Clarification re: Prospectus Drafts

Hello all,

I’ve changed the settings so that prospectus excerpts are no longer visible to the public. Also: you are not *required* to post them here until after you’ve got feedback from me, but I recommend that you do, and I recommend that you read the prospectus drafts of your cohort.




Drock prospectus rough


On the internet , local internet you can download any 2600 hacker magazine

don’t tell anyone, well read through one of your favorites and tell me what you glean


my website is

my recent electromancy site is at


Human interface with technology

the tools and machines we create enhance our access and interaction with the world around us.  Precision tools allow microscopic and even subatomic manipulation of the world’s material, and in the other direction machines extend our strength to superhuman crane lifting, the pulley is but a metaphor for current industrial construction and fabrication super machines.  The button mechanism might have originally been used thousands of years ago by early humans to deceive a rabbit to trigger a rock to crush it or rustle a snare to hoist the animal into the air.  Now we have buttons around the earth that trigger a nuclear warhead launch.  All the destruction we could ever want to harness embedded in an automated response to an original avalanching action trigger.  A persistent  NO designed to reveal a glimpse of a horrific Yes .
Thats an optimistic notion that a human rationality, a human compassion is the one that makes these magnificent decisions.  Further and deeper human activity is mediated by the breakneck speed of computer transfers and decisions we hand over to machines so that their speed and our approximation of their discourse can somehow marry allowing optimized stock trading, traffic flow, information exchange, telecommunication.  Just as we all have sat at a red light that idiosyncratically wont trigger we occasionally end up the residual butt of a technological faith.  

The human offers more and more autonomy to machine process and the algorythym.  This faustian bargain relinquishes our desicsions to a protocol we endow like a child with the essence of our desires.  Cant be hard and tough: Regimentated confiment is fragle to the  slightest fracture, the discrency in the rules, our faith in our conception of the protocol is not necessary a mirror of the state the machine resides in.  COmputer programs can hack themselves.  In fact we artists hope they do,  Not only by rewriting themselves but more simiply using their sense and response to mediate input that we never anticipated they would be exposed to.  

COmputer archetecture is allot like sedimentary layering,  new layers of interface rely on the staiblity of there precedent.  Like condemmmed building that have a econd floor installed on them.  Machine code that was a direct feed into the computer, its personal language has become archiac as well have multiple sedimentary layers of transferance so that many programmers and almost all users exist on a high story on this aging foundation.  We no logner make foundational changes to our machines. There is no time to recreate our origins as the future progression becomes out new obsession. THis is easily analogized by the qwerty keyboard.  An archaic interface archetecture intentionally created ti limit efficieny hasembedded itself as far as the romantic language alphabet had millenia ago.  Production and improvement are ends in themselves that distort and belittle attempts to return to our origins, attempts to redefine the plan of our technological topography.   Just as Paris was remodeled in the early 20th century to intentionalize its capacity and functionality so we might gain from allowing machines to be deconstructed, reconsidered.  The near infinity fast serial click of a processor, does chain all programs that follow from this archetecture to a linear programming style.

Memory leaks are build ups from use.  

Hacking is seen as a form of terrorism these days.  In much the same way as copyright infringement is seen as a crime.  Access and use of materials that have been previously appropriated as intellectual property is extremely controversial and constantly imposing limitations for creative acts   Richard Prince’s Marlboro Man Cowboy portraits are a perfect example of this quagmire.  Right at the heart of modern art is the ready made.  Duchamp created a new idea based on a an interpretive assembly of pre existing objects.  This “new” idea, the crowning achievement of conceptual art isn’t legally protected.  The “old” idea came first and as the kernal: all growths that unfold from that source are tainted and mediated under the advisory of the copyright holder.

Hacking accesses information that is veiled in securities secrecy, but just as a hole is in a fence, and a coyote can sneak into the farm, or a hole in a cup allows water to stream forth exploiting all possible leaks so a hacker never breaks protocol, but acts according to a larger domain of protocol than the security program assumed where the limits of access.  Much as a freewill argument If you can should you?:  The hackers ethic is of freedom to explore, THe hacker doesn’t accept that holes in fences of software have the same connotation as real estate property.  Virtual property,  access to the etherial  territory of the new century is certainly being modeled by corporations under the same guide of physical property.    
My personal concern with access rights revolved around machine access.  A prime example is the jail break an Iphone.  To use a peice of technology outside the bandwidth of official specifications.  
The tinkerer, the designer adapts their tools to respond to new challenges,  The innovator is by definition a recomposer of previous methods of design to allow the protocol of materials and technology to be expanded to it’s entire potential.  There are intentions today to illegalize reverse engineering of systems,   be they physical objects like microchips or more language designs like software.  

Culture Jamming    proposed by Negative land  certainly defines this expressive plight of the contemporary artist.  Open source of technology allows innovators to improve and creatively mold the tools of our time.  Take the hammer as an example. To reverse engineer this tool might allow the power hammer to come about, Different heads, variations of the “temetic” code allow perfection and specialization of this tool.  Such could be said about most every computer every technology.  Rights to improve and creatively mutate temes accelerates human ingenuity, allows unique and customizable methods or expression.  To redefine the idea behind something.  To observe the output and think back  through the permutations and computations to the input becomes illegal is much like illegalizing philosophy or philosophy.  Wisdom can’t be loved and appreciated if the knowledge has a patent. monopolization of  expressive commodities


Excerpts from hacking

After all hackers merely exploit preexisting holes made by clumsily constructed code.(162)

Hacking is an index of protological transformations taking place in the broader world of techno culture.

Any Newbie hacker will be able to tell you that hacking relies on “exploits,” preexisting bugs that are leveraged by the hacker to gain access to a computer.(167)
Protocol is synonymous with possibility. (168)

Whatever code we hack, be it programming language, poetic languag, math or music, curves or colourings, we create the possilibity of new things entering the world( Mckenzie Wark, “A Hacker Manifesto [version 4.0]

(P)rotocol is nothing but an elaborate instruction list of how a given technology should work. (171)

(a) true protocol can not be closed or proprietary, It must be paraded into full view before all, and agreed to by all.  It benefits over time through its own technological development in the public sphere. (171)

(DMCA) basically makes it illegal to reverse engineer technology.  This means that you;re not allowed to take things apart to figure out how they work if corporate entities involved don’t want you to.(2600 Spring 2000 p. 6 the next chapter.)

(T)he real issue here is one of control over a specific technical knowledge, (172)

(W)ith protocol comes the exciting new ability to leverage possiblity and action through code.  (172)

 Digital Rights management

Ihde proposes a magnification/reduction transformation to be a structural feature.  To magnify some observed object, optically, is to bring it forth from a background into a foreground and make it present ti the observer, but it is also to reduce the former field in which it fit, and due to foreshortening- to reduce visual depth and background   297

Other kinds of technologies, such as speedometers, clocks, and the buttons on a telephone, seem not to have this enhancing or amplifiying character,  They do not in the same way seem to directly enhance their user’s perception, but rather hold another mode of reference to observed objects(.)

Ihde makes a distinction between three basic kinds of relations between humans, technology, and world, namely between the embodiment relation, the hermenutical relation, and the alterity relation 299

Ihde makes a case for what he terms alterity relations.  It is primarily a relation to or with technology.  Ihde argues that this is a relation between a human being and some otherness, although an otherness generally weaker than the one we find in our relation with people and annimals. The alterity relation a form of quasi otherness relation to technology that in at least some limited way seems to take on a like of its own.

When working wit a word processor, the application functions as an almost transparent tool for manipulating the document. However, in the case of a serious breakdown the ongoing flow and the transparency of the tool is lost and the relationship transforms into frustration and rage which is directed towards the computer system.   (he continues: ” attention becomes directed at the tool itself.  

modern pop culture representations often: “continue a far reaching strand of thinking in which anypotential signs of otherness of technology is considered as nagative and unwanted. 302

borgmann is “highly skeptical about the conventional view that technology frees us to attend to toher, more simulating pursuits.  He arguess, othe the contrary, that we are typically not freed up at all by technology but rather made passive.” 304

Persuade Into What? Why HCI Needs a Philosophy of Technology  Dnaiel Fallman   Umea university Sweden
Y. de Kort et al. (Eds.): Persuasive 2007, LNCS 4744, pp. 295-306, 2007.  Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007


Reference Materials for Heller Presentation

The thesis for my presentation on May 9 is the study of how imagery is perceived as reflective of truth. Can we trust images? Can the photographer be trusted? Can the observer be trusted? The readings below are articles written by Eroll Morris, a film director most known of documentaries. His works reflect is philsophical point of view that have inspired my attitude about photography: he is interested not about the truth of a photography, but the more complex story behind the story that the photograph exhibits. He questions whether any given point of view is sufficient on its own. His thesis has lead to my personal interest in understanding the human conditions that govern how people understand the world through imagery.

Readings relevant to conversation:

NYTimes 6-part contribution to the opinion pages on the “truth” of photography and how its perceptions shape society, culture, politics and economics. The articles include photographs to be used in discussion.

It Was All Started by a Mouse Part 1 and Part 2

Thought Experiment #2

My Art relevant to this discussion:




Elian Gonzales:



This is a multi-page series on life in cuba. Discussion of politics, economics and life are interspersed on several pages. These photos were shot in 2000 and 2002.


The photos (and their discussions) that I will be presenting on May 9 can be found here:

Note that each photo has its own narrative, which can be read by clicking on each individual photo.




Natalie Prospectus Draft 1

(Rough Draft, still doing some research but would welcome comments) 


           The paradox of becoming as Deleuze describes it, “the affirmation of both sense or directions at the same time”, describes a state of flux, a sense of now that is informed by a concurrent awareness of the immediate past and immediate present.  It is time experienced in a non-linear form, or at least a sense of time experienced in a way other then distinct successive moments.  In my project “unfolding” I explored the theme of collapsed distance and time through a diptych of digital photo and projected video.  The video is a progression of still photographs taken from the same vantage point out the front of my car window while moving from New Jersey to California.  The position of the vanishing point in each photo is in roughly the same position.  Each photo zooms in slightly before dissolving into the next.  They are presented in a tumbling, slow moving motion.  The images are blurred to concentrate on the abstracted forms that are created through such movement, to create obscurity, and to create a soft visual tactility.  Edmund Burke meditates on the power of poetry’s obscurity, stating that “It is one thing to make an idea clear, and another to make it affecting to the imagination,” and continues to describe how a description or image that lacks clarity can lead to evoking stronger emotions because of it’s room for interpretation.  In using imagery that is suggestive rather then descriptive, I am focusing on the emotional impact of the image rather then specific narrative content.  The obscurity of the image forces the viewer to be mentally active and fill in visual information that is not there, creating an instant dialogue with the viewer, and necessity for their subjective input.  The video focuses on the dissolve of one moment into the next, which is drawn out over time, and in a constant state of becoming.  Baudrillard writes in his book “America” that “speed is the triumph of effect over cause, the triumph of instantaneity over time as depth, the triumph of the surface and pure objectality over the profundity of desire.”  In “unfolding” I start with the movement of travel that creates this “triumph of effect over cause” and digitally manipulate the imagery to focus on the moments in between the now.  Hypnotic, meditative movement is created for the viewer, in which the affective response is a contemplative environment, which allows for concentration and hyper-awareness of the current moment.  The accompanying photograph is a digital composite of all the photographs used in the video, layered at an equal opacity. The photograph offers the space and time of the journey that is presented in the video, collapsed into a single image. By showing it alongside the video, my intent was to have the two pieces in conversation, sparking thoughts of how we perceive and experience time.  Artist Olafur Eliasson writes, “Time flows continuously in a single motion, so to speak, with each moment naturally relating to the next.  Edmund Husserl added that our expectations of the coming moment and the memory of the one just passed are all part of our sense of ‘now’.”  Hyper-awareness of our state of “becoming” in the moment that it is occurring would be a concept outside our human faculty of understanding, and could lead to a moment of sublimity if fully realized.  It would be an expanding of our sense and definition of now, recognizing in the present that our current moment is not simply a succession of relative moments as Eliasson describes it, but a dissolving, overlapping of many moments at once.  The limited ability of our perception as humans is what must break the now into a singular moment separate from the constant state of becoming that is occurring.  I am interested in the territory of perception where our boundaries of external/internal, past/present/future, here/there start to collapse or reform themselves, and the viewer is allowed to focus on becoming in the Deleuzian sense rather then being.  As Deleuze puts it “a pure becoming without measure, a veritable becoming-mad, which never rests.  It moves in both directions at once.  It always eludes the present, causing future and past, more and less, too much and not enough to coincide in the simultaneity of a rebellious matter.”  Expanding our abilities to perceive our present moment in space and time, and experimenting with the limits of perception is an area I am interested in as an artist. 

            With “unfolding” the objective is to create an immersive projection environment, which allows the viewer to enter a meditative, contemplative state of mind.  The slow speed of the continual movement and the soft, subjective imagery of the video create an affective response in which the viewer’s own “body-time” (Mark B. N. Hansen describes this concept and more about perceived temporality which I am in the middle of researching – will cite more of his New Philosophies For New Media in the next draft) is slowed down.   In my sound installation “ A Billion in One Life”, the viewer/participant is asked to physically compare the rhythm of their own beating heart with the rhythms of various animal heartbeats.  The affective response is a similar distortion of one’s body time, but in this case verges on the uncanny, and asks the viewer/participant to become hyper-aware of the cardiovascular system that pumps through their own body, and hold in comparison the biological rhythms that are occurring in species around them.  This project stemmed from an interest in scaling theory – the idea that all species of mammals have roughly the same amount of heartbeats in their lifetime, about one billion.  My dad is an animal scientist, and the memory of him explaining this theory to me recently resurfaced.  It had always sat at the back of my mind, but seemed too poetically perfect to be a true fact, and felt like something I had dreamed up in my childhood.  I was interested in the idea that all of these biological rhythms are happening simultaneously in the world around us.  As Elizabeth Grosz describes the concept of the Umwelt, each species exists in their own “Umwelt” complete with perceptual cues specific to their kind and vibration.  The rhythm of a heartbeat of a certain species  … (still working this part out) (pg. 42-43) The piece starts with the familiar rhythm of a human heartbeat, and phases into the high heart rate of a shrew, the slow rhythm of a whale’s heart, and so on.  This is combined with low frequencies that can be felt pulsing through one’s body, and gives the sensation of attempting to reconcile the pulsing of one’s own heart with the various rhythms of each species that begins to play.  The five-minute composition ultimately builds and overlaps to have all species beating simultaneously. 


Works Cited:

Baudrillard, Jean.  America.  New York, Verso, 1989.

Deleuze, Gilles [1969] on Alice and Wonderland in the First Series of Paradoxes of Pure Becoming,” in The Logic of Sense. Trans. by Mark Lester and Charles Stivales. Ed. by Constantin V. Boundas. New York: Columbia University Press. [First Published as Logique du sens. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit, 1969.]

Grosz, Elizabeth. Chaos, Territory, Art: Deleuze and the Framing of the Earth. New York: Columbia, 2008.

Hansen, Mark B. N.  New Philosophy for New Media.  Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2004.

Morley, Simon.  The Sublime: Documents of Contemporary Art.  Cambridge, The MIT Press, 2010.