The new episode of #A.I.L - artists in laboratories, the weekly radio programme about art and science i present on ResonanceFM, London's favourite radio art station, is aired this Wednesday afternoon at 4pm.
Today's guests are Evan Roth, Becky Stern, Geraldine Juárez and Magnus Eriksson from the Free Art and Technology Lab (F.A.T. Lab), a network of artists, engineers, scientists, lawyers, and musicians who are committed to supporting open values and the public domain through the use of emerging open licenses, support for open entrepreneurship, and the admonishment of secrecy, copyright monopolies, and patents.
Some of the members were at the MU gallery in Eindhoven last week for a F.A.T. Lab retrospective as well as for the launch of THE F.A.T. MANUAL. In this episode, we will be talking about 3D printed guns, Ideas Worth Spreading which allows you to deliver your own pirate TED talk, open culture and how to remove Justin Bieber from your web browsing.
The radio show will be aired this Wednesday 20 November at 16:00, London time. Early risers can catch the repeat next Tuesday at 6.30 am. If you don't live in London, you can listen to the online stream or wait till we upload the episodes on soundcloud.
F.A.T. GOLD Europe. Five Years of Free Art & Technology is at MU in EIndhoven until January 26, 2014. THE F.A.T. MANUAL is on print on demand but you can also download it for free.
There are countless parodies, imitations, versions of the Technoviking. The fabulous and the lame ones that you can expect Youtube to harbour. But the character has also inspired a couple of artworks: Wafaa Bilal put the head of the raver in a public park and watched it grow bigger as people were tweeting about it. And for The Marc Horowitz Signature Series, 19 performances aimed at 'improving' the lives of the citizens he encountered, Marc Horowitz reenacted the techno viking dance session in a junkyard in Walsenburg, Colorado. I saw that one a few years ago at the Espace culturel Louis Vuitton in Paris. Because technoviking knows no social boundaries. Neither does he have any mercantile limits: you can buy Technoviking action figures and Technoviking t-shirts.
And now there might be a documentary about Technoviking. But probably not the one its many fans were expecting.
Matthias Fritsch, the artist who shot and uploaded the video has spent 3 years in a legal battle in Germany. In 2009 (2 years after 'the technoviking' became an internet hit), the raver starring in the video sued the artist for uncleared 'personality rights' and tried to remove Technoviking from the web. Not only the original video (called "Kneecam No. 1") but also all the thousands of mash-ups, copies, comics, parodies and other content uploaded online by enthusiastic users. All had to be removed. The protagonist of the video even requested that his famous fingerpointing pose be erased from the internet. At the end of last month, the judges decided that the original video would not be allowed to be shown as long as it is possible to identify the protagonist. Besides, the filmmaker has to pay the money that he had earned to the plaintiff. The earnings came mostly from YouTube ads with a few extra euros from TV-licenses and T-shirts sales.
Fritsch has started a campaign on indiegogo to raise funds for a documentary about the Technoviking story. First of all, because Fritsch has been studying and documenting the many reactions to the videos for years and the phenomenon in itself is worth discussing. But also because, as he puts it:
the documentary would be :a means to pave the way for artists and internet users around the world to be able to protect themselves against old laws that have yet to catch up to contemporary meme culture."
All this without ever being allowed to actually show the main protagonist of the story.
I caught up with Matthias online the other day...
Hi Matthias! You published the Technoviking video on YouTube in 2006 but it was not before 2009 that the mysterious man sent a legal notice asking you to stop using the video and all derivations of it. Why do you think it took him so long to write you? Was it because he wasn't aware of the phenomenon until then? Or is it because something changed in culture or laws in 2009 that made him realize that the moment had come to do something to protect his "personality"?
I can't say for sure why it took the plaintiff so long to get back to me. Already in October 2007, just a week after the video became viral, I met people in China who I had never met before and who already knew the video. Therefore I find it hard to believe that it will take somebody two years to get notice of being involved in such a big viral effect.
What happened with this trial? Is it finished? What was the decision of the law?
The trial is finished. Basic results are that I am not allowed to show the video anymore in its original form, meaning as long as it is possible to identify the plaintiff's image. If I cant show the protagonist so can't users anymore who mash up the video. According to the judgement a violation can have consequences of up to 250 000 Euro fine or up to 6 months of jail for me. Also I have to pay him all the money that I have earned since 2008 and I will need to cover 7000 Euro for my part of the fees for the trial and costs for his and my lawyers over the last 3,5 years. Since the judges didn't support him in many points of the lawsuit like the banning of user reactions like comics, re-enactments or mashups that are deemed "arty" enough (the German term is "besondere kunstgerechte Bildbearbeitung") in connection with the video's protagonist. Those should still fall under the freedom of expression. Also the judges seem to have concluded that the plaintiff is rather after the money than really trying to solve his argued personal problems in connection with the video and therefore denied him to claim further financial compensation from me. There is still a chance that the plaintiff is not happy enough with this result and files an appeal against the judgement.
In the indiegogo campaign you say that "The trial was not just about me and Technoviking, it pointed out the borders of free culture and user reactions and one can also conclude that we need new categories in the law how to deal with memes on a legal basis." Could you tell us what you mean by this? Where do you think the law should go? And where do you fear it might go?
I am not a specialist in law and I can just describe my "amateur" feeling after being involved in this case. Therefore I can't provide a solid legal concept yet how the law should include new forms of expression that we find in the contemporary network culture, but I realized that there is a big gap between the actual laws and how I think of this case from a perspective of logic & human spirit. What was the situation when the legal problem started and what could be changed about it by a trial? If there has been a viral Meme in the net for years, if it's been watched globally, copied, used for mash-ups, and if it got out of control - what possible result can a judgement bring in reality that by stating that it is not allowed anymore to continue with the further use? Especially since it it became a web-celebrity which is handled by users like a common piece of media that belongs to everybody?! The young generation grows up with a new understanding of how to deal with media in times of instant copy, paste and edit. And the most common effect of censoring something popular is that this makes it even more popular.
If there is no right for mash-up and fair use for cases like the Technoviking-Meme I fear that, as it is already the case in the music business, lawyers might pick up this way of easy & massive money making and start to send cease and desist letters to prosumers for violating personality rights by doing mashups or forwarding it in FB, etc.
An other interesting point is the fact that in Spain or the US the Technoviking-Claim wouldn't even have a legal basis since it all happened in public space. I would love to talk with competent people about those issues, bring them together within the film that I am planning to create and hopefully find answers and possible solutions.
But more generally, i've been wondering how your case wasn't symptomatic of what is happening more generally with internet culture nowadays, when laws seem to be crafted in retrospect and punish you now for something that wasn't illegal at all 5 or 10 years ago. With -for example- designers or artists receiving bills for copy rights of images they used online 10 years ago as part of a student project, at a time when there wasn't any law detailing what could be or shouldn't be done in terms of copyrights for online images, etc. Is this something you would like to comment on?
I think that's of course a problem and always will be one. I am not aware of those examples when a bill points back 10 years, but it points out that the images you talk about are still online. Since the web hardly forgets anything we need an awareness of what we put out there and what is still online in our own accounts. One radical way could be to cut credits completely, only focus on important content and ideas that will be published anonymous, untraceable but alive.
The Technoviking is by far my favourite meme. Yet, i do sympathize with a man who is universally ridiculed (and didn't ask for it, unlike many reality tv 'stars'). Did you try to reach some kind of arrangement with him? Some understanding which would have been less dramatic and time/money consuming than a court case?
The first thing I did was sending him a personal letter, thanking him for finally contacting me and offered that of course I'd like to share whatever I earn and that I would be open to think together about how to make both a part of living out of the meme's popularity.
What strikes me in your case is not so much that you are brought to court (i do find it sad though, don't misunderstand me!) but that you have to be held responsible for the fact that the whole technoviking meme got out of your hands (as is the case with any meme.)
The judges didn't hold me responsible for user reactions and neither denied me the right of showing them in lectures or art projects as long as they don't show the plaintiff.
Matthias Fritsch, The Story of Technoviking - Indiegogo Campaign, 2013
You are planning to shoot the documentary within the legal restrictions that have been made clear by the judges. What are these legal restriction exactly?
The conditions are that the plaintiff should not be identified in the material. I also will not reveal any name, address and so on that could point out how people can find him.
You have created an archive of the different versions, creations and reactions inspired by the technoviking. It is so big that, as you write, "you would need a week to see all the versions that are out there!" So let's end on a cheerful note! If you could select 5 of these versions, which one would they be?
In the past I have created some compilations that research specific recycling strategies by fans and are real enjoyable to watch:
For the biggest part of the user-reactions, since they mash up the original video, my hands are bound at the moment because i shouldn't link directly to content that shows the plaintiff's face. So people need to find these ones themselves. But i can talk about it and it is just incredible how perfect Michael Jackson's song "Beat It" is fitting on the Technoviking clip. As if they were made for each other. There are other songs that are awesome in combination with my video but "Beat it" beats them all in terms of accidentally perfect match.
Also some collages like "the end of the vorld party" or a streetfighter like game simulation of Technoviking against Vernon Koekemoer are results of an incredible fan culture that i could have never come up with myself.
I do love that Beat It techno viking and Matthias might not be allowed to point directly to it, but i can!
The exhibition Shoot! Existential Photography opened a few weeks ago at The Photographers' Gallery and i never got to mention it so far. The selection of work is fantastic, the theme is seductive and it makes you want to locate the nearest playground.
Load, aim, Fire!
In the period following World War I, a curious attraction appeared at fairgrounds: the photographic shooting gallery. If the punter's bullet hit the centre of the target, this triggered a camera. Instead of winning a balloon or toy, the participant would win a snapshot of him or herself in the act of shooting.
The exhibition celebrates the use of the shooting gallery at fairgrounds by the famous (from Jean-Paul Sartre to Federico Fellini) and the non-famous but also the contemporary artists who have been intrigued by the idea of shooting oneself.
The most stunning work in the show is probably the video-sound installation Crossfire by Christian Marclay. I felt like that rabbit in the headlights of a car (or was it a hare? or a deer?) Crossfire is a super fast, loud and powerful sampling of shooting scenes from Hollywood movies. You stand in the middle of the room and wherever you turn your gaze there's Clint Eastwood, Antonio Banderas or some other action hero star aiming and shooting at you.
Since the late 1970s, Jean-François Lecourt has been literally shooting his own image. In his early experiments, the bullet smashes the camera. The roll is pierced by the shoot. In the second series, the bullet perforates a wall of the lightproof box, a ray of light comes in and leaves a mark on the photosensitive paper.
Similarly, Rudolf Steiner uses the camera as a target. In the series Pictures of me, shooting myself into a picture, the bullet hole is the aperture for a pinhole camera, creating an image upon impact.
The story of Ria van Dijk is endearing. Every single year, the lady goes to a fairground shooting gallery in Tilburg, Netherlands to shoot a self portrait. She started her pilgrimage to the shooting booth in 1936, when she was 16. The artist Erik Kessels collected all the images she has taken at the fair. Going from one self-portrait to another is fascinating. You see her hair getting greyer, her glasses following the fashion of the passing decades, her friends or fans coming along with her, etc. The only pause in the sequence is from 1939 to 1945.
The action takes place in total darkness with the flash being triggered just as the bullet breaks open the analogue camera and hits the negative inside it.
Sylvia Ballhause bought a shooting rig from the booth of a family business in Germany. It was the last booth working with analogue, large-format cameras in the country.
The shooting gallery is not as popular as it used to be but you don't need to go far to try the amusement yourself, the Photographers' Gallery has turned on of its rooms into a photographic shooting gallery so that visitors can shoot (at) themselves.
Shoot! Existential Photography is up at the Photographers' Gallery in London until 6 January 2013.
Related story: The cameras that record the moment of their own destruction.
Do you remember Technoviking? He was one of Youtube's sensations in 2007. Millions of people admired his dancing skills and undeniable male magnetism but to this day, his identity remains a mystery. The technoviking video has been blogged, commented, shared, emailed and sparked numerous parodies.
Wafaa Bilal has installed an inflatable Technoviking avatar at All Saints Park in Manchester for AND, the Festival of New Cinema, Digital Culture and Art (running this weekend and you should run there too if you can, it's that good). The gigantic head is linked a twitter account and in order to breathe life into it, people have to tweet about it otherwise Technoviking will go flat and dance right back to oblivion again. So go and tweet #technoviking to keep him alive!
Pop culture and astute social comments cohabit in this work like in other works by Bilal. Meme Junkyard is fun and a bit silly of course but it also invites us to reflect on the promises of constant connectivity, on the meaning of 'going viral,' of generating almost unlimited levels of attention before fading back into disinterest. What happens to the technoviking (as well as to the other meme that will soon lay to inflate and deflate in the meme junkyard) is similar to what awaits our ego when other web users stop re-tweeting our rants, linking to our blog posts (oh please let that never happen to me!), or thumbing up our status on facebook.
And the one and only:
Wafaa Bilal is going to discuss his work this Sunday at Cornerhouse. The event is free.
AND, the Festival of New Cinema, Digital Culture and Art remains open all over Manchester until 2 September 2012.
Other works by Wafaa Bilal: Subversion in the Arab Art world, A few words with Wafaa Bilal, Book Review - Shoot An Iraqi, Art, Life and Resistance Under the Gun, Positions in Flux - Panel 1: Art goes politics - Wafaa Bilal, ...and Counting.
The Circus as a Parallel Universe, edited by curators Gerald Matt and Verena Konrad. With essays by by Birgit Peter, Matthias Christen and Verena Konrad. And interviews with pop artist Peter Blake and filmmaker Ulrike Ottinger.
Published on the occasion of the exhibition of the same name at Kunsthalle Wien.
Publisher Verlag für moderne Kunst writes: Clear the ring for the world of acrobats, clowns, and exotic animals! Presenting a number of contemporary works of art, the catalog »The Circus as a Parallel Universe« offers an introduction into the universe of the circus and highlights a wondrous place full of knowledge of the world, surprises and sensations, a place of poetry, but also of excitement, confusion, and unease. The circus as a parallel world has become a projection surface in film and literature, but also in the fine arts.
I wouldn't normally review the catalogue of an exhibition i haven't seen but i was seduced by the description of the book and its accompanying images (midgets! Anthony Quinn in La Strada!) But then i don't know much about the circus, i've never even been to the circus. Not because i have that "clowns freak me out" affectation but because i've always been so sad for the animals.
Still, there is something unique and endlessly appealing about the whole circus aesthetics though: the garish colour, the merry silhouette of the tents, the posters, the costumes (which i do wear on some occasions) and Moira Orfei (do click with sound to max volume). Don't laugh at Moira, she used to be the most beautiful creature of Italy. I just wish she'd leave those tigers alone.
The book has the usual format of a catalogue: a series of essays and then a few pages about each artists participating to the show, plenty of images and a couple of interviews thrown in. The essays are particularly good at identifying the rules and roles of the circus. On the one hand it's a world of escape and dreams. A world where social conventions, animal behaviour and even the laws of physics are challenged. But it is also a microcosm that sets very clear limits to its own transgressions, makes a business of violating norms and requires that its members operate within a strict framework.
The text The Circus as a Model of the World charts the intertwining histories of circus and cinema. Both shared the same venues, the same audiences and the nomadic lifestyle in the early days of the cinema. They might not have so much in common right now but the movie industry has never stopped looking at circus as a source of inspiration (apparently some 600 circus films have already been produced in 30 countries.) The essay Taste and Prejudice, however, demonstrates that the circus isn't meeting with the same appreciation as the other sources of entertainment. While theatre and circus used to compete in the 19th century for example, it is now obvious that one is now regarded as a form of art while the other doesn't meet with the same respect.
The interviews in the book are as enjoyable and though-provoking as the essays. They would, however, benefit from some context or at least a short introduction. For example, the interviewer kept asking Peter Blake about his collection. If i hadn't seen an exhibition about that collection two years ago, i wouldn't have received much information about it from the interview only.
I've said a few words about the essays, the interviews, the images are as good as you can hope in a catalogue. Let's talk about the small texts explaining the works exhibited by each artist. Actually there's only one thing i can say about them and it is that they are in german only! The whole book is in english and german except the part dedicated to the individual works. Why be so cruel? Why translate one half of the book and leave the other part in german only? Still, i did discover a few works i liked a lot. That Deborah Sengl does animal anthropomorphism like no one else.
The artists selected have found inspiration in the circus in its childhood entertainment form (as opposed to glamourous Cirque du Soleil-like performances), reconstructing part of its magic, decoding its figures and metaphors, extending its boundaries. Here's just a small selection of their work:
In 2005, Javier Téllez organized a parade of patients from Mexicali's CESAM mental health center. They were protesting against general views on mental illness in today's society. The procession stopped in Las Playas, a Mexican town on the US-Mexico border for the first-ever firing of a human cannonball over an international border: from Mexico to the US.
In the installation illustrated below, light chains hanging from the ceiling move up and down. The installation is activated by a person pedalling on an exercise bike.
Some researchers have observed that apes held in captivity watch tv programmes. Some of them are fond of the Teletubbies, others favour emergency room dramas or Disney cartoons. But is it possible to script, shoot and screen cinema just for primates? That's what Rachel Mayeri set out to discover with her work Primate Cinema: Apes as Family.
The artist worked with Stirling University comparative psychologist Dr Sarah-Jane Vick to identify which kind of action, narrative or images a group of chimpanzees from the Edinburgh Zoo were most receptive too. The scientist and the artist observed how monkeys reacted to documentaries, cartoons, dramas screened inside a research pod where the animals could pop in and out as they pleased. The monkeys would spend a few minutes in front of the images then go away, come back, sit down for a moment, get up and bang violently against the wall that protect the tv screen, etc. Unsurprisingly the monkeys reacted more strongly to scenes featuring sex, food, violence but they were also interested in drumming and seemed quite fascinated by humans dressed as monkeys and by humans removing their monkey masks.
The result of the artist's research is a 20 minute movie. The video installation juxtaposes two screens. The right screen shows the movie for apes, its stars are actors dressed as and acting like monkeys. The second half displays the reactions of the ape audience when the film was shown on a chimp-proof screen at Edinburgh Zoo last August.
The hero of the film for monkeys is an actress wearing an animatronic suit with motorized eyes that are controlled by a puppeteer. She enters a house, gets a soda from the fridge, goes upstairs and falls asleep in front of the tv. Soon, a group of chimpanzee intruders enter the house as well and start misbehaving: they help themselves to the bananas and carrots in the fridge and basically trash the house. The clatter wakes up our chimp heroine. She gets up and goes downstairs to see what's the tumult about. That's when the plot thickens. Because chimpanzees also appreciate to watch social and sexual dynamics on screen.
Rachel Mayeri told us a few thought-provoking facts during her presentation:
- chimps might like to watch tv but that only happens when they are in captivity. Left in the wild, they have far more interesting things to do than watch tv.
- even the zoo is not the most suitable place to study the reaction of monkeys to moving images as the chimps' backgrounds may vary dramatically: some were rescued from poachers, others used to be mascots, some were born in captivity, etc.
- it's not correct to say that we descend from chimps as they haven't stayed exactly the same while we were evolving, our closest cousins have evolved too.
- chimps don't focus solely on the images appearing on the TV, they regularly check the changing social situation around them. They monitor each other ("who around me is sexually available?" for example) just like we do on facebook. Two of the most 'avid' tv watchers were a mother and daughter. During the research, the females were the ones who spent most time watching the tv screen. On the day of the screening of the finished movie for chimps at the Edinburgh Zoo, they were in rut, distracted and the center of male attentions.
- The artist is conscious that she made a film that reflects her own, very human prejudices and ideas of what a film should be like. She therefore asked herself "If a chimp director had to do a film for humans, would it have done the same mistakes and made a film for chimps rather than one for humans?"
Rachel also showed an extract of her first Primate Cinema video experiments, Baboons as Friends. In the two channel video installation, field footage of baboons are shown next to a reenactment by human actors, shot in film noir style.
The work was inspired by primatologist Deborah Forster who, unlike most people, can watch babboons for hours as if they were actors in a soap opera. The artist attempted to translate the plot of lust, jealousy, sex, and violence into the human world.
Primate Cinema: Apes as Family is at The Arts Catalyst in London until 13 November 2011.