (maybe already dead horse) conversation surrounding this kind of artistic practice and see where that leads them. The crux of all of these projects is the structure the collective has created for itself, which enables them to hone their energies. As Mason Brown puts it, â€œonce thereâ€™s a structure, you can do anything.â€
It is striking that Speleogen chose to center itself on caves. Not only does the cave figure as a rich metaphorical space for imagination and incubation, but it also serves as a point of departure for conceptualizing collectivity and making. If we take Gregory Sholetteâ€™s work on the â€œdark matterâ€ of the culture of artistic practice seriously in terms of cosmic relations, what happens to the underground caverns Speleogen inhabits? According to Sholetteâ€™s use of the astronomical and cosmological phenomenon of dark matter, most of the art worldâ€™s activities are â€œinvisibleâ€ and essentially unaccounted for; resting outside mainstream institutions, these activities create the possibilities for other activities to come into visibility. If invisibility is taken simply in the case of Speleogenâ€™s practices and goals, the dark underground space of the cave serves as an apt metaphor and location. David Matysiak stated during a conversation that part of the project is to (re)build a world, which coming from the subterranean space of the cave means that they are â€œstarting from underground, not even ground level.”Â For this particular part, and for the collective more generally, this is important â€” the intent to build a world for artistic practices that does not rely on any already established foundation; the task is to create the very foundation that will serve as the ground. Speleogen chooses to inhabit the margins; whether this is due to lacking a particular knowledge of or interest in the Atlanta art scene is a question that may need to be asked.
Part of Speleogen involves the ritualistic and meditative. Because of the physical challenge involved in traversing caves, the caverâ€™s particular embodiment becomes a site of reflection. What is interesting about the corporeal for Speleogen is how this experience translates into multimedia works that are, for the moment, only presented in a digital form. However, as I mentioned in my last article, even digital work is experienced by some body in some place at some time, an embodied being. What Speleogen has the opportunity to do is push these relationships of the embodied and the digital to new possibilities. One way they can do this is through sound, which for musicians, this is a primary material. Sound, being invisible and immaterial, pours through speakers into the listenerâ€™s ears, vibrating the membrane of the eardrum, causing the bones to move, translating waves into concretely experienced sounds that carry with them a particular sense. In a sense, Speleogen could provide the portal into a different sensible space by literally delving underground into a radically different landscape. Mason describes that experience â€œas going into an alternate worldâ€ which â€œonce youâ€™re in that world you think differently.â€Â One obvious way to talk about entering the cave is through the metaphorics of the womb and the female body, and this is indeed something on the table, but putting too much weight into this structure could be too simplistic. Devin, David, and Mason all are aware of the problem of the figure of the male plunging into the depths of the earth. For them, the cave, serves as an incubator space where images (sound-images, moving-images, still-images, etc.) are produced, but as to whether this means created in the womb may be another discussion, which Luce Irigaray addresses in the section â€œPlatoâ€™s Hysteraâ€ in her book Speculum of the Other Woman. Unlike Platoâ€™s Allegory of the Cave which quickly dismisses these images as mere artifice, Speleogen describes the images they produce in and from these caves as emanating from the caves themselves and become a way of connecting with others and â€œcommuning with old cave spirits.â€
Re-Mixing and (Re)Building
If placed within the context of Nicolas Bourriaudâ€™s observations in his book Postproduction concerning contemporary art practices that involve the figure of the re-mixing DJ, maybe the question of Speleogenâ€™s relevance to contemporary art (and conversely, contemporary artâ€™s relevance to Speleogen) becomes more clear. Though these conversations about re-mix and file sharing are not new to the Creative Commons community, Speleogen adds another topography to the existing focus of many projects. However, unlike, say GLI.TC/H, Speleogen is not necessarily interested in delving into these technologies as telecommunicative tools that inherently carry with them disruptions and breakages.
Because their focus is on sharing materials with each other and re-mixing â€œcompletedâ€ works into new ones that then become material for further re-mix, the group is constantly moving as David states: â€œyou give the idea a chance to grow the way it wants to grow … youâ€™re just working on things, youâ€™re always just playing with materials and itâ€™s not about showing off at the end â€œHere we did it!â€ Youâ€™re always moving … encouraging people to walk with you.â€Â This calls to mind Bourriaudâ€™s claim in Postproduction that â€œthe contemporary work of art does not position itself as the termination point of the â€œcreative processâ€ (a â€œfinished productâ€ to be contemplated) but as a site of navigation, a portal, a generator of activitiesâ€ (19). Speleogen is concerned with carving out a space that enables them to keep on making; part of this space is left open to others – they encourage others to hop on board with them.
As I mentioned above, this ethos is not new to contemporary art. Chicago, for example, has the collective Temporary Services among others, a multitude of artist-run spaces, and strong Creative Commons and GLI.TC/H cultures. Atlanta is still picking up on these issues. Eyedrum, one of the venues/collectives that has been around for the longest, serves as a space for experimentation. MINT Gallery also attempts to open its doors to emerging artists and curators. There are also a few other artist run projects and spaces including Beep Beep and the Atlanta Zine Library. However, this Atlanta-based group is not interested in the institutionalization of their practice and is still figuring out the Atlanta landscape, which can feel at times quite closed.
To quote Bourriaudâ€™s Postproduction again: â€œprecariousness is at the center of a formal universe in which nothing is durable, everything is movement: the trajectory between two places is favored in relation to the place itself, and encounters are more important than the individuals who compose themâ€ (49).Â Speleogen is still precarious. It is looking for its audience. It is looking for its space/place/location/situation. Considering that core members of Speleogen also work with each other on many other projects including projects mentioned above (Boating, ROAM, chitchats, and Synaesthesia), the method of working that fuels Speleogen also fuels these other projects, making these discrete projects porous to each other. These projects are all about play; as Devin states: â€œthis is all play … everything is an opportunity to expand and riff.â€
Lately there has been more grants and prizes than you can shake a stick at. Beginning with the Frieze prize, Iâ€™d say itâ€™s the perfect time to devote yourself to writing. If youâ€™re lazy like me though, you take pictures and should apply for the Humble grant for emerging photographers. If youâ€™re just straight up post modern (read: into â€˜net art) you should apply to the new Creative Commons prize, notably titled â€œThe Liberated Pixel Cup.â€ If youâ€™re a painter…well, I just donâ€™t know what to tell you. More info below!
Itâ€™s also worth noting that thereâ€™s a new video up of the ENTIRE how-to-win-the-Propeller-Fund workshop AKA, â€œFunding and Creating Your Independent Projects.â€ Check it out here.
OR, be there in person:
Saturday, June 16, 2pm
Hyde Park Art Center
5020 South Cornell Avenue, Chicago
Wednesday, June 27, 6pm
6932 North Glenwood Avenue, Chicago
Wednesday, July 18, 6pm
Gallery 400, UIC
400 South Peoria Street, Chicago
Frieze Prize 2012
deadline: July 20th
Aspiring writers are invited to submit an unpublished 700-word review in English of a recent contemporary art exhibition. Applicants must be over 18 years old and must not have had more than three pieces of writing on art published in a newspaper or magazine. The winner will be awarded Â£2,000 (a lot of American dollars) and commissioned to write a review for an upcoming issue of frieze.
Humble Foundationâ€™s New Photography Grant
deadline: June 29th
Given twice annually (fall and spring), the grant is a $1,000 cash award that recognizes the strongest new proposal in contemporary art photography as submitted to Humble Arts Foundation.
Funded projects can be new or ongoing and with visual strength and clarity of proposal.
THE LIBERATED PIXEL CUP
deadline: June 30th
Liberated Pixel Cup is a two-part competition: make a bunch of awesome free culture licensed artwork, and then program a bunch of free software games that use it. Liberated Pixel Cup brings together some powerful allies: Creative Commons, Mozilla, OpenGameArt, the Free Software Foundation, and you.
I definitely missed the Creative Capital | Warhol Foundation grant program for arts writers, but with that said, there is always next year. Itâ€™s basically amazing and I think everyone involved in the arts should enter.
This morning I found an email from Richard Holland that simply stated “utterly awesome” with a link. I clicked on the link and found myself at the home page for the film Sita Sings the Blues. I had seen the movie poster while I was at the Gene Siskle Film Center and had thought about seeing it based on the animation. But as usual I was too lazy and forgot about it. On the front page you are greeted with a letter to the audience: “I hereby give Sita Sings the Blues to you. Like all culture, it belongs to you already, but I am making it explicit with a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License. Please distribute, copy, share, archive, and show Sita Sings the Blues. From the shared culture it came, and back into the shared culture it goes.” The film came about when Nina Paley was dumped by her husband after he had moved to India via e-mail. The film is a recreation of the Indian story The Ramayana.
Wired has a great interview with Nina Paley:
Wired: What is your movie about?
Nina Paley: Sita Sings the Blues is a musical, animated personal interpretation of the Indian epic the Ramayana. The aspect of the story that I focus on is the relationship between Sita and Rama, who are gods incarnated as human beings, and even they can’t make their marriage work [laughs].
Wired: And that ties in with the film’s second narrative.
Paley: Right, and then there’s my story. I’m just an ordinary human, who also can’t make her marriage work. And the way that it fails is uncannily similar to the way Rama and Sita’s [relationship fails]. Inexplicable yet so familiar. And the question that I asked and the question people still ask is, “Why”? Why did Rama reject Sita? Why did my husband reject me? We don’t know why, and we didn’t know 3,000 years ago. I like that there’s really no way to answer the question, that you have to accept that this is something that happens to a lot of humans.
Wired: And this whole movie was rendered on a laptop?
Paley: I started on a G4 titanium laptop in 2002. I moved to a dual 1.8-GHz tower in 2005, moved again to a 2-by-3-GHz Intel tower December 2007, with which I did the final 1920 x 1080 rendering.
view the entire interview here.
I just downloaded it and am looking forward to watching it after the Blackhawks play the Red Wings tonight. Yeah, I like sports.