Daily Archives: October 21, 2009

Cybernetic Serendipity

Cybernetics is one of the most widely misunderstood concepts. The word itself seems sinister and futuristic, but the term has ancient roots – the Greek word kybernetes, meaning steersman. Cybernetics was famously defined in more recent times by Norbert Wiener in 1948, as the science of “control and communication, in the animal and the machine.” Words like “control” may seem to have creepy overtones, but at its heart, cybernetics is simply the study of systems. “Cybernetics is the discipline of whole systems thinking…a whole system is a living system is a learning system,” as Stewart Brand put it in 1980. Cybernetic systems have been used to model all kinds of phenomena, with varying degrees of success – factories, societies, machines, ecosystems, brains — and many noted artists and musicians derived inspiration from this powerful conceptual toolkit. Cybernetics may be one of the most interdisciplinary frameworks ever devised; its theories link engineering, math, physics, biology, psychology, and an array of other fields, and ideas from cybernetics inevitably infiltrated the arts. The musician and producer Brian Eno, for example, was a big fan of connecting ideas from cybernetics to the studio environment, and to music composition, in his work in the 1970s.

Eno was first exposed to concepts in cybernetics as a teenager in the mid-1960s, during his days as a student at Ipswich Art College. Several art schools in the UK in the ’60s were incorporating ideas from cybernetics into their pedagogical approaches, mainly via Roy Ascott’s infamous “Groundcourse” curriculum. Ipswich Art College, where Eno studied in the mid-’60s, was run by Ascott, an imposing presence who incorporated cutting-edge cybernetics principles into his offbeat teaching style. Before Ipswich, Ascott had been head tutor at Ealing, a nearby art school where a young Pete Townshend was studying. “The first term at Ipswich was devoted entirely to getting rid of those silly ideas about the nobility of the artist by a process of complete and relentless disorientation,” Eno recalled some ten years later, in a guest lecture he gave at Trent Polytechnic. Ascott’s teaching philosophy involved countless mandatory group collaboration exercises — an echo of cybernetics’ emphasis on “systems learning” — and mental games. Very little of the teaching at Ipswich had anything to do with what the teenage Eno had ostensibly set out to do — study the fine arts. Instead of daubing canvases with oil paints, Eno and his fellow students were instructed to create “mindmaps” of each other.

Eno became very interested in cybernetics, and possible ways to apply those ideas to music. As an art school student, he had gotten into observing life on a “meta” level, and looked at his own creative process with a bird’s eye view. Cybernetics concepts challenged Eno to think in different ways about the process of making music, and these ideas infiltrated Eno’s thinking on many of his 1970s albums in key ways. Groups of musicians working in the studio could be conceptualized, in some general sense, as cybernetic systems. A piece of music composed using feedback, or tape loops, could be construed using cybernetics principles, too. One of Eno’s favorite quotes, from the managerial-cybernetics theorist Stafford Beer, would become a fundamental guiding principle for his work: ”Instead of trying to specify it in full detail,” Beer wrote in his book The Brain of the Firm, “you specify it only somewhat. You then ride on the dynamics of the system in the direction you want to go.” Eno also derived inspiration from Stafford Beer’s related definition of a “heuristic.” “To use Beer’s example: If you wish to tell someone how to reach the top of a mountain that is shrouded in mist, the heuristic ‘keep going up’ will get him there,” Eno wrote. Eno connected Beer’s concept of a “heuristic” to music.


Brian Eno, Peter Schmidt, and Cybernetics

by Geeta Dayal

Read the article | Rhizome


Geeta Dayal holding a copy of her new book,  Another Green World

Tagged , , , ,

Hockney Smoking iPhone

Artist David Hockney isn’t afraid of picking up new media — over the years, he’s used Polaroids, photocollages, and even fax machines to create his art — in addition to regular, old-fashioned painting. Now, he’s taken to using his iPhone to create new works of art. The resultant “paintings” have been exhibited at the Tate Gallery and Royal Academy in London, as well as galleries in Los Angeles and Germany. Like artist Jorge Colombo (whose iPhone fingerpainting was featured on the cover of The New Yorker), Hockney uses the iPhone app Brushes to create his works.

It’s always there in my pocket, there’s no thrashing about, scrambling for the right color. One can set to work immediately, there’s this wonderful impromptu quality, this freshness, to the activity; and when it’s over, best of all, there’s no mess, no clean-up. You just turn off the machine. Or, even better, you hit Send, and your little cohort of friends around the world gets to experience a similar immediacy. There’s something, finally, very intimate about the whole process.

Hollywood star Marlene Dietrich, who added to the perceived glamour of smoking. Photograph: PA

Deborah Arnott is a professional anti-smoker. She makes her living from it. She thinks she can “save lives”. Since we all get a lifetime and she is not offering immortality, what she means is you might have a longer life.

Given the choice of 50 years as a free person or 70 years as a slave, she would choose slavery. I wouldn’t, and I suspect there are many like me, as most people seem to go for quality of life not quantity. Time, the great mystery, is elastic. Watch the kettle boil and it takes “a long time”…

This quantitative view of life seems dominant today among the medical profession and politicians – as though they can and should make these kind of choices for us. It seems a recent phenomenon, and not really very wise. On big issues it might be good, but on small ones it’s tyrannical.

(Continue reading)

Tagged , , ,