- Beyond the Evidence - The Rise and Rise of Evidentiary Realism

http://new-tactical-research.co.uk/blog/beyond-the-evidence-2/

 At a time when right wing populist demagogues routinely denounce experts and 
expertise a movement of interdisciplinary 
artists and researchers has emerged whose work is unapologetically generations 
with some who have been active for decades 
but the current climate has seen them crystalize into something like a movement 
that artist/curator Paolo Cirio has dubbed 
“Evidentiary Realism”. What follows is an attempt give these practices a wider 
critical context and speculate on how these 
efforts could be seen as part of a broadly based drive towards a “knowledge 
democracy”


“The internet for all its benefits, has led to an epistemological crisis of 
unprecedented scale, facilitating the international rise of demagogues and 
reactionary populists”   Mark O’Connell [New Statesman July 2019]
What is striking in this quotation is that Mark O’Connell has chosen to 
characterize our current predicament not as political or cultural or economic 
or even ecological but as “epistemological”, a crisis of knowledge. Moreover 
one of the aggravating symptoms of this crisis is the way the a new breed of 
far right populists have bypassed traditional forms of propaganda, focusing on 
forms of misinformation that go beyond simple deception, operating instead 
through establishing "grey areas” or "zones of uncertainty” in which well 
established norms on subjects such as climate change, migration, poverty, race 
and sexual identity are not so much rebuffed through competing narratives but 
systematically called into question through tactics of obfuscation, irony, 
deniability, displacement and distraction. This is not simply about deception 
or the struggle between competing narratives, it is a battle for the social 
mind within the context of a war on knowledge itself. 

The claim that we are in the midst of a campaign that is explicitly 
anti-knowledege is reinforced by the words of numerous high profile figures. We 
have Farage’s frequent attacks on Universities, Michael Gove’s infamous 
assertion that “we've had enough of experts”. There is the Trumpian use of the 
term "alternative facts" and Boris Johnson’s systematic avoidance of scrutiny 
by either journalists and more recently by parliament. It is in this 
anti-knowledge, populist climate that an art movement has emerged based on the 
foregrounding of fact, evidence and knowledge in both style and its substance. 


-Evidently Art-

”There is a new way of understanding our times.. a new wave of realism, a new 
wave of artists who are engaged in political issues. “Evidential Realism” is 
the realism of today… “ These are the words spoken by artist Paolo Cirio in a 
recent BBC radio documentary , ‘Evidently Art’.

An art movement that emphasises evidence or "art as evidence” was initially 
articulated by the curator Tatiana Bazzachelli in 2016. The ideas were further 
developed in 2017 with greater emphasis on various forms of knowledge 
infrastructures, by the artist and curator Paolo Cirio in a publication and 
exhibition that introduced the term “Evidentiary Realism”.  Typically it is a 
movement that combines data gathering, data analysis and digital imaging to 
illuminate complex social systems for broadly progressive social purposes. In 
his exhibition notes Cirio describes how the “ the truth seeking artworks 
featured explore the notion of evidence and its modes of representation”. It is 
noteworthy side effect that this is perhaps the first fully-fledged research 
led art movement. It covers a wide spectrum of artists including Lawrence Abu 
Hansen, Wachter & Judt, Paolo Cirio, !Mediengruppe Bitnik, Forensic 
Architecture, Trevor Paglen, Lev Manovich, Morehshin Allahyar, to name just a 
few. As I write Bazzachelli is busy building on these achievements with the 
event CITIZENS OF EVIDENCE that is “exploring the investigative impact of 
grassroots communities and citizens to expose injustice, corruption and power 
asymmetries". 

Recently mainstream awareness of this movement has grown significant enough to 
become the subject of a recent BBC radio documentary “Evidently Art” in which 
Andrew McGibbon interviewed a number of artists involved. Within the confines 
of what is possible in a short documentary McGibbon does a good job of 
introducing this movement to a wider audience. But although a number of probing 
questions were asked, important issues remained untouched. The most urgent of 
these questions revolve around what we might expect (or even demand) of a 
cultural movement driven by the primacy of evidence and data when the nature 
and status of knowledge itself is in crisis.

Cirio himself acknowledges that applying the principles of ‘realism’ in art is 
not new. Indeed some of the basic principles of this movement were already in 
place in the 19th century naturalism, and most particularly in Emile Zola's 
literary theory and practice developed in texts such as "Le Roman 
Experimentale". To be clear Zola's usage of the term "Experimentale” is not 
formalist experimentation in the modernist sense of experimenting with (for 
example) the novelistic structure, rather it is an idealised notion of the 
scientific method applied to both art in order to bring about social progress. 
According to Robin Bus, the title of Zola’s theoretical exposition, Le Roman 
Experimentale, is a deliberate echo of the medical researcher Claude Bernard’s 
Introduction à l'étude de la médecine expérimentale (1865) a text which shaped 
Zola’s intellectual development with its detailed descriptions of the 
application of the scientific method through systematic observation and 
verification and underpinned by Auguste Comte’s deterministic positivism. 


-Forensic Narratives-

Currently the most developed expression (some would say the 'gold standard') of 
this movement is the work of Forensic Architecture, an art and knowledge 
research center based at Goldsmith's University and led by architect Eyal 
Weizman. The support of an institutional framework provides Forensic 
Architecture with the ideal platform to support a critical mass of 
interdisciplinary research. Its members include “Journalists, architects, 3D 
modelers, animators, coders, lawyers working on multiple projects. In a few 
short years they have compiled an impressive range of projects and 
investigations. In a time when nearly any major conflict, crime or event 
generates large quantities of data from multiple sources, Forensic 
Architecture’s rich combination of analytical disciplines and experimental 
methods routinely achieves outcomes that are not only taken seriously in legal 
and journalistic contexts but are also featured in major art venues around the 
world.

When pressed in interview as to whether identifying their outputs as art 
might... “take the edge off the truth he is trying to show” Weizman pushed 
back, insisting that the specific sensibility of artists, architects and film 
makers are particularly important part of FA’s armory. 

"Think about it. When the most important piece of evidence coming from battle 
fields world wide are video graphic. You need video makers to make sense of it. 
 They would be the right people to look at it to notice the nuances of color 
and shade and blur. And to understand how one piece of video might relate to 
another. Indeed aesthetic sensibilities. The sensibilities of an architect an 
artist or a film maker are very useful in figuring out what has taken place.”

I would agree but also respond to Weizman by arguing that this rationale is 
only part of the story as there is also something else going on, something that 
is as much rhetorical as it is evidential. The audio-visual installations 
produced by this movement represent, through their info-graphic style a 
distinctive "evidential aesthetic". They do not persuade through the substance 
of their factual analysis alone but also through a rhetorical ability to 
project an aura of the incontrovertible, an indexical aesthetic with a deep 
roots and a deep appeal to the modernist sensibility. But to what end? Have we 
not learned to be skeptical about anything that looks like the reemergence of 
an unproblematised scientific empiricism? 

But at this particular moment particularly when speaking of misinformation and 
the anti-science of climate change deniers Evidential Realists might insist on 
an unambiguous, pro-evidence stance, and that respect for hard won expertise 
and facts have particular importance at this historical juncture.  If we feel 
that emphasizing the importance of pushing back against anti-knowledge forces 
is exaggerated we can see how ‘live’ these questions through the following 
example.

- Christian Democrats Intervene -



An important example of the role Evidentiary Realism can play in countering 
politically motivated obfuscation is the mysterious intervention of Germany’s 
Christian Democratic Party (CDU) in order to subvert a report by Forensic 
Architecture to the parliamentary commission looking into the murder of Halit 
Yozgat.  

The report has its origins in the investigative installation into Halit 
Yozgat’s murder that is one of FA's most impressive and powerful works. It is a 
meticulous multi-faceted recreation of the neo-Nazi murder of Yozgat in an 
internet café in Kassel. It is an extraordinary audio-visual distillation of 
complex questions of ballistics and motion studies that translate complex data 
in ways that illuminate the many contradictions around the possible role of the 
presence of the German Secret Service presence at the scene of the killing. The 
work was plucked out of its context of Dokumenta probably Germany’s most 
important art event. Forensic Architecture were commissioned submit a report to 
the parliamentary inquiry. Strangely Germany’s Christian Democratic Party (CDU) 
publishing a counter report just one day ahead of Forensic Architecture’s 
submission to the German Parliamentary inquiry in Hessen that was considering 
the case Murder of Halit Yozgat.

What is strange and as yet unexplained was the reasoning behind this sudden 
intervention by the Christian Democratic Party, not only in the publishing of a 
counter report but also seeking to de-legitimize Forensic Architecture’s work 
on the basis that it is the work of artists and therefore should not be taken 
seriously as evidence. In contrast the CDU’s report was not only unsigned it 
did not even adhere to the most basic research requirements of referencing of 
sources or credits. This is the politics of anti-knowledge that Evidential 
Realists could be seen as resisting. Far from seeking to pursue a line of 
argumentation or interrogate the evidence, Christeena Vavia of Forensic 
Architecture argues that the CDU’s aim was simply to “blur and obfuscate ”. 
When the BBC approached the CDU for comment, answer came there none.  


The Evidentiary Realist movement has emerged at a historical juncture with 
implications that go beyond the intrinsic value of individual works and 
projects as it is possible to see the movement as a counterweight to the 
corrosive anti-knowledge tactics of reactionary populism. But as we reflect on 
the achievements we should also reflect on whether the underlying "faith in 
exposure" and evidence also carry their own epistemological risks. The 
knowledge crisis can never be about facts and evidence alone. It is crucially 
about the ways in which knowledge circulates. False information “outperforms" 
verified statements online to use Buzzfeed’s telling verb. Algorithms for on 
line content selection are designed to maximise circulation-or what 
commentators stubbornly persist in calling “engagement”.  What facts come up on 
what platforms ? The evidentiary movement is the start of a conversation that 
needs to become deeper something that enables us to identify the sites where 
the relationship between politics and knowledge are most tractable. 

-Risk and Reflection-

The deeper conversation might begin by taking account of the origins of the 
breakdown of trust between citizens and the scientific establishment combined 
with the wider post war liberal consensus. To a degree when Gove declared that 
"we have had enough of experts" he had a point. However the causes of this 
rupture are not just about the internet as Mark O’Connell asserts in the 
introductory paragraph. A wider process of erosion that has been in train for 
decades. It the early 1980s and 90s a number of sociologists began to theorize 
some of the side effects of globalisation. The most notable contribution to 
this discussion came was Ulrich Beck's The Risk Society (1992) he saw the 
breakdown of the nation state as a silo as undermining the reliable predictive 
management of risk. Beck argues that this is important because "insurable risk 
was essential in establishing trust in the progressive nature of capitalism as 
well as the nation state’s internal order.” In short reliable methods for 
anticipating the unforeseeable making accidents in the aggregate were 
predictable was at an end, propelling us into an era of radical indeterminacy 
and incalculable risk

However, from the perspective of this discussion, the key point of Beck’s 
analysis, is that the institutions of the natural sciences were not only slow 
to recognise these new conditions they were (and remain) effectively locked 
into a mindset of denial or worse . They acted as though their very legitimacy 
and authority depended on denying the very possibility of incalculable risk 
"even though these risks force their way institutions like a virus that weakens 
them from within”. The latest example of this weakening from within is the 
Volkswagen Diesalgate scandal.

A clear line can be traced from Beck’s account of the dangers he saw on the 
horizon in the early 1990s to the current collapse of the trust in the 
institutions that are supposed to “ know” and the political consequences that 
have followed. So when scientists march on Washington demanding that facts and 
evidence (including the facts about climate change) are taken seriously they 
might also reflect on their own role and the role of their institutions in 
shaping the epsitemic rupture we are witnessing. If the arts are to take this 
subject on they/we must go beyond the “evidential”. It is not enough to turn 
artists and other activist citizens into investigative reporters and 
researchers who simply replicate the narrow empirical methods and assumptions 
of the earlier regime. 

-Reflexive Turn-

Some of the most generative evidentiary works in which the questioning of the 
basis of its evidential assumptions are folded into the works themselves. And 
classical sociology offers us some important tools. Max Weber defined sociality 
as ‘the curation of our actions with an eye towards their interpretation by 
others’. This definition might serve as an introduction to a number of artists 
whose work take into account of the highly reflexive nature of the evidential 
on social media platforms. I will look at just two examples both of whom 
combine the evidential with a reflexive relationship to both system and 
subjectivity. The artist Erica Scourti’ work ’Outage’ is the artists’ own 
biography as a traditional printed book. However the content of this 
experimental biography is constructed not by her but by a ghost writer who was 
commissioned by the artist to craft a narrative based only information sources 
gleaned from the investigations of a group of experts in cyber security, 
digital privacy and social profiling. This is just one instance Scourti’s rich 
body of works which has found numerous entry points through which to curate and 
engage experimentally with her digital identity or data-body. 

Another artist whose use of the evidence we should consider is Micheal 
O’Connell whose work collected on http://www.mocksim.org/. O’Connell’s work 
infiltrates the mundane technological systems that we have no choice but to 
engage with such as automated supermarket check-out systems to parcel 
information tracking systems. In a recent work, he set up three bank accounts 
and a standing order that sent small sum of money (£1) flowing in pointless 
circles between the accounts on a daily basis generating mountains of bank 
statements from each bank..mockery and playful experimentation lie at the heart 
of O’Connell's practice, revealing the myriad ways in which so called ‘smart’ 
infrastructure as frequently dumb… There are many artists who work in these 
ways that have the effect of intensifying the reflexive potential of the 
systems we inhabit. Artists such as Lawrence Abu Hamdan, Ian Allen Paul, Mario 
Pfeifer and many more who successfully bypass the trend of establishing the 
“evidential" as some universal space founded on an aura of incontrovertibility. 
 In the book Propaganda: Art of the 21st Century Jonas Staal’s book arguing 
that when we speak of “post truth” it is crucial to emphasise that there is no 
norm to return to.” He goes on “rather there are various competing realities, 
past and present, each trying to impose its own set of values, beliefs and 
behaviours”.

-Knowledge Democracy and the Design of Supportive Environments-

“We need to recover the central role in public life of experimental facts: 
statements whose truth value is unstable” 
Noortje Marres.Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 4 (2018) 423-443 

The artist Jonas Staal, in his recently published Propaganda Art in the 21st 
Century argues that "when we speak of post truth it is crucial to emphasise 
that there is no norm to return to.” He goes on “rather there are various 
competing realities, past and present, each trying to impose its own set of 
values, beliefs and behaviors”. This reiteration is a version of the familier 
post-structuralist trope in which various truth claims are reduced to rival 
narratives of those seeking power. This is a position at the furthest remove of 
the Evidentialist movement with its advocacy of empirically based facts and 
evidence. We are looking at a familier dichotomy which returns us to the 
question at the heart of the epistemic crisis: "is it time we gave up on the 
task desciding on more or less valid contributions to public knowledge” ? The 
answer given by Sociologist Noortje Marres to this question in her essay "Why 
We Cant Have our Facts Back” is a resounding NO. But she qualifies this 
position by arguing, that we must first reject knowledge claims based on 
appeals "to the authority of experts grounded in the authority of statements 
that are validated outside of the public domain.” The phrase “outside of the 
public domain is telling here as it suggests that resentment against experts is 
based on the fact that their power is located beyond any possibility of public 
scrutiny, or engagement. Marres goes on to assert that in the context of 
“today’s dynamic and diverse public spheres epistemic authority will have to be 
earned the hard way through an exchange between epistemically diverse 
viewpoints”. But how and where can this vision of a “knowledge democracy” 
unfold?

- Regulation -

To speak seriously of creating a knowledge democracy is to immeditely ask how? 
Realistically, where is the traction? Where do experts meet the structures with 
the power to intervene in our lives? Where does the rubber hit the road ? The 
answer is the relatively new realm of independent power - regulation - The 
bodies that oversee the day to day development of the rules required to manage 
the dangers of science based progress. This regulatory regime is the unelected 
network of goverment appointed agencies often with quasi judicial power, made 
up almost entirely of experts. It is they whose oversite we look to ensure 
safety of aerospace, pharmaceuticles, food safety. The complexity of the work 
they do means that they can’t be managed by traditional parliamentary 
insitutions or overseen by traditional executive power as regulation is a 
continuous process of investigation, consideration and enforcement. Though 
essential this regime is opaque and remote from public scrutiny, engagement or 
accountability. Any attempt at re-building trust in epistemic authority must 
begin by rethinking the position of the regulatery sphere within the wider 
constitution and asking whether their status as a distinctive part of the 
constitution on a par with say the judiciary needs to be acknowledged with 
boundaries defined. At the very least we could (and must) open these structures 
up to public scrutiny, engagement and in some cases intervention.

- Assemblies - 

Opportunities being generated by the current strain being felt by our current 
constitutional structures to open up new avenues to connect greater public 
engagement to political decison making. One of these opportunities lies in the 
increasing exploration of ‘'citizens assemblies” as a means of tackling 
intractable problems in a less adversarial way. Citizens selected through 
‘sortition' work alongside experts whose knowledge relevant to particular 
issues in ways that contribute to a decision making process.

Returning to the role of the arts it is easy to imagine how groups like 
Forensic Architecture might use their analytical audio visual capabilities to 
make complex and contentious issues accessible as in the case of Halit Yozgat’s 
murder where these capabilities was used to inform a parliamentary commission. 
As we have seen a number of artist/researchers such as Lawrence Abu Hamdan and 
Forensic Architecture already have an impressive record of combining academic 
frameworks, public exhibitions and juridical interventions. But these well 
established frameworks that provide limited scope for experiment in how we 
might create new partnerships between the experts and citizens. It is not too 
much of a stretch to widen this to commissioning artists with these skill sets 
to play a role within citizen’s assemblies. But one might go beyond the 
presentation of fact and evidence evidence and think about the discourse space 
itself. In this regard the artist Jonas Staal offers an interesting set of 
possibilities with his history as an experimental designer of supportive 
environments. His projects both exhibitions and workshops that operate as 
highly curated shared workspaces that facilitate experimental forms of 
collective public learning. 

A frequently sited example is the role of citizens’ assemblies in the Irish 
abortion refferendum whose recommendations were felt to have played an 
important role in both the outcome and the tenor of the debate. In this example 
the role of experts and expertise was able to move from the remote and 
technocratic to the public and the dialogical. We can only imagine how 
arrangements for deliberative public discourse around the complexities of 
delivering Brexit, in which experts had worked alongside citizens rather than 
pronouncing from above, would have impacted on the quality of the discussion. I 
am not suggesting that these assemblies represent a magic bullet moreover not 
all assemblies are as successful as the Irish example but they represent one 
way of responding to the fact that as Marres argued "validating public facts 
will have to happen in the public domain [….] we will need to re-envision what 
a public fact is in a world that is not only marked by contingency but also 
epistemic diversity and dynamism."

- Addendum -
This essay was written as part of my personal preparation for the War on 
Knowledge workshop at 
Brighton Digtal Festival- This workshop will be led by OiLab a research network 
at the forefront of 
investigation into the impact of on-line discourse on knowledge and politics. 
The hope is that this 
workshop will illuminate some of the questions outlined above on October the 
17th at Brighton 
University. The workshop has a limit of 50 participants so anyone interested 
should register soon.  

https://brightondigitalfestival.co.uk/events/the-war-on-knowledge-beyond-the-evidence
   

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



References

Evidently Art - BBC radio iplayer (for a limited time only)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0007bk3

Noortje Marres - Journal Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 4 20018
https://estsjournal.org/index.php/ests/article/view/188

Micheal Seemann - Digital Tailspin
http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/no-09-digital-tailspin-ten-rules-for-the-internet-after-snowden-michael-seemann/

Paolo Cirio 
https://paolocirio.net/press/texts/evidentiary-realism.php
https://paolocirio.net/press/interviews/interview_evidentiary-realism.php
https://paolocirio.net/press/show_evidentiary-realism_nyc.php

Tatiania Bazzichelli 
https://www.disruptionlab.org/citizens-of-evidence
https://www.disruptionlab.org/truth-tellers

- OiLab: Open Intelligence Lab 
https://oilab.eu

- Bellincat
https://www.bellingcat.com/

- Jonas Staal
https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/propaganda-art-21st-century
http://trainingforthefuture.org/?fbclid=IwAR1ER_SDu8Ppp5uJXe0dKs06QPwjKAuJu9rIMncn-16UPNxt8Pm4OKfSq_0

- Micheal O’Connell/Mockism
http://www.mocksim.org/

- Erica Scourti
http://www.ericascourti.com

- How Much of This is Fiction
https://www.fact.co.uk/event/how-much-of-this-is-fiction

- The War on Knowledge- Brighton Digital Festival 
https://brightondigitalfestival.co.uk/events/the-war-on-knowledge-beyond-the-evidence



#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to