BREAKOUT SESSIONS

Saturday afternoon, Nov. 3, 4:00-5:00 (7 concurrent sessions)



Saturday afternoon, Nov. 3, 4:00-5:00

1

Ellen K. Levy

multi-media artist and teacher of art/sci at the School of Visual Arts, NYC

QUESTION/TOPIC
How can we politicize collaborative, interdisciplinary ventures? With funding sources drying up as a result of the events of September 11th, how will this impact collaborations, etc.?

REPORT
Educators:
áSoft integration is easy áHard integration (with the sciences) is tough, more imagination is required. áAre Universities becoming a place of activism again?

How would an artist go about making a proposal to work with and get access to other departments in a university or research setting?

áAccess is key issue, how can artists get access to tools?
áInterdisciplinary connections happen when you network (bars near universities are great location).
áIt is important to meet on an informal level first (friendly context).
áAsk simple questions.
áCall department and ask for a tour of facilities.
áGet scientists to share their interests with you, then dovetail your interests to theirs.
áRemain flexible, balance flexibility and your particular idea.
áStudy the facilities and have a sense of the possibilities - know what you'll find there.
áGet approval for a visit from the scientists, speak their language and discuss options (ideas).
áKeep your playfulness. Scientists admire that desire to explore.
á"Higher Ups" in a department are usually more accessible and interested (post docs and beginning   profs are too busy).
áIf you don't know the field very well, read Science News and other journals (focus on abstracts and   conclusion sections).
áPlay with their egos
áShare your process/research, what you've learned.


Is the artist's role to educate scientists about the impact and value of art?

áTake scientists to galleries to expose them to art.
áEngage scientists directly in the creative process. (The experimental process of science can learn   from the experimental process of art making.)
áHave strong, well thought out ideas.


Do you find that scientist are skeptical about the artist's value and contribution?

áNo, people are beginning to look at this.
áArtist can bring what isn't seen or apparent to the table.


reported by Richard Bressani

Ellen K. Levy, Artist, teaches at the School of Visual Arts, NYC
Education: BA, Mount Holyoke College; MFA equiv., Museum School of Fine Arts in Boston
Awards: Distinguished Visiting Fellow (Skidmore College), AICA (AAA show)
One-person exhibitions include: Institut Cochin, France; AAA, NY; Trans Hudson Gallery, NY; N‡rodn’ technickŽ muzeum, Czech Rep.; New Jersey State Museum, NJ; National Academy of Sciences, D.C.; Galerie Wild, Germany Collections include: NASA; Newark Museum, NJ; National Academy of Sciences, D.C.; IBM, NY; New Britain Museum of American Art, CT; SUNY New Paltz, NY Publications include: Art in America, The New Yorker, The New York Times, Flash Art, Art Journal, Leonardo

http://www.complexityart.com/
levy.nyc@attglobal.net



Saturday afternoon, Nov. 3, 4:00-5:00

2

Barbara London

Curator, Film & Video, MoMA, NYC


QUESTION/TOPIC
Inspiration and pragmatism -- where art and science meet? This breakout session explores new directions in collaborations and exchanges between artists, scientists, and technologists.

REPORT
Issues discussed:
* inspiration (art) and pragmatism (science) not as oppositional;
* the limited concept of art as individual and self- indulgent vs. science as pragmatic, necessarily   verifiable, social and useful;
* the tendency of participatory models to emerge first in ãlowä fields such as engineering (traditionally   defined as diluted science) and design (traditionally defined as diluted art) - such as found in   movies -   but which provide useful lessons/models necessary for successful collaborations.
  For example:
* the need for clearly defined roles within collaborations;
* a mindfulness of the end product;
* yet the need to establish a permeable relation and the basis necessary for such relationships -   such as
* the need for respect and especially friendship;
* recognition of the shared process & value of abstract thinking;
* recognizing the different motivations for collaboration as exterior or interior driven and their   consequent pressures, expectations, demands and differences;
* other models: the use of consultants rather than collaborators and the differences required -
* limited use values for the other: e.g., scientist uses artist for overview, artists uses science as   technology;
* there was a consensus that both models - consultation & collaboration - are needed and work, but   collaboration obviously the more difficult model;
* best model for collaboration is for both to initiate or renegotiate an initial idea in collaboration rather   than a pre-formed idea that ãrequiresä merely the use/ consultation of the other;
* science as not defined as technology and technology not defined as collaboration;
* view the joint/collaborative output or product as a concept that has a variety of manifestations;
* allow each collaborator to contribute unpredictability;
* the conceptual model for collaboration as one of stages and allowances; Aspect of failed   collaborations included:
* undefined roles;
* group dynamics over time that do not recognize and work with the limits of the other: e.g. artists   satisfied with the metaphoric and the unknown, or scientists/ technologists with the need for the   discrete and pragmatic - also expressed as individual synergy vs. production.
* inability to accept innovation and change - the propriety of the ãoriginalä now open for collaboration;

Reported by Rich Leslie

Barbara London initiated the first ongoing program devoted to video exhibition. As curator at The Museum of Modern Art, she organized more than 250 exhibitions, and assembled a unique collection of more than 1,000 media works. Her most recent efforts include "TimeStream, a new Web site by Tony Oursler, designed with Eric Rosevear; "Video Time" and "Video/Performance," which were components of the MoMA 2000 exhibition series. Her Web dispatch projects also include dot.jp, Internyet, and Stir-fry (www.moma.org/dot.jp, www.moma.org/internyet, and www.moma.org/stirfry.) Last year she was a commissioner of the new biennial, Media_City Seoul.

www.moma.org/dot.jp
barbara_london@moma.org



Saturday afternoon, Nov. 3, 4:00-5:00

3

Julian LaVerdiere and Paul Myoda

Artists


QUESTION/TOPIC
The Artist and the Skyscraper: a discussion about negotiating the spaces between public art, the monument and the memorial

REPORT
We had an hour. Julian and Paul sat midpoint in an arc of black chairs as a crowd gathered, maybe ten or twelve people, almost all of them women. Some were drawn by the question, others by the artists, and most by their project itself; the well-publicized monument to the Sept 11th attacks. The project had been taken up by the TK, resulting in a press freeze. This was the first, and possibly last time the artists themselves would be publicly commenting.

Julian opened his briefcase and produced stacks of paper. One stack framed the question, an obtuse query regarding public art and private artistic vision and the role of the individual artist- any individual artist- when that artistâs work becomes a memorial.

Especially a memorial touching fresh death. When it attempts to salve public wounds in a public place. When it is paid for by a people, a city or nation, for that purpose. When it is antidote to public terror. When that nation has different aesthetic sensibilities than the artists. Julian and Paul had phrased the issue academically, to initiate a philosophical discussion, and now they read it aloud.

Then Julian pulled out more paper. These were magazines, the NY Times Sunday Magazine and Art in America. Both covers depicted full-page artistâs renderings of the project Paul and Julian were championing, and Julian placed them on the carpet in the center of the circle. The renderings showed the Manhattan skyline by night, Jersey view. Where the twin towers once stood, we now see twin shafts of white light, radiating up from the island to the clouds. This is their project.

This is a sculpture, an event, this is energy as architecture. They are art, a monument, a memorial. What are they? Right now they are an idea. Whose art is this?

The discussion begins. Megawatts and xenon bulbs and candle power. Website opinions and pie charts. Pearl harbor and Mya Lynn. The danger of artistic celebrity on the back of national tragedy. The national need after a psychic national wound. Firefighters wanting the shafts of light in red, white and blue. The logistics of lighting trucks and public money, issues of bird migration and light pollution, of corporate vs. individual sponsorship and the irony of commemorating an attack indirectly resulting from American presence in the Middle East with a memorial dependent upon fossil fuel. Should the project be sponsored, should it travel, should it be temporary, occasional? With as many questions afoot, should the project be realized at all? Is the image enough?

The circle is small. All are artists, some in New York for the first time since September 11th and now, not two blocks from a TV scene theyâve seen replayed dozens of times, are these images. These shafts of light trace the old buildings like a memory. Itâs not a new skyline rather a photonegative of the old, as if the violence had scarred our collective retina. It is, at once new and familiar, both altered and restored. People speak then return to the images, chins in hands. The pictures are a black hole sucking in words and philosophy and abstract ideas. We are talking about action. Whose? Ours. If the initial question was answered, it was answered in this way.

Then the conference photographer entered the room, snapped a few pictures, then stood in the corner, staring down at the pictures on the carpet.

Reported by Charles Graeber

The artists, Julian LaVerdiere and Paul Myoda, are both former residents in the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council's World Views artist residency program, which was housed on the 91st floor of World Trade Center Tower One. For two years, they have been designing Bioluminescent Beacon, a project commissioned by Creative Time for its DNAid series, intended to be affixed to the top of one of the Twin Towers in the fall of 2002. Since the devastation, the artists evolved the project at the request of The New York Times Magazine, which features a preliminary rendering on the September 23, 2001 cover.

Bioluminescent Beacon was to be a public light sculpture celebrating the awe-inspiring developments of genetic engineering. It was also to be a living monument to a form of life (the dinoflagellate single-cell plankton and the light source of Bioluminescent Beacon) which has served as a rich tool for scientists in the investigation of life itself. The light broadcast by Bioluminescent Beacon would have been visible to pedestrians and others in Lower Manhattan and has now become the seed for the artists' proposal of a different sort of light: "light for light's sake," in the artists' words, that will rise for all to see, in recognition of the September 11th tragedy.

Julian Jean-Baptiste LaVerdiere, was born in the Adirondack Mountains, and moved to New York City in 1980, where he now lives and works as a artist. LaVerdiere is currently represented by: Lehmann Maupin Gallery NYC, Deitch Projects NYC, No Limits Gallery Milan, Italy, and Greene Gallery in Geneva, Switzerland. LaVerdiere received his BFA in 1993 from The Cooper Union and MFA in 1995 from Yale University's Graduate School of Art, sculpture program.

Paul Myoda was born in Wilmington, Delaware. His father is from Hiroshima, Japan, his mother is from Wolbach, Nebraska. He attended Rhode Island School of Design (BFA), California Institute for the Art, and Yale University (MFA). He has exhibited sculptures, paintings, photographs and short films nationally and internationally, and has written for various art and cultural publications, including Art in America, Flash Art, Frieze, and Feedmag.com. In 2001, he participated in Lower Manhattan Cultural CouncilÕs World View Studios on the 91st floor of World Trade Center One. He is represented by Friedrich Petzel Gallery, NY. He is based in Brooklyn, NY.

http://www.creativetime.org/towers/



Saturday afternoon, Nov. 3, 4:00-5:00

4

David Madacsi

Professor of Physics and Director of Arts & Cultural Programs, Univ.Conn.at Avery Point


QUESTION
Are the cultural border-crossings of Art/Science collaborations made with a temporary visa? Does two-culture credibility end when the collaboration ends or can borders remain open for individuals to make unescorted crossings?

REPORT
The level of the dialogue in this breakout was on a very sophisticated level, with input from a physicist, an industrial designer, several conceptual artists, a product design teacher, an art and technology teacher, and a performance artist. There was much discussion of the differences and similarities between art and science.

Science seems to be represented by a collaborative enterprise that validates itself with real effects. It is justified by the marketplace. Science has authority because an argument either verifies or disqualifies a theory. Art is involved with interpretation, and there is usually more than one. Historically, artists like Leonardo da Vinci were closer to the scientific method, because appearance was closer to science, but today an artist's observations could no longer be considered science. But even Leonardo, with his scientifically inquisitive mind, went about the process in a subjective way. The question of subjectivity and relativity are integral to art.

Madacsi suggested that art and science were identical in that they both modeled reality, although art was dependent on the individual artist. One artist preferred "a system of thought" to the formulation "modeling." Discussants countered that in science one is constantly disproving theories and there's room for movement. The limits of applicability are crucial to science. Although art has provided a lot of empirical flat out truth, such as the meaning of color, in art it is more important to know who is saying something than what they are saying.

Although the language of art does help people feel comfortable with the world, some artists' work is so cerebral that it requires the same concentration that you would devote to science to comprehend it. Calling art conceptual doesn't distract from it by drawing attention to the media but rather focuses the attention on critical thinking.

While we are trained to think of art as a means to express something, many artists are not interested in that purpose. Some are not particularly interested in expressing their feelings. Furthermore, art is not an illustration of some science work, and it is important to distinguish between collaborating and simply having assistants. Another distinction between art and science is that science is controlled by huge corporations. Art tends to be interested in metaphor, although some artists are interested in the literal. One thing both art and science have in common is that, often, neither the artist nor the scientist really know where the process they have undertaken will lead.

Reported by Jessica Goodyear

David Madacsi is Professor of Physics and Director of Arts & Cultural Programs at the University of Connecticut at Avery Point. His research interests include magnetic and optical properties of crystalline materials and photoelectrochemical conversion of solar energy. He was a Visiting Scientist at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest in 1985 and 1989-90, and served as Interim Director of UConn Avery Point from 1997-99. Dr. Madacsi is the Founding Board Chairman of the Alexey von Schlippe Gallery of Art and founder/producer of the festival, Jazz by the Sea. His current research project is a study natural lighting in geographic locales that historically have attracted visual artists.

david.madacsi@uconn.edu

<< PREVIOUS    NEXT >>