Re: [-empyre-] (no subject)

[Norie Neumark]

--empyre- soft-skinned space--Hello Tyler and everyone

What a great post, Tyler, and wonderful to hear about your work. Perhaps you 
know about the algae opera by Michael Burton and Michiko Nitta?  
(http://www.burtonnitta.co.uk/algaeopera.html) 
. I haven’t seen it myself but 
read about it and accessed it online and was enchanted. Again, apologies for 
being lazy (if this is really bad net etiquette, let me know!) as I just put in 
an excerpt about the work from my Voicetracks book:

Breath also connects us to the place through which it resonates 
and the others in that place and in the shared medium of air. It not only 
connects people,  intersubjectively, it 
also connects people to animals and things,  voicing the connections between 
breath and the natural environment. I listen to this in The Algae   
 Opera of artists BurtonNitta (Michael Burton and Michiko Nitta), for 
example, which literally breathes life into the natural environment, giving 
voice to the   relationship between human breath and 
plant life on our planet. In this work, it is an opera singer’s copious voiced 
breath that literally breathes life into algae.
Masked in a specially designed piece of biotechnology, an algae headdress, the 
opera singer, the algae, the audience and I (watching documentation) form a 
strange  relationship, a curious assemblage. The carbon 
dioxide in her breath feeds the algae, which later will be fed to the audience, 
so that they can literally “taste hersong.”  In The 
Algae Opera, the head mask, attached to tubing which channels the breath to an 
algae tank, is a strange mixture of a Greek mask, a persona,  and a 
beautiful lunglike filigree that looks like a seahorse. The singer feels part 
sea creature herself as she intones her algae opera. I listen to the voice as 
mediumhere, life-giving medium, medium for life. 
Meanwhile the other sense of medium merges into the undertones as, medium-like, 
the singer crosses an ether and  connects me to 
another life form. And when the audience eats the algae, I sense that that they 
are actually ingesting the singer’s voice. In an odd way, the work  
 makes me think about John Baldessari’s 1972 video of teaching 
a plant the alphabet. As far as I know (I wonder if anyone ever followed up 
with those plants?), that work was more humorous and 
conceptual than literal, in contrast to the literal relationships between plant 
life and voice that animate works made after the new 
materialist turn. And it is with new materialist ears that I encounter The 
Algae Opera as it provokes a listening to breath between the human and 
nonhuman— opening an awareness of the vibrancy of 
breath and the productiveness of its connections. It voices and breathes life 
into a sense of intersubjectivity beyond the  human.

 Speaking of Whitehead and fermentation and guts, your post set thinking about 
my amazing acupuncturist, Mattie Sempert, who is a Whitehead scholar (part of 
the Sense Lab in Montreal) and essayist as well as acupuncturist — she is 
writing a book of essays about the entanglement of all of these. Anyway, her 
“twirling fingers” as she feels my gut to sense where to needle are in-touch 
with the life that my gut tspeak to her – attuning her to what’s happening 
throughout my whole body(/mind). It’s an amazing collaboration and as the 
needles start to work, my stomach gurgles appreciation and joy.

best

Norie

www.out-of-sync.com 

workingworms.net 

unlikely.net.au 
 

> On 13 Oct 2017, at 5:19 AM, Tyler Fox  wrote:
> 
> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> Hello everyone,
> 
> First, I also want to send my best wishes to April and Matt. I have
> friends and family in the same area, some who had to flee in the
> middle of the night with nothing more than pajamas and their cat
> (which, at least, is a thin silver lining). I am saddened for all,
> humans and nonhumans, dealing with such devastation.
> 
> I would like to thank Margaretha for inviting me as a guest to this
> week. Also thanks to everyone for the wonderful posts with much to
> consider (terroirism, affection, enlivenment, grieving and resistance
> thereof, turtles and other turtles, listening, learning, and
> communicating with nonhuman collaborators…the list goes on). Just.
> Wow.
> 
> As Margaretha’s introduction 

Re: [-empyre-] Has mediated natures changed your ideas of what communication is?

[Julie Andreyev]

--empyre- soft-skinned space--
Hi Meredith
thank you for this lovely example of how artwork can inform communications with 
other animals, even without those animals being physically present. The work 
takes a humble position, through methods of careful listening and responding. 
Using this knowledge to then create a set of instructions to re-enact those 
responses and corporal connections is a gentle way of inserting biocentric 
anthropomorphic potentials. The sensing like a fish opens possibilities for 
extending the human into the larger ecology we share, as tenticular making

Julie
> On Oct 12, 2017, at 6:38 PM, Meredith Drum  wrote:
> 
> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> 
> Dear Soft-skinned space,
> 
> Re Margaretha’s question about communication and work with animals, I have 
> been thinking of somatic communication, specifically dancers, choreographers 
> and movement artists who work with animals, landscapes, environments. This 
> includes Grisha Coleman (hopefully a post from her soon) and an artist + 
> organization with which Grisha and I have worked: Jennifer Monson’s iLand 
> (Interdisciplinary Laboratory for Art, Nature and Dance). 
> 
> Jennifer Monson and iLand just published a field guild to ilanding 
> http://www.ilandart.org/purchase-a-copy-of-a-field-guide-to-ilanding/. Some 
> info about her and iLand may be of interest.
> 
> One of my favorite ecologically focused dance projects is Monson’s BIRD BRAIN 
> (2000-2006), a six-year research-rich science/dance project following fish, 
> whale and bird migration along the Pacific, Atlantic and Mississippi fly and 
> water ways. Monson and collaborators danced along migration routes, carefully 
> listened and responded to each location, and meet and worked with community 
> groups and scientists. 
> 
> Later she founded iLand, commissioning dancers and other artists, scientists, 
> urban planners, architects, park rangers (and many others) to collaborate on 
> scores, and then host public workshops to test, dance and play the scores. I 
> feel lucky that I have co-created two such iLanding events. 
> 
> I hope Jennifer and iLand will not mind me quoting one of the scores here. 
> 
> -
> FISH MIGRATION 
> for four or more participants 
> a location near water
> 
> Start at the edge of water.
> 
> Become aware of the sides of your body. Imagine that you can sense, hear and 
> feel the space around you through your sides as if you had the lateral lines* 
> of a fish. What can you hear? Can you feel vibrations from the sounds and 
> actions around you? 
> 
> Soften your front focus and tune into your peripheral vision. 
> 
> Choose a point along the edge of the water some distance away. Note open 
> pathways and obstacles.
> 
> Migrate from here to there - darting, schooling, resting in an eddy, hiding, 
> floating - guided by the information coming from the sides of your body. 
> 
> -River to Creek iLAB Residency 2010
> 
> *A lateral line is a system of sense organs that detects movement, vibration 
> and changes in pressure.
> ---
> 
> Best,
> Meredith
> ___
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au
> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu

___
empyre forum
empyre@lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au
http://empyre.library.cornell.edu

[-empyre-] Braiding threads, climate disaster, animal/artist interaction, policy

[Meredith Drum]

--empyre- soft-skinned space--
Hello All,

Thank you, Ben, for inviting us to consider how our projects might address the 
questions Brian (and you) raised. 

I usually work at small scale, yet with the intent to shift policy on small 
scale, for certain. My collaborative Oyster City Project was specifically 
addressing policy shift re NYC pollution management and aquatic ecology 
remediation / bio-remediation. Yet, importantly, this project does not involve 
collaborating with animals. That is not something I do. 

I am excited to hear others address this and will continue to respond.

Best,
Meredith


> On Oct 13, 2017, at 3:40 PM, Benjamin Schultz-Figueroa  
> wrote:
> 
> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> Hi all,
> 
> I wonder if it's possible to bring together some of the different threads of 
> this conversation? On the one hand, we have the pressing problems of incoming 
> climate disaster, which Brian observes "will now force new experiments in 
> land management." The question of how this management manifests, and what 
> role nonhuman animals will play in this realization, is paramount. As Brian 
> concludes: "Can we imagine a world in which ever-larger numbers of people 
> change their own behavior according to the cues they receive from animals?" 
> 
> On the other hand, we have a really amazing collection of encounters between 
> human artists and animal subjects. Collections of humans, crows, salmon, 
> oysters, among others, have worked together to produce a variety of mediated 
> conversations about ethics, land-use, and point-of-view (human or otherwise). 
> 
> Drawing from the basic theme of science fiction that Margaretha began this 
> week with, I'd love to hear this week's artists speculate about how they 
> might answer Brian's question. What would a world look like in which the 
> media works that you (co-)produce with animals were taken as informing 
> policies of land management,  social organization, agricultural practices, 
> etc.? Do your films/videos/installations imply a larger, scaled up, possible 
> method for tackling the kinds of design questions that Brian raised? 
> 
> All the best,
> -Ben
> 
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Norie Neumark  wrote:
> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> Thanks for opening this vital can of worms, Julie. I was first alerted to 
> these issues by vegan colleagues at an Animal Studies conference in Australia 
> earlier this year. We were talking about new materialism, which for me has 
> been so rich an opening for my thinking, and Fiona Rapsey Probyn asked the 
> same sort of questions you raise about real material political and ethical 
> concerns. I think the way you put it about “the real material lives of the 
> animals they theorise” provides an acid test for new materialism and one that 
> will be the key question I’ll put to theories now — thank you. Given that all 
> thinkers have limitations, there are still important things that Haraway and 
> Braidotti have to offer, I think -- though I certainly agree these are 
> serious limitations to new materialism thinking when it cannot recognise the 
> different pains suffered by things and by lab animals and food industry 
> animals. I guess what I wonder is are these limitations inherent to new 
> materialism or can it be ethically and politically attentive to the real 
> material lives of animals.
> best
> Norie
> www.out-of-sync.com
> https://workingworms.net
> http://unlikely.net.au
> 
>> On 12 Oct 2017, at 6:11 am, Julie Andreyev  wrote
>> 
>> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
>> Hi Meredith
>> 
>> Thank you for pointing out the Braidotti reference, and reminding us of her 
>> concept of zoe. 
>> 
>> I’d like to open a bit of a worm-can so see if there is room for debate on 
>> Braidotti’s, and Haraway’s thought on more-than-human animals. I do 
>> appreciate the creative thought that both philosophers present on the 
>> vitality of other animals, and our need to expand our thought and ethics. 
>> The recent speculative fiction by Haraway is an example. However both 
>> theorists fall short of extending their thought into applied practice that 
>> is meaningful for the lives of other animals. In their writing they stick 
>> with a utilitarian view on other animals, such as supporting work on animals 
>> in the laboratory. They seem to have a fatalistic, or entrenched 
>> anthropocentric view, that the lab and meat industry is a given, 
>> indisputable fact of contemporary culture, and that this warrants the 
>> continued exploitive actions of humans. For example, while Haraway talks 
>> about ‘companion species’ her version of this category includes those 
>> animals utilized in labs and food industry. How may a companion relationship 
>> be actualized in this hierarchical and harmful, even lethal system? In an 
>> similarly 

Re: [-empyre-] Introducing Week 2: Mediated Natures, Speculative Futures and Justice and thank you to Week One

[Benjamin Schultz-Figueroa]

--empyre- soft-skinned space--Hi all,

I wonder if it's possible to bring together some of the different threads
of this conversation? On the one hand, we have the pressing problems of
incoming climate disaster, which Brian observes "will now force new
experiments in land management." The question of how this management
manifests, and what role nonhuman animals will play in this realization, is
paramount. As Brian concludes: "Can we imagine a world in which ever-larger
numbers of people change their own behavior according to the cues they
receive from animals?"

On the other hand, we have a really amazing collection of encounters
between human artists and animal subjects. Collections of humans, crows,
salmon, oysters, among others, have worked together to produce a variety of
mediated conversations about ethics, land-use, and point-of-view (human or
otherwise).

Drawing from the basic theme of science fiction that Margaretha began this
week with, I'd love to hear this week's artists speculate about how they
might answer Brian's question. What would a world look like in which the
media works that you (co-)produce with animals were taken as informing
policies of land management,  social organization, agricultural practices,
etc.? Do your films/videos/installations imply a larger, scaled up,
possible method for tackling the kinds of design questions that Brian
raised?

All the best,
-Ben

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Norie Neumark  wrote:

> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> Thanks for opening this vital can of worms, Julie. I was first alerted to
> these issues by vegan colleagues at an Animal Studies conference in
> Australia earlier this year. We were talking about new materialism, which
> for me has been so rich an opening for my thinking, and Fiona Rapsey Probyn
> asked the same sort of questions you raise about real material political
> and ethical concerns. I think the way you put it about “the real material
> lives of the animals they theorise” provides an acid test for new
> materialism and one that will be the key question I’ll put to theories now
> — thank you. Given that all thinkers have limitations, there are still
> important things that Haraway and Braidotti have to offer, I think --
> though I certainly agree these are serious limitations to new materialism
> thinking when it cannot recognise the different pains suffered by things
> and by lab animals and food industry animals. I guess what I wonder is are
> these limitations inherent to new materialism or can it be ethically and
> politically attentive to the real material lives of animals.
> best
> Norie
> www.out-of-sync.com
> https://workingworms.net
> http://unlikely.net.au
>
> On 12 Oct 2017, at 6:11 am, Julie Andreyev  wrote
>
> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> Hi Meredith
>
> Thank you for pointing out the Braidotti reference, and reminding us of
> her concept of zoe.
>
> I’d like to open a bit of a worm-can so see if there is room for debate on
> Braidotti’s, and Haraway’s thought on more-than-human animals. I do
> appreciate the creative thought that both philosophers present on the
> vitality of other animals, and our need to expand our thought and ethics.
> The recent speculative fiction by Haraway is an example. However both
> theorists fall short of extending their thought into applied practice that
> is meaningful for the lives of other animals. In their writing they stick
> with a utilitarian view on other animals, such as supporting work on
> animals in the laboratory. They seem to have a fatalistic, or entrenched
> anthropocentric view, that the lab and meat industry is a given,
> indisputable fact of contemporary culture, and that this warrants the
> continued exploitive actions of humans. For example, while Haraway talks
> about ‘companion species’ her version of this category includes those
> animals utilized in labs and food industry. How may a companion
> relationship be actualized in this hierarchical and harmful, even lethal
> system? In an similarly un-problematized way, Braidotti draws some
> equivalents between living beings, and those computational intelligences
> produced by humans. I would argue that real live animals are presented with
> more risk than computers.
>
> My question about both Braidotti’s and Haraway’s thought is: What is at
> stake for the real material lives of the animals they theorize?
>
> best
>
> Julie
>
> On Oct 10, 2017, at 5:11 PM, Meredith Drum  wrote:
>
> --empyre- soft-skinned space--
> Dear Empyre
>
> I am writing in response to Benjamin’s post about animal research films,
> specifically the three rats films. I was pleased that Joyce Wieland’s ended
> the post. Hers is refreshing and funny -  a nice shift after the
> frustrating, humorless films by Miller and Mowrer. The difference between
> the albino lab rats,